2009 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Swedish Continuers
Contents
- Oral Examination
- Written Examination
- Section I – Listening and Responding
- Section II – Reading and Responding
- Section III – Writing in Swedish
Introduction
This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 Swedish course. 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 Swedish.
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 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 which are not included in the glossary, such as ‘design’, ‘translate’ or ‘list’.
Oral Examination
Conversation
Most candidates were well prepared for this section of the oral examination. They communicated competently and confidently with appropriate pronunciation and intonation. The best responses demonstrated an extensive vocabulary, a wealth of ideas and a command of a variety of linguistic structures.
Weaker candidates did not understand all the questions, demonstrated a limited vocabulary and did not elaborate their answers.
Discussion
Most candidates demonstrated competency in the language but let themselves down because they had not done sufficient research and consequently seemed ill-prepared for the discussion.
Candidates need to be reminded that they should be using a minimum of three different resources: ‘It is expected that at least three different texts will form the basis of the in-depth study, so that the candidate is able to explore their chosen subject in sufficient depth.’ (Swedish syllabus) Possible resources to support the discussion are books, internet sites, interviews, written statements from sources in Sweden and verbal histories.
The topics chosen were interesting but depth of treatment was often missing. Candidates are advised to discuss each source in depth. Topics which lent themselves well to discussion of information, ideas and opinions included the following:
- the Swedish royal family
- the differences between education in Australia and Sweden
- Swedish immigration policy.
Written Examination
Section I – Listening and Responding
Part A
Question 3
In the weaker responses, candidates did not analyse or comment on the use of language in the announcement, while in the better responses, candidates demonstrated an ability to comment on the use of language techniques and link this to the content of the announcement.
Question 5
- The better responses made a direct reference to the theme and title of the program and demonstrated why the person was a suitable guest for the show.
- Most candidates focused on the content and did not identify the language features. The weaker responses merely translated parts of the interview and tried to relate this to the question. The better responses discussed the language and techniques used in the interview and gave suitable examples to support their statements.
Part B
Question 6
Most candidates answered this question well. The stronger responses paid close attention to detail and formulated their responses well. A common mistake was made in reference to when the ‘party’ was going to be held.
Question 7
- In the better responses, candidates identified and outlined several reasons as to why the principal had based his speech on this article. Weaker responses were too general and tended to simply regurgitate the speech in a written format.
Section II – Reading and Responding
Part A
Question 8
- Candidates generally answered this question well. Weaker candidates struggled to identify the two details needed to gain full marks.
- Weaker responses demonstrated a lack of understanding of the vocabulary of the text.
Question 9
- Several candidates missed important information at the beginning of the text and focused mainly on the letters.
- Weaker responses translated Gunnar’s letter rather than summarising his opinion. In the better responses, candidates managed to do this in a clear and concise form.
- Weaker responses demonstrated a lack of focus on the relationship between Stefan and his wife. These responses focused on translating aspects of the text rather than showing an overall understanding of the text and the relationship between Stefan and his wife.
- In the better responses, candidates identified the language techniques used to convey the thoughts and attitudes of the writers. However, some candidates struggled to support their arguments by referring to examples from the text. Weaker responses comprised translations of the text rather than an analysis of language and purpose.
Part B
General Comments
The majority of responses in this section showed a sound understanding of the text and responded appropriately. The better responses adopted an in-depth treatment of the task through the development of relevant ideas and information relating to the original text. These responses also demonstrated a very good knowledge of grammar, syntax, register and vocabulary. These candidates organised their responses well and used the appropriate text type in their answers, a speech. Weaker responses were less linguistically accurate and tended to contain literal translations from the English. Some candidates did not to use the required text format appropriately.
Section III – Writing in Swedish
Responses were creative and well organised. All candidates responded using the correct text type. The better responses showed a broad knowledge and understanding of vocabulary and manipulated language in an authentic and creative style. Weaker responses demonstrated a limited vocabulary and lack of grammatical knowledge, especially in relation to the use of verb tenses, pronouns and the correct use of adjective endings.
2010010
NSW Government