1. Home
  2. HSC
  3. HSC Exams
  4. 2015 HSC Exam papers
  5. 2015 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre — Italian Continuers
Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size

2015 Notes from the Marking Centre – Italian Continuers

Introduction

This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 Italian Continuers course. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2015 Higher School Certificate examination, indicating the quality of the responses and highlighting their relative strengths and weaknesses.
This document should be read along with:

other support documents developed by the Board of Studies, Teaching and Educational Standards NSW to assist in the teaching and learning of Italian in Stage 6

Oral examination

Characteristics of better responses:

  • candidates communicated fluently and authentically with in-depth responses to a range of questions
  • effective engagement with the examiner across a range of syllabus topics was demonstrated
  • ideas were expressed clearly and opinions justified consistently when unexpected questions were asked
  • tenses were manipulated effectively
  • responses were reflective, not just descriptive
  • candidates were able to deftly manipulate language more spontaneously, and did not solely depend on using pre-prepared responses
  • a broad range of sophisticated vocabulary and a variety of complex structures were used
  • authentic vocabulary and expressions were used
  • candidates used authentic pronunciation and intonation.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

  • candidates communicated using simple structures and vocabulary
  • candidates responded minimally to a limited range of syllabus topics
  • candidates did not engage naturally with the examiner
  • language was manipulated using a small range of expressions, often with frequent pauses and errors
  • grammatical mistakes included: incorrect use of tenses, poor use of pronouns, incorrect agreements, misuse of articles, misuse of circa, superlative errors, ending a sentence with a preposition, confusing imparare and insegnare, misuse of  piacere, omission of verbs, using infinitives
  • candidates relied on listing and repetition (eg. bella, divertente, mi piace)
  • structures such as Da quanto tempo…; using l’anno scorso  to say ‘next year’  were misunderstood
  • there was a reliance on English syntax and anglicisms
  • mispronunciation of basic words, for example morto instead of  ‘molto’ was common.

Section I - Listening and Responding

Characteristics of the better responses:

  • appropriate and relevant detail was provided
  • candidates provided an explicit explanation of the type of student being appealed to (Q4)
  • the relevance of the conversation was clearly linked to the text (Q5)
  • the language techniques identified were supported by examples from the text (Q8).

Characteristics of the weaker responses:

  • information was inferred that was not in the text
  • all the ideas in the notes column were not transferred to answer the question
  • candidates confused the speakers (Q7)
  • some vocabulary was misunderstood; for example,vocabolario, fare una domanda, cancellato, borsa di studio and maleducato
  • not all aspects of the questions were addressed : ‘type of student’ (Q4); ‘relevance of the conversation’ (Q5); ‘to what extent is the reaction justified’ (Q7).

Section II - Reading and Responding - Part A

Characteristics of the better responses:

  • questions were answered in a perceptive and global manner where required
  • questions were answered thoroughly and effectively
  • global responses which referred back to the question were given
  • Fabio’s views were clearly identified and linked to the language used (Q10d)
  • appropriate elaboration on the ideas was provided.

Characteristics of the weaker responses:

  • rather than using an understanding of the text to help answer the question, the text was translated
  • terms like sereno, banco, sopportare, lottare, college were misunderstood
  • difficulties in explaining how the language used conveys Fabio’s views were evident (Q10d).

Reading and Responding Part B

Characteristics of better responses:

  • all necessary cues in the text were addressed and points were elaborated, showcasing the ability to both comprehend and interact effectively with the text
  • a variety of language structures were used correctly and the language was manipulated authentically and creatively
  • responses were well-structured and flowed and paragraphs were linked
  • an appropriate greeting and sign off were provided
  • hypothetical phrases were used competently and efficiently, and there was not an overuse of idiomatic expressions
  • ideas were developed.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

  • candidates relied heavily on the text and in some instances other parts of the paper were used when responding to cues
  • anglicisms and inappropriate use of tenses were evident
  • articulated prepositions were poorly used and frequent minor errors, especially with articles, were made
  • errors with cognates were made, perhaps due to poor use of a dictionary
  • not all cues were addressed
  • ideas were poorly linked or unstructured, with the overuse of idiomatic expressions that rendered the text unauthentic
  • candidates did not use a variety of tenses
  • spelling and agreements were poor; Serena was referred to in the masculine form
  • the text was not understood, and some candidates thought that the respondent was still at school
  • scripts were short and underdeveloped.

Section III - Writing

Q12

Characteristics of better responses:

  • candidates kept within the requirements of the text type and addressed the audience, purpose and context appropriately
  • an authentic email was provided
  • a range of authentic idiomatic expressions were used in a relevant way and knowledge of a wider range of tenses was demonstrated
  • language was manipulated well and complex grammatical structures were included.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

  • modal verbs and infinitive structure were not used well
  • verb conjugations were incorrect or simply left in the infinitive form. At times the incorrect verb tenses were used
  • dictionaries were not used effectively
  • spelling and agreements of nouns and adjectives were inconsistent.

Q13

Characteristics of better responses:

  • candidates adhered to the word limit
  • candidates responded to the context, text type, audience and purpose, as required by the question
  • a wide variety of structures were demonstrated and a reflection was provided rather than a recount of the experience
  • language was manipulated authentically
  • the content was relevant to the task.

Characteristics of weaker responses:

  • irrelevant information was included and the writing was not reflective
  • use of pronouns, agreements, tenses and spelling were poor
  • ho realizzato rather than mi sono reso conto was used to express the idea of ‘I realised’
  • over-long texts, which did not meet the requirements of the task, were submitted.
Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size