2009 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Korean Background Speakers
Contents
- Introduction
- Section I – Listening and Responding
- Section II – Reading and Responding
- Section III – Writing in Korean
Introduction
This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 course in Korean Background Speakers. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2009 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 2009 Higher School Certificate examination, the marking guidelines and other support documents which have been developed by the Board of Studies to assist in the teaching and learning of Korean Background Speakers.
Teachers and students are advised that, in December 2008, the Board of Studies approved changes to the examination specifications and assessment requirements for a number of courses. These changes will be implemented for the 2010 HSC cohort. Information on a course-by-course basis is available on the Board’s website.
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 a guide 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 which are not included in the glossary, such as ‘design’, ‘translate’ or ‘list’.
Section I – Listening and Responding
Part A
Question 1
General comments
Some candidates made poor use of bilingual dictionaries, which limited their ability to express themselves in English.
Specific comments
- Most candidates demonstrated a good understanding of Songyi’s point of view. In the weaker responses, candidates stated a few points only. In some cases, candidates translated sections of text without referring to the question asked.
- In the better responses, candidates demonstrated a good understanding of Youngho’s arguments and included relevant supporting evidence from the text. In the weaker responses, candidates included some relevant information but did not indicate their own opinion of what they had learned. In the very weakest responses, some of the candidates did not express themselves coherently.
Part B
Question 2
Most candidates identified the main issues raised in the texts. They responded within the required word limit. They composed a sound argument with reference to the texts and wrote in the correct text type.
In the better responses, candidates demonstrated a good understanding of the issues of ‘creating an ideal multicultural society in Korea’ raised in the texts. In these responses, candidates demonstrated a sophisticated level of ability to compare and contrast the main issues presented. They demonstrated a well-developed understanding of context and audience.
In the weaker responses, candidates summarised the text or referred to general information by using only isolated references from the texts. In these responses, candidates tended to ‘copy’ and/or ‘cut and paste’ from the texts. Poor spelling, inappropriate use of vocabulary, and poor grammatical structures and poor sequencing of information and ideas were also issues.
Section II – Reading and Responding
Part A
Question 3
Candidates are reminded to answer in either English or Korean but not both. In the better responses, candidates demonstrated the ability to analyse texts and structure a logical response. Their answers demonstrated a comprehensive understanding of the task and text. In the weaker responses, candidates summarised aspects of the text.
- In the better responses, candidates demonstrated an understanding of the symbolic meaning of the ‘rally’ and demonstrated a sound understanding of the issue raised in the text and its historical background. In the weaker responses, candidates referred to ‘rally’ but provided few relevant examples to support their response.
- In the better responses, candidates provided well-rounded answers with appropriate textual references. They demonstrated an insightful understanding of the text and the analysis of character was accurate. In the weaker responses, candidates did not analyse the impact of ‘Man Geun’s absence’ and focused on the role of ‘Man Geun’.
- In the better responses, candidates demonstrated excellent use of textual references. They demonstrated control of sophisticated vocabulary and complicated language structures. They also demonstrated good analytical skills. In the weaker responses, candidates did not refer to the text as a whole. They provided only a cursory summary of the text, not related to the main message that the author was intending to convey to his contemporary audience through the main character. Some attempted to summarise the main message but did not include relevant examples. In the weaker responses, candidates included inaccurate information from the story, misunderstood the question or misinterpreted the story.
Question 4
In the better responses, candidates demonstrated an excellent analysis of features such as imagery and metaphor.
In the weaker responses, candidates wrote about the poem in a way that could not be supported by evidence from the poem. Careless mistakes were made such as wrong names, titles, stanzas, etc. Some candidates demonstrated only a superficial understanding of the poem. These candidates did not address the features in the poem and included incorrect information.
Part B
Question 5
In the best responses, candidates responded in a well-structured essay format and clearly expressed their opinion on the new exam method with close reference to the given text. These candidates effectively presented the negative or positive aspects of the issues with excellent examples, meeting the length requirements of 250–300 words.
In weaker responses, candidates identified the issues raised in the text. However, some candidates focused extensively on the impact of the internet on contemporary society in general without reference to the information in the text. These candidates demonstrated only a limited ability to structure and sequence the information and ideas in the essay format. Some candidates did not use the correct text type and/or summarised the stimulus text without presenting their own opinion on the issues.
Section III – Writing in Korean
General comments
Common weaknesses included problems with written expression and a lack of logical organisation of ideas – the latter often limited to simply listing information.
Candidates are reminded not to identify themselves or their schools in any way.
Specific comments
Question 6
Most candidates provided interesting responses, using their own experiences to develop arguments and suggestions. In the better responses, candidates used a variety of examples to persuade the target audience by using an appropriate tone, and developed their arguments in a well-structured speech, followed by reasonable suggestions. In the weaker responses, candidates presented personal opinions related to the topic without using these to form a persuasive or coherent argument.
Recommendations
Candidates are advised to use monolingual and/or bilingual print dictionaries to translate Korean words into English and to check the use of words or expressions chosen, especially in Section I – Listening and Responding. Candidates must answer this section in English.
Candidates should read the questions carefully and provide structured answers that specifically address the question. It is important to practise structuring an extended piece of writing using a variety of text types.
Candidates are reminded to write clearly and to pay attention to spacing in sentences and paragraphs. Each paragraph should contain a new idea. Excessive use of colloquial language should be avoided.
It is recommended that candidates adhere to the word limit and allow sufficient time to plan their responses. Candidates can disadvantage themselves by writing overlong responses, which often lack coherence and structure.
2010041
NSW Government