1. Home
2. HSC
3. HSC Exams
4. 2012 HSC Exam papers
5. 2012 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre — German

2012 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – German

Contents

• Introduction
• Beginners
  • Oral examination
  • Written examination
  • Section I – Listening
  • Section II – Reading
  • Section III – Writing in German
• Continuers
  • Oral examination
  • Written examination
  • Section I – Listening and Responding
  • Section II – Reading and Responding
  • Section III – Writing in German
• Extension
  • Oral examination
  • Written examination
  • Section I – Response to Prescribed Text
  • Section II – Writing in German

Introduction

This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 courses in German. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2012 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 2012 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 German.

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 marks 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 space allocated 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 that are not included in the glossary may be used, such as ‘design’, ‘translate’ or ‘list’.

Dictionary use

Many candidates did not use dictionaries effectively. Candidates need to contextualise the meaning from the choices given in the dictionary. When looking for an English equivalent, candidates must ensure that they choose the correct equivalent part of speech as well as most appropriate meaning. Candidates are reminded to cross-reference words from the English–German dictionary with its complement in the German–English dictionary.

Self-identification

Candidates must not identify themselves, their school or their teachers in their written responses. If the question asks you to thank a teacher, describe a school or draft a letter to a friend, you should not include any identifiable detail.

Answering the question

The mark value and the number of lines in the short-answer questions provide candidates with an indication of the length of the required response. Questions will sometimes require the direct translation of material or ask for information to be interpreted in some way. In every case, it is essential that candidates answer the question asked and refrain from including large amounts of extraneous material.

Word limits

Candidates are reminded that it is possible to gain full marks within the prescribed word limit for a writing task. Nothing is gained by unnecessarily long responses, which often contain irrelevant material, are poorly structured or repetitive. Candidates should take time to prepare and structure their written responses in German. This is far more important than writing beyond the word limit.

Use of prepared material

Careful and intelligent inclusion of prepared material directly relevant to the writing task can be very effective. Material, however, must be relevant to the task’s purpose, context and audience. The inclusion of irrelevant material is a waste of candidate’s time and is disregarded by markers.

Use of Candidate’s Notes column

Candidates must ensure that all relevant information contained in the Candidate’s Notes column is transferred to the lined section of the examination paper if they want this information to be considered as part of their response.

Preparing for the Beginners/Continuers oral examinations

Detailed advice is provided on the Board’s website for teachers and students about the nature and conduct of the HSC oral examinations at www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/syllabus_hsc/languages.html.

However, teachers and students are reminded that:

• Questions will relate to the candidate’s personal world as it relates to the prescribed topics in the syllabus.
• Neither the number of questions nor the number of topics covered by the examination is predetermined. The examiner may ask questions that relate to a previous response made by the candidate or introduce a new topic.
• Candidates should answer each question ONLY with information related specifically to the question asked.
• Candidates who attempt to dominate the conversation with long, rote-learned monologues will be interrupted by the examiner at an appropriate moment.
• Candidates will be asked questions that relate to past, present and future experience.
• If candidates do not understand a question, they may ask for the question to be repeated, clarified or rephrased in the language being examined. Candidates should NOT ask the examiner to translate words or questions.
• Candidates should NOT identify themselves, their teachers or their schools to the examiner.

Beginners

Oral examination

General comments

In the best responses, candidates correctly used modal verbs, eg können, wollen, dürfen, müssen; subject/verb inversion after time phrases, eg Samstags verbringe ich Zeit mit meinen Freunden and subordinate clauses, eg weil, dass, obwohl. These candidates also displayed an ability to use irregular and separable verbs correctly, such as Meine Schwester liest gern; Ich sehe nicht oft fern.

In better performances in the oral examination, candidates communicated relevant information on a variety of topics and used a variety of sentence structures, tenses, adjectives with correct endings and subordinate clauses. Well-prepared candidates answered the questions spontaneously and justified their answers with several explanatory points.

Candidates should ensure that they know all interrogatives, especially wie, welche, wer and wo. Erzähl mir von … was not always understood.

Candidates should refrain from reverting to English syntax when responding. The placement of auch in a sentence was not often correct.

The majority of candidates used an appropriate phrase in German when they did not understand the question asked by the examiner, such as Wie bitte? or Können Sie das bitte wiederholen/erklären?

Candidates are reminded that:

• it is perfectly acceptable to correct oneself if a pronunciation or grammatical mistake is made
• they should speak confidently, using the first person with common regular verbs conjugated correctly
• they should be prepared to talk about something that has happened in the past using the perfect tense
• they should expect questions which require an answer using the 3rd person singular, such as Was macht deine Mutter in ihrer Freizeit?
• they must also recognise the 2nd person plural form ihr and respond appropriately
• a variety of adjectives should be used, rather than repeating the same adjective over and over
• they should consider the usage of werden and würden
• they should refrain from long pauses when attempting to formulate an answer, so that time is not wasted
• they should avoid just listing words in isolation.

Written examination

Section I – Listening

Advice to candidates

Candidates should:

• read the question before listening to the item
• write all answers in English, unless otherwise stipulated in the question
• ensure that all relevant notes scribbled in the Candidate’s Notes column are written on the lines provided for each question.
• use the time given at the end of the paper to read over their answers to ensure they are meaningful and not contradictory.

Specific comments

Question 1

In better responses, candidates used the correct English tense.

In weaker responses, candidates incorrectly stated that Jens had a birthday party on Saturday, which was why he was doing his homework now.

Question 2

In weaker responses, candidates did not distinguish between train and concert tickets, and confused the backpackers’ hostel with a backpack.

Question 4

In better responses, candidates provided specific detail. Many candidates did not specify that it was the first 100 guests attending the Oktoberfest who would receive the special offer.

Question 6

In better responses, candidates demonstrated their skills in comparing and justifying. For example, one possible response to the question was that Tania would probably choose the mouse as she thinks it is cute, small and cheap, even though it does stink a little.

Question 7

(a) In better responses, candidates gave relevant details. Some candidates confused Theater (theatre) with Kino (cinema).

(b) Some candidates confused dreizehn and dreißig as well as fünfundzwanzig and zweiundfünfzig.

Question 8

Geschichte (history) was not always well translated.

Question 10

In the best responses, candidates gave a comprehensive list of the points why Leon would be suitable for this reality television show.

Section II – Reading

General comments

In the best responses, candidates showed a global understanding of the entire text and translated necessary detail accurately. Merely translating the texts word for word did not guarantee full marks for each question.

Specific comments

Question 11

In weaker responses, candidates did not state that learning to play the guitar in small groups made this offer appealing.

Question 12

To answer 12(a) effectively, candidates needed to state that Stefan had slept through his train stop and was asking his mother to pick him up at another train station. Einschlafen and abholen were not always translated well.

In better responses, candidates were attentive to the tense used in each text. In 12(b) some candidates thought that the mother had already prepared dinner, which was why she couldn’t pick up Stefan.

Question 13

In better responses, candidates ensured that they provided all relevant detail and linked ideas. In some responses, candidates neglected to link important parts, and did not give a comprehensive answer regarding what made this holiday different.

Als freiwillige Arbeiter (as a volunteer worker) and Erlebnis (experience) were not well translated.

Question 14

1. In a number of responses, candidates only partially explained how Tina got the work experience job. They did not include that it was Tina’s basketball trainer who told her about the work experience position.
3. In better responses, candidates stated the positive and negative things Tina learnt during her work experience. These candidates understood that she became increasingly tired having to get up early every morning and her feet were sore. They also recognised that she was rewarded for her hard work and she also got to meet some very interesting and famous people.

Question 15

1. It was important to recognise that David was Liana’s boyfriend and that he was an exchange student from America.
2. In the best responses, candidates also included that Liana was sad because David’s student exchange was ending, he was flying back home next week and she was afraid he would forget about her.
3. In better responses, candidates provided not only Liana’s concerns but linked these coherently with how Kristoff tried to address these concerns. In weaker responses, candidates did not include that, even though Liana had promised her father to work in the shop, her brother could do the work instead of her. It was important to state that Liana had always wanted to go to Los Angeles and she would find the shopping great there. Heimweh (home sickness) was not always understood.

Section III – Writing in German

Question 16

In better responses, candidates explained how they received the concert tickets, using the past tense; invited their friend to go, using phrases such as Kannst du mitkommen?; stated when and where the concert was taking place and used the imperative form to encourage their friend to contact them as soon as possible: Ruf mich bitte bald an, wenn du mitkommen willst!

Question 17

In better responses, candidates used the ihr form consistently throughout their speech to address their fellow students. These responses also listed the positives of hosting a German exchange student, such as improving their German speaking skills, the opportunity to stay at the host student’s home in Germany in the near future and the joy of being able to show these exchange students around Australia etc.

Question 18

In better responses, candidates planned their responses so that their writing flowed coherently. Very brief responses, which do not meet the word limit, cannot demonstrate the range of vocabulary and sentence structures required to answer this question fully.

1. In better responses, candidates used a variety of sentence structures and vocabulary, subordinate clauses, appropriate adjective endings and the future tense to explain what plans they had for next year. These candidates also used the correct register consistently when addressing their grandmother, ie du, dein etc.
2. In better responses, candidates compared their former home to the new one, stating the positives and negatives. They also provided a vivid description of some of the rooms in the new home and also commented on the neighbourhood. They included a variety of vocabulary, complex language structures and verbs conjugated correctly.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates merely listed what rooms were in the new home.

Continuers

Oral examination

General comments

The majority of candidates communicated fluently and authentically over a range of topic areas. In better performances, candidates communicated relevant ideas and information in greater depth, using appropriate vocabulary with a range of grammatical structures. In the best performances, candidates engaged effectively with the examiner across a range of syllabus topics, demonstrating the ability to manipulate language with a high level of grammatical accuracy using sophisticated vocabulary.

Specific comments

The best preparation candidates could have for this examination consists of being familiar with:

• a range of vocabulary needed to cover the range of syllabus topics (not limited to simple adjectives), especially to explore one’s personal world (eg family and friends, school, future plans, free-time activities, etc)
• essential grammatical structures that include, but are not limited to, correct verb forms including subject-verbal agreement, perfect tense and word order.

Some areas candidates are encouraged to consider are:

• the use of the dative (eg mit mir/ihr/ihm/ihnen, mit meinen Freunden), also dative verbs (eg helfen, geben)
• the use of the comparative and superlative
• sich interessieren für
• seit wann
• wenn, wann and als (especially when using the past tense)
• studieren versus lernen
• the use of professions (eg meine Mutter ist Lehrerin).

Candidates should also consider:

• bekommen versus werden
• werden versus würden
• es handelt sich um
• ich bin langweilig versus ich habe Langeweile
• seit versus für.

In better responses, candidates not only demonstrated control of grammatical structures, but also responded to questions with authenticity and sophistication. In the best responses, candidates displayed a wide range of vocabulary and offered in-depth, relevant responses.

Written examination

Section I – Listening and Responding

General comments

Candidates should give specific details from the text rather than make generalisations. They should be prepared to interpret the information they hear in order to respond well, particularly in the later questions.

All answers are to be given in English, unless otherwise stipulated, including any evidence from the text given to support a response. Quoting in German is not necessary and any German quotes must be translated.

Candidates should not rely on implication and should explain fully and give detail.

Candidates should apply their cultural knowledge of German-speaking countries where applicable so that their answers are relevant.

Candidates should read over their answers at the conclusion of the Listening section to ensure what they have written makes sense and that relevant elements of the answer have not been omitted accidentally. Candidates should not rewrite the question just to fill the lines.

Specific comments

Question 2

In better responses, candidates linked the two columns and gave detailed information on the three items. Some candidates did not provide a detailed answer, for example buy two packets without naming the item. Fahrkarten and Sitzplätze were often confused.

Question 3

In better responses, candidates made it clear that Marion would be in a different city and therefore unable to attend the party with Thomas, and explained that it was scary or dangerous on the bridge due to the high volume of people.

Question 4

Candidates were required to make it clear that the course participants could further their learning by practising their speaking with the locals. They needed to show that they were speaking the language, not just sight-seeing or having coffee, and with the locals, not other tourists or their classmates.

Question 5

In some responses, candidates gave a recount, rather than explain the dilemma. In better responses, candidates showed that Petra was in two minds and they linked the reasons correctly. In better responses, candidates explained the irony well.

Question 6

In better responses, candidates provided evidence of the change in Konrad’s attitude and included an overriding statement. ‘Eigentlich tut er mir leid’ was understood.

Question 8

In better responses, candidates drew a conclusion and did not just give a translation. Supplementary evidence was relevant and correct.

Vocabulary that caused difficulty included: trotzdem (this is not the name of a place), übel, Kaufhaus,Erfolg, an einem der schönsten Orte, Dachboden, Flohmarkt, unter den Sachen (among, rather than under), unbeliebt, die Hälfte.

Section II – Reading and Responding

Part A

Questions 9 and 10

General comments

Candidates must answer all questions fully, provide evidence from the text to support an argument and take into account the mark value allocated to each question.
If candidates include quotations in their responses, they need to ensure that they show an understanding of the meaning by paraphrasing or translating the German into English. Candidates should not repeat the question in the answer – this simply wastes time. Candidates can answer in point form.

Specific comments

Question 9

1. It was necessary to clearly express the idea of Daniel’s familiarity with American television shows. The fact that he had grown up with them was significant.

3. In better responses, candidates gave full details of the proposed trip and combined that with a thorough analysis of Jessica’s personality.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates confused ‘waschen’ with showering.

Question 10

1. Erfolgreich was sometimes confused with erfahren.
   
   Vocabulary that caused difficulty: auf dem Sprung.

3. Vocabulary that caused difficulty: schiefgehen. In better responses, candidates ensured that that dictionary meanings made sense.
   
   Glücklich was sometimes mistranslated as lucky.

4. In better responses, candidates identified Melanie’s personality traits and linked them closely with the text. Simply translating the last two paragraphs into English did not answer the question, nor did listing personality traits without evidence. As stated in the question, only content from the last two paragraphs was required.

Part B

Question 11

General comments

In the best responses, candidates both contextualised and developed original and creative pieces of writing to the stimulus text as a whole. These candidates understood that they were replying to the email from either Mama or both parents, from Vietnam. The better responses were well-structured, logical and appropriate to the task, and candidates clearly demonstrated an understanding of the stimulus text by providing well-supported comments. These responses reflected good control of the language, with grammatical structures and vocabulary appropriate to Stage 6.

In better responses, candidates addressed the context and the three main focus areas, clearly demonstrating that they were in fact reading and responding. However, some candidates simply focused on a particular word in a focus area/question – such as Oma or Party – and wrote irrelevant responses, which clearly showed that the candidates had not understood the issue or context being presented in the stimulus text.

In some weaker responses, candidates wrote little more than 150 words. These scripts were underdeveloped and could not reach the higher mark range, as both creativity and excellent understanding of the text as a whole could not be adequately addressed.

It was apparent there was a difficulty with recognising when to use du/Sie or ihr/euch. Some candidates addressed parents with Sie and continued to mix up personal pronouns throughout their responses. In some responses, candidates had problems with some of the most commonly used nouns: Wetter/Haus/Party/Geschenk.

It is recommended that candidates:

• read the stimulus text carefully and more than once, to ensure they have understood both the general message and the finer detail
• identify the elements of the text requiring comment, to ensure that good comprehension is reflected in the response
• take time to plan the response in its entirety, to ensure that the response is well-structured and the ideas flow logically
• begin with an appropriate introduction, clearly relevant to the task
• develop a response which clearly addresses the requirements of audience, purpose and context
• communicate their ideas in the most authentic and accurate way possible
• ensure their response is the required length (approximately 200 words)
• refer to the stimulus text for the correct gender and spelling of key words
• take time to review and edit their response, ensuring that both language and spelling are as accurate as possible, including fundamentals of the language such as subject/verb agreement, tenses, past participles and word order.

Section III – Writing in German

Question 12

In better responses, candidates wrote effectively and appropriately with an awareness of audience, purpose and context. Responses from candidates were generally creative and used authentic language.

Most candidates produced a piece of writing that met the required word length (approximately 75 words) and addressed the question with relevant information. A well-thought-out answer that met this count, which demonstrated the writer’s ability to manipulate vocabulary, language structures and features, scored much better than an overlong and poorly structured response.

In better responses, candidates identified the key points, ensured that they correctly understood the intent of the question and planned their answer accordingly. In weaker responses, candidates wrote an email telling their friend what they had planned for the weekend but failed to provide details or failed to provide an alternative if the weather was bad. In the best responses, candidates provided details about what they were doing on the weekend and a realistic alternative. These responses often demonstrated excellent knowledge of language features, such as correct use of modal verbs and the conditional.

Question 13

In better responses, candidates demonstrated a variety of grammatical structures and a wide range of appropriate vocabulary, with language that was manipulated authentically and creatively. These responses were more effective when they read like a diary entry as candidates demonstrated that they understood what was required for this text type.

1. In better responses, candidates reflected on the idea of studying overseas and not just the idea of travelling overseas or going on exchange.

2. In better responses, candidates produced a well-sequenced piece of writing with consistent reflection throughout and not just description.

Common errors included:

• use of Gelehrsamkeit (instead of Stipendium)
• incorrect auxiliaries used with past participles (especially sein)
• incorrect past participles
• poor subject/verbal agreement
• ins Ausland studieren (instead of im Ausland studieren)
• misuse of wollen versus werden
• misuse of the dative case especially after dative prepositions
• incorrect word order after weil.

Extension

Oral examination

General comments

In better responses, candidates prepared a well-structured answer with an introduction, main body and conclusion. These candidates avoided the repetition of material or ideas and organised their response within the specified time limit.

Candidates should write only keywords/notes in the box on the examination paper. Candidates should not write out a full response in the box and read directly from this, as this practice prevents them from demonstrating fluent and confident communication. An in-depth response could involve providing both sides of the argument, allowing candidates to show a wider perspective. In the case of questions with two parts, candidates must address both parts in order to provide a complete response.

Specific comments

Question 1

In better responses, candidates explained why parents deserve or do not deserve our sympathy. If they agreed with the statement, candidates had to show a clear link between the stress/problems/demands of teenagers and the effect of these on their parents. Some candidates misinterpreted the question as being about the stress on young people and thus were not able to completely answer the question.

Question 2

Candidates discussed the issue of tolerance in today's society and whether this issue was more important for young people today than it was for their grandparents. A range of different examples of tolerance was discussed, including multiculturalism, globalisation, racial, gender, religious and cultural tolerance, technological advances that allow more travel and the internet, which enables fast and easy access. Most candidates were able to express whether it was a more important issue today than for their grandparents.

Written examination

Section I – Response to prescribed text

Question 1

General comments

In better responses, candidates demonstrated a good knowledge of the short story Die Geschichte vom bösen Hänsel, der bösen Gretel und der Hexe and the course of events it entailed. They handled the specific aspects of each question with confidence and provided a range of evidence to support their responses. Their comments were succinct and well considered and did not rely heavily on lengthy retelling of the story. Excessive quoting from the text is usually unnecessary, unless required by the question.

Specific comments

2. In showing how both diligence and resilience were portrayed through the character of the Hexe, despite her waning powers, most candidates referred to her industriousness when building her house. A number supported their responses with language examples to contrast her frailty with her determination and included direct reference to the pride she felt, eg grün vor Stolz. Others supported their response with textual references. In the best responses, candidates also referred to her resilience in her treatment of the children, despite their bad behaviour and ingratitude, never losing her patience but remaining dignified. A number commented that her final remonstration of Hänsel when she locked him in the stall reflected her determination to retain her dignity and not be bullied. All valid arguments were accepted.

3. Although there was a wide range of examples to choose from, candidates were not expected to refer to them all and full marks could be gained by providing a number of supported language features. In this question, examples in German often enhanced the response. For example, the use of archaic language (eg da ward….), the use of made-up words (eg kneuschen to rhyme with Häuschen) or the use of diminutives to show the story is directed at children (eg Bettlein) etc. General comments, such as that the story is set in a forest and refers to magic, a witch, a wizard, talking animals etc, are based in content and are not specific language features. Although the use of the simple past tense and linear narration are features of this story, they are also used across literature and are not specific to fairy tales.

4. While the situation faced by the Hexe was often well-understood, a number of candidates could only provide a sketchy reference to the Oberst, often with very little support and minimal analysis, or an incorrect understanding of the events that had surrounded him. Candidates should always be prepared to answer questions on all of the stories and all of the characters, and comparison questions can reflect the depth of preparation for this examination. A number of candidates had a reasonable working knowledge of the Oberst but were unable to provide any comment on his situation, relying instead on a lengthy retell of the content of both stories. Other candidates attempted an analysis, but were hampered by a superficial understanding of the Oberst’s situation. In better responses, candidates provided an interesting and compelling insight into both characters, always based in a sound and perceptive understanding, especially of the Oberst. Regardless of the conclusions drawn, in better responses, candidates provided interesting, well-supported responses, revealing an understanding of the characters, rather than providing a simple retell of the stories’ events.

Part B

Question 2

Candidates’ knowledge of the short story was generally very good. However, the task was not to retell the story but to specifically address question requirements, including the given text type. Too many candidates exceeded the word limit, sacrificing focus, structure and relevance.

In the best responses, candidates:

• structured their response within the word limit
• wrote a critical, personal monologue and did not respond in a different text type such as an interview or an article
• directed the criticism at the show and not Hermann Hermann, the show’s moderator
• made direct reference to the stimulus text in their response but did not include the whole quote verbatim.

In weaker responses, candidates:

• included extensive retelling of the plot
• included sections unrelated to the question and/or extensive irrelevant quotes from the short story
• were excessively long, poorly structured and unfocused.

Section II – Writing in German

Questions 3 and 4

General comments

Candidates need to address question requirements specifically. This includes using the given text type and making reference to the given audience. Candidates must present and develop, with relevant supporting evidence, an effective argument that specifically relates to the topic.

Specific comments

Question 3

In the best responses, candidates:

• adhered to the word limit and the responses were well-structured
• specifically addressed the issue raised in the question and developed a coherent argument
• specifically addressed the audience referred to in the question.

In weaker responses, candidates:

• wrote about the pros and cons (often as lists) of computer use/the internet in general and discussed ways in which these dangers could be addressed
• did not mount an argument – while the positive effects of using the internet could have been mentioned in support of an argument, the focus had to be on the negative effects of addiction
• omitted the article’s heading and wrote in general terms with little or no evidence of addressing the readers of a youth magazine
• exceeded the word limit and wrote irrelevant and poorly structured text.

Question 4

In the best responses, candidates:

• adhered to the word limit and the responses were well-structured
• specifically addressed the issue raised in the question and developed a coherent argument
• specifically addressed the audience referred to in the question. This was evident in the style of the writing, the choice of supporting evidence or in the direct reference to them.

In weaker responses, candidates:

• discussed becoming rich and famous or being well-educated and not their relative importance
• included rote-learnt material on similar topics
• included extensive, irrelevant statistical material.