1. Home
2. HSC
3. HSC Exams
4. 2011 HSC Exam papers
5. 2011 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre — Information Technology

2011 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Information Technology

Contents

• Introduction
• Section II
• Section III
• Section IV

Introduction

This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 course in Information Technology. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2011 Higher School Certificate examination, indicating the quality of the responses and highlighting their relative strengths and weaknesses.

This document should be read in conjunction with the relevant syllabus, the 2011 Higher School Certificate examination, the marking guidelines and other support documents developed by the Board of Studies to assist in the teaching and learning of Information Technology.

Teachers and candidates are reminded that if candidates are undertaking the 240-hour VET Industry Curriculum Framework in Information Technology and they want to undertake the HSC examination in Information Technology, they need to be entered separately for the examination through Schools Online (Administration) by the due date, which is published in the Higher School Certificate Events Timetable.

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’.

Section II

Question 16

1. 1. In better responses, candidates clearly defined the term operating system as software that acts as the user’s interface between hardware and software.
      
      In weaker responses, candidates confused an operating system with application software, or listed examples, eg Windows 7, OSX, etc.
      
      
   2. There were a number of acceptable answers for this question, including naming well-known open source software such as Linux.
      
      In weaker responses, candidates identified web browsers, applications or commercially available operating systems.
2. 1. In better responses, candidates compared both systems correctly and identified the costs associated with commercial operating systems and the free nature of open-source operating systems.
      
      In weaker responses, candidates confused the price difference between the two operating systems.
      
      
   2. In better responses, candidates compared the two systems’ software, and mentioned the following features:
      
      • legal ability to edit the source code of the software
        
      • the number of licenced seats allowable
        
      • copyright protection versus acknowledgment of intellectual property.
      In weaker responses, candidates often only identified one feature of the systems’ software and did not provide the comparison between the commercial and open-source software.

Question 17

1. In better responses, candidates clearly described the function of each of the components listed.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates identified the acronyms but not the function. Some candidates confused the components with other components, or used colloquial terminology, eg ‘brains of the computer’.
   
   
2. 1. In better responses, candidates clearly distinguished processes to eliminate the cabling and monitor, ie ensure cabling is plugged in correctly, check for bent pins, change cabling, or try a working monitor.
      
      In mid-range responses, candidates displayed some troubleshooting ability but failed to describe processes in enough detail. Some candidates discussed isolating power from the monitor as a solution to the problem.
      
      In weaker responses, candidates were limited in their description of a single procedure, eg check cabling. Some candidates did not clearly identify whether it was the cable or monitor they were testing, while others mistook elimination to mean disposal of the monitor, etc.
      
      
   2. Most candidates displayed a knowledge of anti-static procedures and that power should be isolated. Some candidates wrote about replacing the PCI graphics card after removal.
      
      In better responses, candidates discussed the procedure clearly and in detail, as well as  identified the steps involved in the removal of the card. These candidates’ responses reflected their experience in performing these tasks, and included identifying the correct tools required.
      
      Weaker responses were limited in their detail of the procedures, eg turn off computer, open case, remove card.

Question 18

1. Most candidates identified one function of a modem and a scanner.
   
   Some candidates confused the scanner with a virus scanner, without realising the question meant a flatbed scanner.
   
   Many candidates re-worded the ‘wireless access point’ question, or did not acknowledge that a wireless access point allowed a connection to the internet for mobile devices.
   
   
2. Most candidates outlined two duties of a network administrator correctly.
   
   Some candidates either did not correctly outline two duties of a help desk operator (HDO), or they described the qualities of the HDO rather than the duties.
   
   
3. Many candidates correctly named a diagnostic tool and its purpose, with the most popular choice being defragmentation.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates named a diagnostic tool without correctly describing its purpose.

Question 19

1. In better responses, candidates outlined a task for both the graphical user interface and the command line interface.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates gave a description of each of the interfaces rather than outlining a task. A significant number of candidates gave unclear responses for graphical user interface.
   
   
2. Most candidates correctly stated several advantages for upgrading a system. Responses demonstrated a familiarity with the upgrade process.
   
   Many candidates described only one advantage of optimisation or were repetitive about improved performance.
   
   
3. Most candidates demonstrated an understanding of the benefits of replacing a generic driver with a vendor-supplied driver.
   
   In better responses, candidates described several benefits of replacing a generic driver with a vendor-supplied driver, and provided an appropriate example.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates described the benefits without giving any example, as required in the question.

Section III

Question 20

In this section, candidates responded with a range of formats. Better responses were generally written using either a report or letter to management.

In most responses, candidates addressed the characteristics of effective online documentation. Many responses identified formatting features and language use. In better responses, candidates also discussed elements related to search, navigation and accessibility.

Candidates clearly outlined multiple benefits of moving from paper-based to online documentation in relation to all the components required by the scenario. In better responses, candidates outlined positive elements such as the comparative costs, ease of updating, access and distribution methods. In weaker responses, candidates failed to address all the components of the question, many merely identifying the benefits that were related to the move from paper-based to online documentation. In these responses, candidates generally acknowledged online documentation as being easier without identifying explicit reasons or adding characteristics of the benefits.

When considering the importance of reviewing and signing off on documentation, in better responses, candidates identified the supervisory role of a person who would perform the review and sign-off process, as well as outlined elements relating to the importance of signing off. In weaker responses, many candidates confused reviewing and signing off on documentation with the process of logging out of a computer, and discussed network security rather than checking the content of documentation before its publication.

On the importance of user feedback regarding the effectiveness of online documentation, in better responses, candidates identified the users of the online documentation, suggested methods of obtaining feedback, and outlined areas that user feedback would address. In weaker responses, many candidates did not understand the question correctly, and said that feedback from users would lead to effective online documentation.

Section IV

Question 21

1. Most candidates defined a hazard.
   
   In better responses, candidates presented a well-structured, correct definition of a workplace hazard accompanied by a relevant example, and identified why this was an issue in an IT environment.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates did not identify an example of a hazard that would be likely to occur in an IT work environment.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates recognised the difference between work environment and ergonomic factors as important considerations in the workplace. Candidates presented clear examples of factors occurring in the work environment and factors of an ergonomic nature, and their effect on workers.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates generally failed to recognise the difference between work environment and ergonomic factors. Candidates often presented a single example with a limited explanation as to how it was significant.
   
   
3. In better responses, candidates recognised the role of the employer, employee and WorkCover in minimising workplace injury, and made reference to the three examples in the question. In these responses, candidates used appropriate terminology consistent with a workplace document.
   
   In mid-range responses, candidates’ responses lacked precise terminology and only discussed some of the key personnel/organisations listed in the question. Candidates in this range generally had a poor understanding of the role of WorkCover in an IT environment.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates presented a general discussion of workplace safety without reference to the key personnel/organisations and examples outlined in the question.