2011 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Indonesian
Contents
- Introduction
- Indonesian Beginners
- Oral examination
- Written examination
- Indonesian Continuers
- Oral examination
- Written examination
- Indonesian Extension
- Oral examination
- Written examination
Introduction
This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 courses in Indonesian. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2011 Higher School Certificate examinations, indicating the quality of the responses and highlighting their relative strengths and weaknesses.
This document should be read along with the relevant syllabuses, the 2011 Higher School Certificate examinations, the marking guidelines and other support documents developed by the Board of Studies to assist in the teaching and learning of Indonesian.
General comments
Teachers and candidates should be aware that examiners may ask questions that address the syllabus outcomes in a manner that requires candidates to respond by integrating their knowledge, understanding and skills developed through studying the course.
Candidates need to be aware that the mark allocated to the question and the answer space (where this is provided on the examination paper) are guides to the length of the required response. A longer response will not in itself lead to higher marks. Writing far beyond the indicated space may reduce the time available for answering other questions.
Candidates need to be familiar with the Board’s Glossary of Key Words, which contains some terms commonly used in examination questions. However, candidates should also be aware that not all questions will start with or contain one of the key words from the glossary. Questions such as ‘how?’, ‘why?’ or ‘to what extent?’ may be asked, or verbs may be used that are not included in the glossary, such as ‘design’, ‘translate’ or ‘list’.
Indonesian Beginners
Oral examination
Most candidates were well prepared for the conversation examination and communicated effectively about their personal world, exhibiting a good level of fluency. Better responses demonstrated sound sentence structure and expressed personal opinions with flair and authenticity.
In better responses, candidates manipulated language competently and imaginatively in response to particular questions, rather than providing rehearsed responses that did not link directly to the question asked. Slow communication or one-word answers rather than elaborated responses restricted a candidate’s opportunity to score well in this examination.
Candidates should expect questions that range from simple to more challenging within each topic raised and therefore should be prepared to answer more probing questions based on the information that they themselves have provided.
Candidates are expected to support their responses to questions with relevant information, comment and/or opinion. Excessive listing of information, such as the rooms in their house or the subjects they studied at school, should be avoided. It is preferable to provide more sophisticated structures, including conjunctions, tense markers, comparisons and justifications of preferences.
Some responses were weakened by errors in basic grammatical forms, such as word order, possessive pronouns and the use of prepositions. The use of English should be completely avoided.
Written examination
Section I – Listening
General comments
Making notes, even for the multiple-choice questions, will assist candidates in selecting the correct response. Re-checking questions and re-reading responses will help ensure that the questions have been answered. Proofreading responses will ensure that answers are succinct and make sense.
Specific comments
Question 3
In answering multiple-choice questions, candidates should first eliminate obviously incorrect items and then endeavour to select the most likely response from the remaining options.
Question 4
Most candidates identified that the hotel room was in a noisy location. However, many candidates omitted the fact that its location would interrupt the guests’ sleep. Jalan raya was not recognised by candidates.
Question 5
Not all pieces of information in this reminder to students were identified. Generally, the need to wear a sports uniform was omitted. Seragam sekolah appeared to be unfamiliar to candidates.
Question 6
Most candidates responded well to this question. However, some did not refer to the closing date, selambat-lambatnya.
Question 7
In weaker responses, candidates reported that Amy had been on a language course. Most candidates focused their responses on the food that Amy had cooked, rather than identifying that she had an opportunity to practise her Bahasa Indonesia and that she had also received a free cook book, buku resep. Few candidates correctly identified all pieces of information.
Question 8
Most candidates correctly chose how Bu Rani would be feeling after hearing the message.
Question 9
Most candidates identified that Surani was successful in applying for a job as a secretary. In better responses, candidates explained how her reactions would change over the course of the phone call from Abdullah.
Question 10
Most candidates displayed some understanding of the level of success of the date, with many noting the negative aspects. In better responses, candidates suggested that despite the problems on the date, Lestari was impressed with Anwar because he was thoughtful towards her and they were able to talk on the walk home.
Question 11
In better responses, candidates identified the male’s comment that they needed to save for their wedding next year, which was meant to assist candidates in selecting Highfields. Most candidates gave a range of reasons why the couple would choose either apartment. Many candidates made full use of the Candidate’s Notes column by making notes in English to help them remember all the details presented in this long text. Kawin was confused with kawan.
Section II – Reading
General comments
In weaker responses, candidates tended to translate text rather than demonstrating a global comprehension. Implied meanings were often not considered by candidates.
Specific comments
Question 12
- The contents page came from a cooking magazine. Marks were not gained for stating that it was a ‘women’s magazine’.
- Bahan makanan proved problematic for some candidates as they looked up bahan but did not then associate it with the word makanan to realise that it meant ingredients.
Question 13
Cagar alam was often mistranslated as a ‘zoo’ rather than a ‘nature reserve’.
Question 14
- Many candidates did not correctly list the duties of greeting guests, answering the phone, and registering or checking in guests. Instead, many responses included some of the job prerequisites but did not include the actual duties that were listed under the heading of Dicari.
- In better responses, candidates rated Erna’s likelihood of getting the job by offsetting her lack of experience with her willingness to learn. This was followed by a correctly detailed justification of the other reasons why she would get the job.
Question 15
- Many candidates did not mention that Yeyen and Sari had been friends for a long time – Sudah lama sekali Yeyen dan Sari teman yang dekat.
- Candidates needed to indicate that Sari’s parents would feel angry, disappointed, hurt or deceived and to clearly justify why they would feel that way. Responses that merely translated the email from Sari did not score highly because they did not directly answer the question.
In weaker responses, candidates wrote from Sari’s perspective instead of that of her parents.
Question 16
- In weaker responses, candidates identified only two pieces of information. Information needed to be drawn from the whole text.
- A detailed and perceptive analysis of Mohammad’s feelings for his parents was essential to achieving maximum marks. Evidence from the text was required to justify the feelings identified. In better responses, candidates deduced the feelings of love, respect and gratitude that Mohammad clearly had for his parents. Some candidates gained some marks by stating that Mohammad considered his parents to be ideal. The expression meninggal dunia was not understood by any of the candidates.
Section III – Writing in Indonesian
General comments
In order to maximise the marks in writing skills, candidates are advised to allocate time for both planning and editing their responses. Time spent planning helps to ensure that the purpose, audience and context are considered, and also provides opportunity for candidates to design responses that are higher in creativity. Editing work after writing assists candidates in eliminating unnecessary errors.
Specific comments
Question 17
Candidates must address the required text type. Some responses contained highly sophisticated language and structures that were unsuitable for an informal note from a child to a parent. Better responses contained depth in the treatment of the chores not done, original ideas as to the ‘unexpected’ event that had prevented the writer from doing the chores, and generally an apology and a promise to complete the chores at a later time. Many responses did not reach the suggested word count for this question. Also, a number of excuses given did not involve unexpected circumstances.
Candidates need to read the instructions in English carefully, and then use their knowledge of Indonesian to express their ideas sensibly. For instance, ‘not completed’ was very poorly expressed. Candidates used the dictionary to look up ‘complete’, which could have been translated by the word selesai (finished).
Question 18
Many responses were not written using correct diary entry conventions and did not include a place and/or date at the top.
Better responses contained more creative and original descriptions of the new student, whereas weaker responses were characterised by errors in word order and possessive phrases. In better responses, candidates also used conjunctions to link ideas and create cohesive texts and gave opinions to support their descriptions.
Candidates are advised to avoid predictable descriptions and instead to include a variety of language structures, including qualifiers, in order to personalise their texts. In addition, it is suggested that a range of sentence types be used rather than starting every sentence with a pronoun.
It appeared that many candidates were rushing to finish the writing tasks and often words were incomplete, with many being misspelt through the omission of an ‘h’ or an ‘n’.
Question 19
Some responses did not achieve the suggested word count. Candidates are required to manage their time so that they are able to complete this major task.
Candidates need to check carefully that their writing directly addresses the question. In 19 (a) more than one experience was required to be discussed and in 19 (b) the task required evidence of planning for an 18th birthday party.
The letter text type required by both questions was generally well handled, although at times there was inconsistent use of register with candidates swapping between aku and saya. Punctuation was at times absent in weaker responses, making them difficult to read.
In these responses, there was a pronounced lack of adjectives and qualifiers to enhance descriptions and create more original texts. Candidates should endeavour to incorporate more sophisticated language structures and a greater variety of vocabulary to demonstrate their ability.
Common errors included:
- overuse and incorrect use of baik … maupun
- confusion between ramai and sibuk
- confusion between punya and harus.
Indonesian Continuers
Oral examination
General comments
In better responses, candidates engaged with the examiner and answered the questions directly with relevant information, rather than giving prepared answers. They responded in some depth. Candidates maintained good intonation and pronunciation, as well as replicating an authentic Indonesian accent. They also demonstrated knowledge of a range of sophisticated vocabulary and sentence structures and maintained a high level of grammatical accuracy throughout the conversation.
Specific comments
Candidates are reminded that there are no ‘set’ questions and that the topic areas may be approached from a range of perspectives. Therefore, they are advised to listen carefully to determine the perspective of the question and whether it refers to themselves (Anda) or someone else (dia).
Candidates are reminded to listen carefully and respond to the specific question asked.
The following areas of difficulty were noted:
- misuse of siapa or bahwa instead of yang
- misuse of itu to translate ‘it’
- misuse of kapan (the question word) instead of waktu/ketika/kalau to express ‘when’
- misuse of senang to express ‘like’
- misuse of menikmati (to enjoy) instead of menyenangkan (enjoyable)
- misuse of menarik (interesting) instead of tertarik akan/pada … (interested in …)
- misuse of adalah/ialah before a verb or an adjective
- misuse of kita (we; myself and others, as well as the listener) instead of kami (we; myself and others, but not the listener)
- misuse of supaya (so that/in order to) instead of sehingga (so that/as a result)
- misuse of bekerja (to work) instead of mengerjakan/melakukan (to do)
- unnecessary duplication after plural expressions such as banyak, eg banyak teman-teman instead of banyak teman
- incorrect pronunciation and intonation of the words dengan, karena, kadang-kadang and sekolah
- not using Indonesian terms for countries, eg Selandia Baru (New Zealand)
- incorrect word order, eg pendidikan jasmani guru saya instead of guru pendidikan jasmani saya
- inaccuracies using the object-focus construction, especially in the first and second person, eg film yang saya sukai.
Written examination
Section I – Listening and Responding
General comments
In better responses, candidates identified relevant, specific, detailed information from the texts. They also drew conclusions, provided sound justification supported by relevant facts, and analysed language use.
Specific comments
Question 1
Weaker responses included irrelevant detail about the arrival of Anwar’s uncle and excuses about being very busy.
Question 3
In some cases, setengah was not understood.
Question 5
Most candidates identified some relevant details about Alex’s holiday. However, berkemah was not familiar to all candidates. Some candidates confused this word with the name of a hotel. In better responses, candidates linked the poor weather to the idea that it was not interfering with the holiday activities. The concept of belajar + verb was not always understood. Some candidates thought that Alex was studying while on holiday.
Question 6
Most candidates identified at least one reason why the venue is popular. In the best responses, candidates recognised the words asli and tradisional in context. Bahan-bahan was not always understood and the mistranslation of memakai led some candidates to believe that the waiters at the restaurant wore traditional clothes rather than used traditional cooking tools. The concept of cooked fresh when you order was well understood.
Question 7
In the best responses, candidates clearly stated their point of view on the issue with no contradictions. Some candidates did not understand what the decision was. Belum mendapat pekerjaan baru was not understood by candidates who wrote weaker responses.
Question 8
In better responses, candidates correctly identified the change in Monika’s career and accounted for that change.
In weaker responses, candidates thought that Monika wanted to become more serious about acting. Some candidates also identified children as a factor, but incorrectly concluded that the change in Monika’s career came about because she wanted to start a family. Also in weaker responses, candidates did not adequately discuss the impact of Monika’s religion and moral values. Membesarkan, dibesarkan, peran and taat agama caused some difficulties.
Question 9
In better responses, candidates outlined the emotion displayed by the speaker (anger, annoyance, disappointment, etc), rather than merely saying that she was passionate or felt strongly about the issue. These candidates also identified examples of language and language devices that reflected this emotion – that is, used metalanguage. A link was then made between the language device and how it reflected the emotion of the speaker.
Examples of relevant metalanguage could include:
- the use of descriptive language, eg throwing away money, an example of a useless program, etc
- the use of the rhetorical question ‘Why?’
- the use of emphasis, eg far better, too often, once again, in fact, etc.
Due to the time constraints, candidates only needed to give these examples in English.
Section II – Reading and Responding
Part A
General comments
Candidates are encouraged to read the questions prior to reading the texts as an aid to identifying the meaning of unfamiliar words and to formulate their understanding of the texts. This will also help them to determine the information required for each discrete response.
Information required to answer a question may be found in different parts of the text, so candidates are advised to read the whole text, including the heading, to gain a global understanding of it. Candidates should provide specific, relevant textual references to support their responses.
Time should not be wasted quoting in Indonesian and English. If candidates include quotations in their responses, they must be in English to demonstrate an understanding of the meaning.
Candidates should provide the meaning of phrases and sentences in context, rather than in word-for-word translations.
Specific comments
Question 10
In part (a), most candidates identified that Irawan had become orphaned. The word kasihan, however, was not handled well by some candidates.In part (b), most candidates identified some evidence to support Irawan’s passion for soccer. However, a poor understanding of tense led to some errors, eg Irawan wanted to enrol in the soccer school, Irawan likes to watch football (showing that sejak kecil was not understood).
Part (c) proved to be challenging for some candidates. In better responses, candidates linked the struggles the national heroes faced to the challenges Irawan faced in his life and then linked the heroes’ love of country to Irawan’s desire to make Indonesia famous throughout the world through his efforts on the sporting field.
In weaker responses, candidates misunderstood the concept of heroes or did not see the parallels between Irawan’s life and the heroes’ struggles. Some candidates incorrectly thought that Irawan wanted to become famous or a national hero.
In part (d), most candidates identified the most appropriate title, although some weaker candidates chose option (d).
Question 11
In weaker responses to part (a), candidates summarised the main points made in the article rather than using the information presented in the opening paragraph.
In weaker responses to part (b), candidates did not identify Bung Karno’s dream to establish a new alternate capital city, believing instead that the entire city of Jakarta was going to be physically moved. The following vocabulary items were not always understood: ibu kota, gunung api, saluran air and dua kali lipat kapasitas ideal.
In better responses to part (c), candidates discussed the three forms of the word banjir individually and analysed the effect created by each form. The concept of literal and metaphoric meaning was also discussed, leading to the conclusion that the city of Jakarta is now inundated and overwhelmed by a range of serious problems.
In weaker responses to part (c), candidates often simply referred to the flood of vehicles on Jakarta’s streets and the prevalence of floods in the city. The reference to the large number of outsiders who constantly flood into Jakarta, thus causing the city’s rapid population growth, was overlooked. Insufficient comment was made about the effect of the word banjir in these weaker responses.
In weaker responses to part (d), candidates relied entirely on factual evidence from the text, eg Gunawan refers to famous historical events and sites in Jakarta, Gunawan says that people would be separated from their families and communities, etc. Better responses included a combination of factual evidence and a discussion of language techniques to explain the emotion. These responses often referred to the use of repetition (di sini); the use of the rhetorical questions ‘Can all this be removed?’ and ‘What about the people of Jakarta?’; the use of the pronoun kita; and the use of emotive vocabulary, such as tercinta, mengkhianati, ikatan erat, terpisah, terputus, etc.
Part B
General comments
In better responses, candidates demonstrated an excellent global understanding of the text and addressed each question or issue raised by the mother in adequate detail. This included the issue of the naughty younger sibling. These better responses were also organised, with a well-planned opening and closing to the email. Ideas were clear and the email was coherent.
Specific comments
The following areas of difficulty were noted:
- word-for-word translations from English
- inappropriate use of a dictionary, selecting the wrong word without cross-checking it for meaning
- misuse of the object-focus construction
- careless misspelling of masak, sudah, sekali, rumah, ramah and tinggal
- affixation, eg dialami rather than pengalaman, makan instead of makanan, and membantu instead of bantuan
- cukup and lebih used frequently without banyak when used with a noun, eg cukup uang instead of cukup banyak uang
- confusion concerning the use of ramai and sibuk
- confusion in the use of the suffix mu rather than changing to saya, eg adikmu selalu nakal
- use of diam instead of tenang
- use of punya instead of harus
- overuse of itu, particularly at the beginning of sentences
- confusion concerning the use of bukan, tidak and jangan
- problems with the use of the makin … makin structure.
Section III – Writing in Indonesian
General comments
Candidates who use a dictionary should be familiar with its use and should distinguish between nouns, verbs and adjectives. Selections should be cross-referenced in both sections of the dictionary to ensure that the meaning of the selected word is appropriate to the context.
Candidates are strongly encouraged to re-read what they have written for accuracy and coherence.
Specific comments
Question 13
In better responses, candidates used the correct form of address for their grandfather (kakek). They wished their grandfather a happy birthday and gave a valid and usually quite creative reason for not being able to visit.
Candidates should pay attention to the text type required and should observe the suggested word count. They are encouraged to use a variety of sentence starters to vary their writing.
The following areas of difficulty were noted:
- attempted literal translations from English, eg Senang Hari Ulang Tahun instead of Selamat Hari Ulang Tahun and saya harus ke studi instead of saya harus belajar
- inability to express an apology accurately, eg Saya maaf instead of Saya minta maaf
- misuse of melihat where bertemu or mengunjungi was more appropriate
- incorrect use of punya where harus was more appropriate
- confusion concerning the use of ramai and sibuk
- incorrect use of Kapan to begin a sentence, instead of Waktu or Kalau
- affixation errors, eg kunjungan/mengunjungi, pesta/berpesta, belajar/pelajaran and bekerja/pekerjaan
- incorrect translations for ‘have’, using mempunyai to indicate past tense, or using punya unnecessarily, eg saya punya sakit kepala
- incorrect use of the baik … maupun construction
- misspelling of tinggal, mengerti, bekerja, pekerjaan, masih, sedih and sekali.
Question 14
In better responses for option (a), candidates reflected on some memorable or interesting aspects of a student exchange experience and encouraged the university students to participate in a similar program.
In option (b), most candidates discussed why learning another language had been advantageous to their career. Better responses gave examples of how they used a language in their profession.
Most candidates handled the speech text type well, using the correct register and form of address throughout their response.
The following areas of difficulty were noted:
- inappropriate use of a dictionary, selecting the wrong word without cross-checking it for meaning, eg using bea dan cukai instead of adat-istiadat to mean ‘customs’
- confusion about when to use tidak and bukan
- use of the English word ‘Indonesian’ instead of Indonesia, eg Ibu Indonesian instead of Ibu Indonesia
- confusion concerning the use of the words menikmati, bersenang-senang and asoi
- expression of ‘Thank you for listening’, eg using Terima kasih atas/untuk mendengarkan instead of Terima kasih atas perhatian Anda
- use of sambil instead of ketika or waktu
- misuse of perjalanan as a verb
- errors in the use of commands, eg Mengikuti program ini instead of Ikutilah program ini
- poor knowledge of affixation, eg bekerja instead of pekerjaan, bertinggal instead of tinggal, makan instead of makanan, terpelajar instead of belajar, memilih instead of pilihan, and bantuan instead of membantu.
Indonesian Extension
Oral examination
General comments
In better responses, candidates developed and presented a logical and well-structured argument that they supported with relevant ideas and information. They were confident and fluent in their delivery and they maintained authentic intonation and pronunciation. Better candidates also manipulated an excellent range of sophisticated vocabulary and sentence structures and demonstrated a high level of grammatical accuracy throughout the monologue.
Specific comments
In better responses, candidates structured their monologues by providing a synopsis of their argument in an introduction and then supporting the argument with relevant ideas and information. In these responses, candidates expressed each supporting idea concisely and once only. These candidates demonstrated their range of vocabulary and language structures by paraphrasing the statement provided in the question, instead of repeating the statement word for word.
Also in better responses, candidates moved beyond a Continuers course level of language, demonstrating knowledge of the sophisticated language expected in the Extension course.
Candidates are reminded that, while they may make notes, reading directly from these notes is not permitted. They should aim to produce a consistently paced delivery of response, which their notes should support. Candidates who wrote full sentences in their notes and read from them did not maintain a consistent style of delivery.
Candidates need to take care when providing statistics that the data is accurate and is expressed in accurate Indonesian. If candidates are uncertain of exact figures, they are advised to provide approximations or more general statements.
Candidates are reminded to make good use of the three-minute time allocation. They should not include their student or centre number and they should not repeat the question.
Written examination
Section I – Response to Prescribed Text
Specific comments
Part A
Question 1
In better responses, candidates responded perceptively to the text and related the film to the prescribed issues using relevant examples from the text. In these responses, candidates addressed the demands of the question specifically, without including a lot of irrelevant material.
In part (a), candidates who wrote better responses made reference to the film as a whole and included a variety of the water tower’s meanings and uses to Rena. The best responses explained that the water tower represented an escape for Rena from her responsibilities at Rumah Matahari, as well as a vantage point that gave her a different perspective on the issues she was thinking about.
In part (b), candidates who wrote better responses considered both parts of the statement. They did not necessarily need to include a literal translation of the statement, but they did need to demonstrate a clear understanding of the statement’s meaning and its significance to Yudha and Rena’s relationship. Terserah kamu aja was explained not just to mean Rena choosing where they would go on their outing, but also to symbolise her choosing to allow Yudha into her life. Tapi kamu aja was explained to mean that the outing was intended for just Yudha and Rena, their first outing together without the other children from the Rumah Matahari.
In part (c), better responses clearly identified Rena as the Princess, Yudha as the Beggar and King, and the Rumah Matahari as the Dragon. In the best responses, candidates explained the parallels between the different characters and their stories with supporting examples from the text that demonstrated an understanding of the film and its prescribed issues.
In part (d), many candidates identified a variety of film techniques and explained how these are used to highlight the relationship between Yudha and Rena. In better responses, candidates showed how film techniques highlight the disconnection between the two characters at the beginning of the scene and the development of the closer bond. In weaker responses, candidates discussed film techniques that were used in the extract but were not relevant to the relationship between Yudha and Rena.
Part B
Question 2
Candidates who wrote better responses showed some flair and originality. They were able to empathise with Pak Sutan and demonstrate an understanding of his character. They also linked their responses to the extract. These candidates typically described how Pak Sutan expressed joy at discovering that his father was alive and also outlined the sadness that he had felt previously and its effects. They also provided a detailed description of Pak Sutan’s plans to return to his home village (including references to Lebaran/Idul Fitri), but avoided outlining the logistics, such as the train that he would catch.
The following were noted as areas of difficulty:
- candidates are reminded to use appropriate pronouns when writing for a specific audience, in this case Bapak, for Pak Sutan’s father, rather than kamu
- candidates are reminded to use appropriate greeting and closing expressions in their letter, eg in the opening expression Bapak yang terhormat, rather than Bapak yang manis.
Section II – Writing in Indonesian
General comments
In better responses, candidates demonstrated an understanding of the requirements of the article text type and demonstrated this by providing a heading and attempting to engage the audience through literary techniques such as rhetorical questions. Weaker responses tended to be structured more like an essay or monologue.
Specific comments
Question 3
In better responses, candidates concentrated on the word kemampuan and built an argument about how facing and dealing with problems can contribute to one’s personal growth, self-esteem and independence, as well as strengthening one’s coping mechanisms. In weaker responses, candidates tended to identify and discuss the different kinds of problems people may face in life.
Question 4
In better responses, candidates focused on the effect technology has had on the teacher’s role, outlining both positive and negative impacts of the advancement of technology and discussing the various educational uses in the classroom. In weaker responses, candidates discussed the effect of technology on education in general, as opposed to the role of the teacher.
The following were noted as areas of difficulty:
- incorrect use of object-focus construction, particularly in the first or second person
- incorrect use of prefix/suffix, resulting in the noun form being used instead of the verb form or vice-versa, eg menggungakan and penggunaan
- incorrect use of duplication after plural expressions, eg banyak guru-guru instead of banyak guru
- incorrect use of adalah with an adjective, eg Mata pelajaran itu adalah membosankan rather than the correct Mata pelajaran itu membosankan.
NSW Government