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

2011 Notes from the Marking Centre – Primary Industries

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 Primary Industries. 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 along 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 Primary Industries.

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’.

In general, the candidates’ knowledge and understanding of the content of this syllabus was good. The structure of the paper and the questions asked gave all candidates access to some marks, while still challenging them.

Section II

General comment

The responses in Section II indicate that many candidates have a sound general understanding of the content of this course.

Question 16

1. Many candidates identified two organisations, such as Fair Work Australia and the National Farmers Federation. In weaker responses, candidates identified incorrect organisations, such as Centrelink.
   
   
2. Many candidates identified the importance of understanding award conditions.
   
   
3. Only a small number of candidates obtained full marks by answering this question correctly and showing all the correct answers and processes. Many candidates did not take into account the information in the table to calculate the ‘Tax Payable’ amount, hence their answers were incorrect. However, correct processes were obtained in ‘Gross Pay’, ‘Net Pay’ and ‘Net Pay plus allowances’.
   
   Many candidates gave incorrect answers but were able to show two or more processes and hence obtained two marks. In weaker responses, candidates were able to obtain one correct answer or one correct process only.

Question 17

1. Most candidates listed two immediate impacts of the flood on the farm. In weaker responses, candidates listed one immediate impact on the farm or only listed areas on the farm that would flood.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates provided detailed examples of relevant actions to reduce the impacts of the flood. Other candidates listed appropriate actions that should be taken.
   
   
3. In better responses, candidates provided a detailed long-term plan of strategies that could be used to reduce the impacts of future flooding on the farm. Most candidates listed or outlined a long-term plan of action.

Question 18

1. Most candidates correctly calculated the volume of chemical required.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates transferred the calculation from part (a) into the allocated section of the table for 20/10/2011. These candidates correctly calculated the quantity remaining for each date. Most candidates were able to correctly answer two of the four quantities in the table and were allocated one mark.
   
   
3. In better responses, candidates provided a detailed explanation of the importance of keeping chemical application records. They then used correct industry terminology to explain the consequences of keeping or not keeping these records. In weaker responses, candidates listed or stated items (such as date of application and chemical name) in a chemical application record and only briefly outlined their importance in a primary industry enterprise. Some candidates only listed these items.

Question 19

1. Many candidates correctly identified and stated the importance of a piece of machinery or equipment for completing a job. In weaker responses, candidates listed materials rather than identifying a piece of machinery or equipment.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates provided a clear sequence of steps that demonstrated how to replace the wooden end assembly. Many candidates listed steps but did not provide a fully sequenced set of steps for the SOP.
   
   
3. In better responses, candidates stated a number of steps detailing a safe and efficient work plan.
   
   Many candidates listed some steps required for the work plan. In weaker responses, candidates listed one point of a work plan. Some candidates confused an SOP with a work plan.

Section III

Question 20

In better responses, candidates approached this question in a logical and cohesive manner, addressing all areas of the question (effectiveness, environmental impacts and risks to people of weed control methods). Many candidates also clearly evaluated a range of control methods using precise industry terms.

In mid-range responses, candidates described some weed control methods and outlined some strengths and weaknesses for these methods. Some candidates formatted the information in a table but did not extend their evaluation in a detailed manner.

In weaker responses, candidates only listed control methods. Ideas were communicated using basic industry terms. Many candidates stated some strengths and/or weaknesses of a weed control method.

Some candidates did not understand the question correctly and wrote about a named weed in terms of its environmental impact and its risks to people and animals. Control methods were only briefly discussed.

Section IV

Question 21

1. In better responses, candidates listed three environmental threats associated with land use activities. Most candidates were able to identify at least one environmental threat.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates listed land use activities shown in the diagram, rather than environmental threats.
   
   
2. Most candidates described in general potential impacts for two environmental threats. In better responses, candidates described in detail the consequences of the impacts on the environment and drew conclusions for further issues, such as long-term effects.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates included impacts for production rather than environmental threats. These responses often failed to describe the consequences of the environmental threats.
   
   
3. In stronger responses, candidates correctly identified and provided analysis of a number of feasible strategies.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates gave a list of the strategies but failed to give further detail regarding the strategies that would minimise the environmental impacts of a named threat.