Analisis Pemarkahan b. Inggeris 2 Spm 2010

1119/2 BAHASA INGGERIS 2

Bahasa Inggeris 2 1 Kupasan Mutu Jawapan SPM 2010

EXAMINATION FORMAT

The SPM English 1119/2 paper consists of 4 sections:

Section A consists of 15 multiple choice type questions which test reading andcomprehension skills and sub-skills at recognition level. Questions 1 to 8 arebased on short texts of different text types – newspaper reports, dialogue, poster,extracts from articles and reports. Questions 9 to 15, which test grammar andvocabulary items, are based on a rational cloze passage with 7 blanks.

Section B requires candidates to transfer relevant information accurately fromone text type to another. For SPM 2010, the question required candidates totransfer relevant information from a poster to the table.

Section C consists of comprehension questions which test candidates’ ability todemonstrate reading and comprehension skills and sub-skills at recognition level.Candidates then have to answer the questions, using language competently toconvey the answers. For this year’s question, candidates were required toanswer questions based on a passage on doing acts of kindness.

This section also requires candidates to write a summary which tests their abilityto select and retrieve relevant information, and then organise the informationcoherently. This question also tests candidates’ ability to paraphrase effectivelyand concisely. For this year’s question, candidates were required to summarisethe ways in which people can show acts of kindness and the benefits that can beexperienced from acts of kindness.

Section D tests reading and comprehension skills and sub-skills at theproduction level. Candidates are required to answer questions set on the literarytexts selected for the literature component. Candidates are also expected to givea personal response to the literary texts tested. They include the selected poem(question 32), short story (question 33) and novel (question 34). For SPM 2010,the poem tested was ‘There’s Been a Death in the Opposite House’, the extractwas from the short story ‘The Drover’s Wife’ and the novel question requiredcandidates’ to write on an important incident giving reasons why it was important.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE

On the whole, candidates did quite well in this paper. Candidates with goodlanguage proficiency did exceptionally well while candidates with poor languageability were unable to perform well. A very small percentage failed to respond tothe tasks.


GENERAL PERFORMANCE OF CANDIDATES ACCORDING TO THEIRGROUPS

Good candidates

Candidates with good language proficiency were able to comprehend andrespond to all the tasks relevantly and accurately. Most of them did well inSection A and Section B. They were able to respond well to the readingcomprehension task and showed good ability to write the summary in their ownwords. They also managed to produce answers of a high standard with cleardetails for Section D (Literature Component).

Average candidates

Generally, students of average language ability fared quite well in Section A. Afew of the items posed problems to them. Section B usually produced better-than-average performance. There were a few questions left unanswered inSections C and D. Some candidates who used their own words to answer thecomprehension and summary questions inadvertently penalised themselvesbecause their limited competency resulted in grammatical and spelling errorswhich sometimes caused distortion of meanings.

Weak candidates

Almost all the weak candidates attempted Sections A and B but most of themperformed badly. Candidates displayed very poor reading skills. Lifting and over-lifting in sections B and C were evident and the candidates did not showunderstanding of the task or text. Some candidates did not even attempt sectionsB, C and D.

PERFORMANCE OF CANDIDATES IN EACH SECTION

SECTION A (Questions 1–15): MULTIPLE-CHOICE QUESTIONS

GENERAL PERFORMANCE

On the whole, candidates were able to do quite well in Section A as theydisplayed a good understanding of the task. However, performance was betterwhere questions required only recall and understanding of main ideas.


STRENGTH AND WEAKNESS OF CANDIDATES

Question 1

A significant percentage of the candidates managed to draw the correctconclusion for the task based on the extract of the newspaper report. Candidateswere able to associate ‘food and clothing’ with ‘basic items’ and then link it to thephrase ‘distributed to the victims’. Weak candidates merely matched words fromthe extract to one of the distractors while some of them misinterpreted the rolesplayed by the two bodies: Suntyre Malaysia and The Flood Recovery Drive.

Question 2

Candidates with good language ability were able to draw the correct conclusion(favoured) from the phrases ‘not many concerts have been staged for classicalmusic’ and ‘but contemporary and pop concerts do not face the same situation’.Weak candidates, who should have been more familiar with the words that soundthe same in Bahasa Melayu, chose the wrong options.

Question 3

A majority of the candidates chose the correct option as the process involved inthe preparation for the marathon run is quite straightforward. Candidates wereable to comprehend the sequence easily. Some candidates were probably misledby the appearance of the word ‘rest’ at the end of the advice in the extract. Theyfailed to see the catch in the word ‘after’.

Question 4

This item required candidates to read for details and a large majority of thecandidates chose the correct information based on the newspaper report. Theywere able to draw the right conclusion based on the phrase ‘it had only one toshow, thanks to…..Rufina Tan’. Weaker candidates did not understand thephrase ‘was in the running for five gold medals’ and eventually chose the wrongoption thinking ‘Malaysia won five gold medals’.

Question 5

Only a small percentage of the candidates were able to infer the correctresponse from the phrase ‘make it beneficial to a charity of your choice’. Somecandidates failed to read the text as a whole and merely focused on key wordslike donation and charity.


Question 6

Candidates were able to relate ‘the first symptom…’ to ‘day 1’. Candidates couldhave also related to their own personal experience in having a cold where a feverusually develops when you fall ill.

Question 7

Candidates could infer the answer from the phrase ‘send us a cheque’ as a formof donation as well as understand the meaning of ‘contribution’ and link it to howit contributes to the conservation problem. Some candidates failed to differentiatethe meaning of ‘to expand’ and ‘to set up’. Weak candidates focused on similarwords used in the options and the text for example ‘homes’ and ‘anti-poachingpatrols’.

Question 8

The word ‘breed’ is repeated three times thus providing the clue to the answer.Some candidates most likely related it to common advice given by adults andcampaigns that Aedes can kill. They were also probably influenced by the factthat people are dying from dengue.

Questions 9 - 15

The items were based on a cloze text. They were all grammar items whichassessed the students’ knowledge of verb forms, prepositions, pronoun, gerundand logical connector. The passage was about a writer’s opinion of Malaysia.

Question 9

We are _____ with natural beauty – pristine beaches, refreshing greenery andan abundance of flora and fauna.

The item tested candidates’ knowledge of past participle and the passive form.Candidates were able to relate to the clue given in the first sentence – ‘wasbrought up’ and ‘educated’. Weak candidates were misled by the auxiliary verb‘are’ which must be followed by the continuous form of the verb (are blessing).

Question 10

Although they are of diverse races, they live _____ peace and harmony.

Candidates were familiar with the common usage of the phrase ‘living in peaceand harmony’. A significantly small percentage of the candidates had no idea onhow to use correctly the prepositions ‘in’ and ‘on’.


Question 11

In the towns and city, we _____ first-class facilities ranging from five starhotels….

Candidates were able to link the description in paragraph 2 to that of paragraph 3which uses the present tense. Weaker candidates were misled by the past tenseform of the verb used in the first sentence of the text.

Question 12

We lack _____ here and everything is at an affordable price.

Candidates with good language proficiency were able to correlate the idea that‘when we have everything we lack nothing’. Some candidates were unable tocorrelate the idea that ‘when everything exists we actually lack nothing’.Candidates may have been misled by the commonly used phrase ‘lacksomething’.

Question 13

_____ homesick, I have to return home.

Candidates were able to understand and use the gerund in context. Somecandidates may have chosen the wrong option based on the verb form used inthe preceding sentence.

Question 14

As soon as I arrive at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport, I always sigh _____relief.

Good candidates understood the meaning of the word ‘sigh’ and the correctpreposition that goes with ‘relief”. Other candidates failed to identify the correctpreposition as they did not understand the meaning of the word ‘sigh’. In addition,the expression ‘sigh with relief’ is rarely used.Question 15

_____, a few have returned as they found that life there was not as easy as theyhad thought.

Candidates were able to link the contrary ideas used in the two phrases,‘..migrated a few years ago to look for greener pastures…’ and ‘…returned asthey found that life there was not easy..’. Weak candidates were unable to uselinkers correctly.


SUGGESTIONS FOR STUDENTS AND TEACHERS

1. Students should read more to improve their command of the language2. Students should go through past years’ questions and exercises in workbooks

to familiarize with the examination format.3. Teachers should give students more grammar exercises.4. Give more rational cloze passages so that they can understand how to

complete the blanks accurately.5. Grammar should be taught in isolation

SECTION B (Questions 16-25): INFORMATION TRANSFER

The assessment objective for section B is to assess candidates’ ability to transferrelevant information from one text type to another. For the SPM 2010 paper, thetask required candidates to read a poster on Taman Negara and using theinformation from the poster, candidates had to complete a table by writing shortanswers.

Most of the candidates were able to locate the answers directly from the poster.However, question 17 was a little bit more challenging as quite a significantnumber of students misunderstood the meaning of the word ‘inhabitants’.Questions 21 and 25 were also imperfectly understood by some candidates.

Candidates performed much better in this section compared to the othersections. Only a very small percentage of the students did not make any attemptto answer the questions in this section.

STRENGTH

Most of the candidates attempted this section. A majority of candidates couldunderstand the instructions and were able to retrieve the relevant informationfrom the poster. Candidates, who were proficient in the language, gave preciseand concise answers. Even weaker candidates were able to provide correctanswers. They were able to select and lift the portion of the sentences that hadthe answers.

WEAKNESSES

Candidates over-lifted the words, phrases or sentences. There was randomselection of words or phrases among weak candidates. Spelling errors wereprevalent. Candidates could not differentiate water-based activities from otheractivities. Candidates lacked the skill to transfer the information from the text tothe table. They gave long answers and many of them over-lifted from the text. Asmall percentage of the students did not attempt this section.


DETAILED PERFORMANCE

Question 16

A majority of the candidates were able to answer this question correctly. Evensome of the weak candidates could answer the question. Those who answeredwrongly were probably candidates who did not quite understand the word ‘Age’.

Common mistakes:Candidates’ answers were incomplete, for example

Candidates gave more than the required information, for example

Question 17

Quite a high percentage of the candidates were unable to answer this questioncorrectly.

Common mistakes:Candidates gave the wrong answers, for example


There was inclusion of other unnecessary information.

Questions 18-20

Most candidates answered these questions correctly. Weaker candidates couldnot differentiate water-based activities from the other activities mentioned in theposter.

Common mistakes:Incomplete information/ candidate’s’ own word

Inclusion of other information / over-lifting


Wrong answer

Question 21

For this question, candidates were required to identify the place for any one ofthe activities mentioned in questions 18-20. However, some candidatesmisunderstood the task and mentioned the activity that could be carried out atthe place mentioned in the table.

Common mistake:Wrong answer given by candidates

Questions 22-24

Candidates were required to identify three other activities besides the threewater-based activities mentioned in questions 18-20. Most of the candidateswere able to identify the activities but weaker candidates could not differentiatewater-based activities from other activities.

Common mistakes:Inclusion of other information / over-lifting


Wrong answer

Question 25

Like question 21, candidates were required to identify the place for any one ofthe activities mentioned in questions 22-24. Some of the candidatesmisunderstood the task and mentioned the activity that can be carried out at theplace.

Common mistake:Wrong answer

SUGGESTIONS FOR STUDENTS AND TEACHERS

1. Have more practice on information transfer of different types.2. Teachers should discourage students from attempting mindless lifting as they

could lose marks.3. Students must be taught to provide short and precise answers when they

attempt questions of this nature.4. Teachers should teach students to use only information found in the text and

not their own words. Sometimes, the use of own words may lead to distortion inmeaning.

5. Students should go through past years’ questions and exercises in workbooksto familiarize themselves with all kinds of text types in this section.


SECTION C

GENERAL PERFORMANCE

This section has two sub-sections: reading comprehension and summary writing.Students produced an above average performance in this section. Meanwhile, asmall number of the candidates did not attempt both the comprehension andsummary questions in this section.

READING COMPREHENSION (Questions 26 – 30)

This section tested the candidates’ ability to read and understand informationcontained in an extended text. The candidates were required to answer 5comprehension questions based on a passage.

Question 26

From paragraph 1, what is the name of the movie?

StrengthCandidates were able to answer the question ‘what is the name’, by givinganswers such as

Candidates understood that the book and the movie shared the same title basedon the phrase ‘which was later made into the movie of the same name’.


WeaknessesMany candidates wrote grammatically incorrect answers but the idea wascomprehensible, for example

Spelling errors were quite prominent

Candidates who could only recognise the word ‘name’ gave the name of thebook, the author or the character.

Over-lifting that included irrelevant information


Question 26 (b)

How did Trevor try to change the world?

StrengthThe majority of the candidates were able to give the right answer, for example

Even though lifting of whole sentences was allowed, most candidates were ableto provide the exact answer showing that they understood the question.

Candidates managed to lift relevant sentences, for example

WeaknessesWeak candidates lifted the wrong line since the words ‘change the world’appears in line 3 of the text


Some candidates did not understand the question. Instead of stating how Trevorchanged the world, they focused on the reason or motivation behind his action.

Question 27 (a)

From paragraph 2, what is the aim of the Random Acts of Kindness Foundation?

StrengthA majority of the candidates were able to lift the answer from the text

Weaknesses

Partial lifting that did not complete the idea required

Candidates lifted whole sentence that contained irrelevant information

Question 27 (b)

Which word from the paragraph means ‘do the same to others’?

StrengthA significant number of candidates were able to give the exact one-word answer‘reciprocate’, showing that, apart from understanding the meaning of the word,they were also aware of the difference between word, phrase and sentence.

A few wrote out the sentence, the word is ‘reciprocate’, and placed the wordwithin inverted commas or had the word underlined


Weaknesses

Giving more than one word as the answer

Candidates chose the wrong word

Question 28 (a)

From paragraph 4, what effect can a comic strip have on a person reading it’?

StrengthA majority of the candidates were able to respond accurately

A significant number of candidates were able to lift the permissible sentence forone of the answers, e.g.

Some candidates just gave a one-word answer which was acceptable


Weaknesses

Candidates failed to change the point of reference

Poor lift or over-lift the line concerned

Question 28 (b)

Who does the word them in line 26 refer to?

StrengthCandidates were able to pick the correct answer that is ‘patients’. The word ‘who’in the question gives a clue that the answer must refer to a group of people.

A significant number of candidates were able to lift the correct phrase from anearlier sentence in the text.

WeaknessesSome candidates misunderstood “them” as a reference to more than one person,so they gave two groups of people.


Candidates mistakenly thought it referred to the items mentioned in the text.

Question 29

From paragraph 5, give two reasons why some people are not prepared to doacts of kindness?

Strength

Most candidates were able to give the correct answers.

Candidates lifted the relevant sentences

Weaknesses

Some candidates misinterpreted “takes up too much time” and rephrased theiranswers wrongly

Some candidates gave the wrong answers, e.g.


Question 30

Without using examples from the passage, suggest two ways in which you canbe kind to others.StrengthGood candidates were able to give quality answers.

Average students were able to give simple acts of kindness

WeaknessesCandidates lifted the examples from the text

Vague answers


Mindless lift of phrases or sentences from text

SUGGESTIONS TO STUDENTS

1. Read the text and questions at least twice.2. Learn to look for clues and use contextual clues3. Understand the fundamental needs of the Wh-questions.4. Look for answers in the given paragraphs. Select intelligently phrases or

sentences.5. Students should be adept at using a wide range of vocabulary6. Make it a habit to look up meanings of difficult words encountered when

reading. A good dictionary is a must.7. Do more comprehension exercises.8. Understand key words in the questions9. Attempt all the questions.10.Give logical opinions.11.Read extensively.

SUGGESTIONS TO TEACHERS

1. Expose students to the use of figurative language2. Expose students to the key words such as ‘word’, ‘phrase’ and ‘sentence’

which are vital in answering some comprehension questions.3. Expose students to various types of comprehension passages/reading

materials other than those in text/revision books.5. Encourage students to read extensively, including newspaper articles and

magazines.6. Remind students to change the pronouns accordingly when lifting answers.


SUMMARY WRITING

(QUESTION 31)

The summary question tests the candidates’ ability to select and retrieve relevantinformation, use the information given to display an understanding of the taskand to organise the information coherently. The question also tests candidates’ability to paraphrase effectively and concisely and to present the information inStandard English, in an accurate and fluent form.

For this year’s question, the candidates are required to write a summary of theways in which people can show acts of kindness and the benefits that can beexperienced from acts of kindness.


GENERAL PERFORMANCE

On the whole, candidates did not perform as well as last year. They were able toselect and retrieve the required information from the text. Their response wasalso organised coherently. However, as expected, a substantial number of thecandidates adopted the safe strategy to be text dependent in shaping theirresponse. So, they did not take up the challenge of using own words in theresponse. In short, the language was largely text-based. When they attempted touse their own words, it was restricted to mostly single word substitution.

GENERAL PERFORMANCE OF CANDIDATES ACCORDING TO THEIRGROUPS

Candidates in the High Achievement Group

The confidence and competency of the candidates were the main features of theresponse. These candidates are proficient in the language and therefore wereable to respond relevantly to the task. They managed to retrieve most of theinformation required and were also able to paraphrase effectively and concisely.They also presented their responses accurately, showing an ability to use originalcompound and complex structures.

Candidates in the Average Achievement Group

Generally, candidates in this group displayed a good understanding of the task,even though there was heavy reliance on the text. They demonstrated this byretrieving the required information. There was some form of selective lifting andat times, wholesale copying, but they were still able to get good marks for contentand language. There were attempts to reorganise and reshape the text. At times,attempts to rephrase distorted the original meaning of the information required.

Candidates in the Low Achievement Group

Candidates did not show understanding of the task. There were cases ofcandidates producing more or less a complete transcript of the text. There wasalso mindless lifting which led to fractured syntax. A small percentage of thecandidates did not even attempt the question.



Strength

Good candidates understood the requirements of the task and were able toselect the relevant information to write a summary of the ways in which peoplecan show acts of kindness and the benefits that can be experienced from them.

Competent candidates were able to identify all or almost all the content points.There were sustained and noticeable attempts at paraphrasing. Expressionswere generally sound, e.g. ‘take time out to listen to someone who has a problemand needs a friend’ = ‘one can lend their ears to a friend in need.’

A large percentage of the candidates were able to do intelligent and selectivelifting of the relevant sections of the text. They were able to lift phrases and partsof a sentence and join them together to form a new sentence that makes sense.

Candidates showed good use of connectors.

The writing was clear, well-organised and coherent. Spelling and punctuationwere accurate.

Weaknesses

Many candidates were unable to paraphrase due to their low proficiency. Attimes, when candidates tried to paraphrase, meaning was distorted. Theexpressions were not secure. Some of the candidates’ attempts to paraphrasewere limited to single word substitution. The summary was also poorly organisedand lacked coherence.

Weak candidates failed to lift intelligently - dropping words indiscriminatelyleading to mindless lifting where sense did not come through. Some candidatesshowed total reliance on text language and resorted to lifting whole sentences.Weak candidates resorted to copying several sentences in sequence, dropping asentence or two and then copying a few more – wholesale copying.Very weak candidates resorted to copying sentence after sentence without aclear break, thus producing a more or less complete transcript of the text.

Summary exceeded the word limit of 130 words. There was intrusion of irrelevantsentences or sections which were not from lines 13 – 43. Candidates includedtheir own ideas and opinions.

Candidates were unable to grammatically complete the first sentence using theten introductory words – One of the many ways to show kindness is to...givingmoney by donating to a needy cause.


There was heavy frequency of serious errors or fractured syntax which impededreading and understanding. Words were wrongly spelt although lifted from thepassage.

Candidates were not able to differentiate between givers and receivers of acts ofkindness. They did not understand the meaning of ‘benefits.’ Though thequestion was clear with the preposition "from" which meant the doer and not thegiver, the candidates had obviously not paid attention to this preposition andstraight away interpreted the question as benefits for the giver and the receiver.This was a mistake that was found in average and below average candidates.

The overall performance clearly shows that candidates did not digest thequestion and think before they answered, they read once, got a superficialunderstanding and then summarised by merely shortening the sentences bydropping words and phrases.


Sample 1

Comments:

Strength

This candidate was able to select and retrieve the relevant information asrequired in the task that is the ways in which people can show acts of kindnessand the benefits that can be experienced from acts of kindness.

The candidate was able to rephrase effectively by condensing the material tomake it concise and also forming original complex and compound sentencestructures. The finished product was rather different from the original text, eventhough there were phrases from the text which were difficult to substitute. Inrephrasing, the candidate was able to convey the meaning intended across usinghis or her own words. Together with the usage of sound expressions and almostfaultless grammatically correct sentences, this candidate was able to perform wellin this question.


Sample 2

Comments:

StrengthThis candidate was able to select and retrieve the relevant information.

WeaknessThere was an attempt at rephrasing but at the same time, there was considerablereliance on the comprehension text language. In terms of accuracy, the candidatemade a few errors, mainly because he attempted to use his own words. But, thecandidate showed a marked ability to use original compound and original complexsentences.


Sample 3

Comments:

Strength

This candidate had successfully done selective lifting which made sense - intelligentlifting. The candidate had relied completely on the text language and had not attemptedrephrasing. Furthermore, the candidate did not show some ability to form originalcompound sentences.


Sample 4

Comments:

Strength

Candidate had lifted whole sentences from the text - wholesale copying. In doingso, the candidate had kept the response largely accurate.

Weakness

The candidate relied totally on the text language. There were not many errorsbecause the candidate lifted entire sentences from the text.


Sample 5

Comments:

WeaknessThe candidate had tried to carry out selective lifting but unfortunately most of thesentences formed did not answer the summary question. Furthermore, many ofthe sentences did not make sense – a sign of mindless lifting.

Even though the candidate relied completely on the text, there were frequentserious errors in the response. This was due to some fractured syntax as a resultof the mindless lifting. However, some parts were accurately copied.


1. Always check to make sure each sentence written answers the task given.2. Use only text within the stipulated area as stated in the rubric. Draw lines to

indicate the beginning and the ending of the summary area.3. Do not exceed the word limit given.4. Use the 10 introductory words given.5. Complete the opening sentence using the 10 introductory words without any

grammatical errors so that the first content point is not lost.6. Build a wider vocabulary, so that paraphrasing is more effective and concise.7. Learn to write using a variety of sentence structures – complex and

compound.8. Learn to use sequence and logical connectors.9. Practise rephrasing.10.Write a draft first and edit it before writing out the summary.



1. Train the students to understand the task given.2. Teach and train students to locate the points. Teach them how to differentiate

between main and supporting ideas/details, and how to recognise the mainclause so that they can select the main idea while leaving out theunnecessary details.

3. Teach them to select intelligently4. Remind students to use the given 10 introductory words and to use material

within the stipulated text area, and write in one paragraph.5. Teach students to use suitable cohesive devices such as connectors.6. Teach and train the students, especially those with good linguistic skills, to

paraphrase effectively and concisely.7. Teach and train students to write using a variety of sentence structures,

focusing on ability to form original compound and complex structures.8. Focus on one skill at a time – locating content points, paraphrasing or writing

original syntax.9. Help the weaker students by using key words for locating points answering

summary questions on how, benefits, reasons, steps etc.10. Improve their vocabulary by introducing relevant comprehension texts based

on the curriculum specifications.

SECTION D (LITERATURE COMPONENT)

GENERAL PERFORMANCE

Candidates showed an average performance in this section. They managed toanswer a few of the questions in the poem and short story sections. Theyperformed reasonably better in the novel question. A significantly highpercentage of the candidates did not attempt the questions in this section.

POEM (QUESTION 32)

GENERAL PERFROMANCE

The poem chosen for SPM 2010 was There’s Been a Death in the OppositeHouse. Out of the three questions given, only one allowed candidates to lift therelevant line or phrases from the given stanza. Quite a high percentage of thecandidates were able to answer this question. They needed knowledge of thepoem to answer the second question and not many managed to get the correctanswers. They were able to provide their personal response to question 33(c).


STRENGTH AND WEAKNESSES OF CANDIDATES

Strength

Candidates were able to give short and accurate answers, e.g.

Q 32(a) Numb look

Q32(b) (i) To pay respect(ii) To confirm the death

Candidates were able to lift the relevant line or phrases for Q32(a)

Candidates showed a good understanding of the required task, e.g. Q32(b) Whydo you think the neighbours and doctor were in the house?


Students were able to express their opinion for the personal response questionbased on their personal experiences or observations.

Weak students managed to give acceptable responses in poor language.

Weakness

Mindless lifting directly from the poem

Candidates showed no understanding or misunderstanding of task


Lack the language ability, e.g. use of BM words


Question 32(a) From stanza 1, how did the persona ‘I’ know that there was adeath in the opposite house?

Common mistakes:

Two answers given but one answer was inaccurate

Candidates did not understand the question.


Question 32b: Why do you think the following people were in the house?(i) The neighbours (ii) The doctor

Common Mistakes:

Candidates lifted lines from the poem,e.g.

(i) The neighbours rustle in and out(ii) The doctor drives away

Candidates showed no understanding of task

Question 32c: Without using examples from the poem, suggest two things youwould do to show concern if death occurred in your neighbour’s house?

Common Mistakes:Candidates’ response that expressed the same idea


Candidates were unable to express ideas due to poor command of the language,use of BM words


1. Students must ensure a good understanding of the poem, both literal andfigurative meanings

2. Do more exercise on all the poem3. Give appropriate responses based on the stanzas tested except for questions

that ask for personal opinion (open-ended questions)4. Improve linguistic ability to enable accurate expression of ideas especially for

questions that require personal opinions and responses.


1. Teachers must teach and emphasize the main elements of the poems2. Expose students to the different type of questions usually tested3. Train students to read and understand the questions carefully. Then,

respond to them by making sure that the answer is relevant to what is beingasked by the question.

4. Remind students to provide responses to the questions based on theprescribed stanza

5. Train students to provide personal responses, especially for questions whichask for personal opinions. Teachers must emphasize to the students thatthey are expected to use their own words and expressions

6. Lessons should be conducted in a more meaningful manner and related tostudents’ personal lives.

SHORT STORY (QUESTION 33)

GENERAL PERFROMANCE

The short story chosen for this year is The Drover’s Wife. Out of the threequestions given, most candidates partially lifted the relevant answer for the firstquestion and lifted the entire relevant sentence for the next question. Quite ahigh percentage of the candidates were able to provide personal responses toquestion 33(d).


STRENGTH AND WEAKNESSES OF CANDIDATES

Strength

They were able to provide answers that gave the main idea of dealing with thesnake for Q33(a)

Candidates were able to lift the relevant words or phrase

Showed a good understanding of the required task, e.g. Q33(c) Would you livelike the Drover’s wife? Give a reason why you would like to and one reason whyyou would not.


Weak candidates managed to give acceptable responses in poor language

Weaknesses

Mindless lifting directly from the extract

Candidates showed no understanding or misunderstanding of task


Candidates gave more than one answer


Question 33(a) Why is the Drover’s wife sitting alone by the fire?

Common Mistakes:Candidate gave two answers but one answer was inaccurate

Candidates did not understand the question.


Question 33(b): State any two activities she does on Sunday afternoon.

Common Mistakes:Candidates wrote more than one activity in the space given and showed nounderstanding of task, wrong answer

Question 33(c): Would you like to live like the Drover’s wife? Give a reason whyyou would like and one reason why you would not.

Common Mistakes:Candidates gave a reason why not for a positive reason and vice versa

Candidates were unable to express ideas due to poor command of the language



1. Students must ensure a good understanding of the story in terms ofcharacters, characterization, plot, themes, setting and moral values

2. Work on the reading and comprehension skills and the ability to ascertain thetask given by the question pertaining to the ‘who’, ‘what’, ‘when’ and ‘why’.

3. Give appropriate response based on the extract as required by the rubricexcept for questions that ask for personal opinion (open-ended questions)

4. Improve linguistic ability to enable accurate expression of ideas especially forquestions that require personal opinions and responses.


1. Teachers must teach and emphasize the main elements of a story i.e.characters, characterization, plot, themes, setting and moral values.

2. Expose students to the various comprehension questions.3. Train students to read and understand the questions carefully. Then, respond

to them by making sure that the answer is relevant to what is being asked bythe question

4. Remind students to provide responses to the questions based on theprescribed extract

5. Train students to provide personal responses, especially for questions whichask for personal opinions. Teachers must emphasize to the students that theyare expected to use their own words and expressions.

THE NOVEL (QUESTION 34)

GENERAL PERFORMANCE

Candidates were asked to choose one of the novels they had studied andrespond to the question. On the whole, they did not do well in this question.Candidates with good language proficiency were able to respond relevantly,giving details from the text besides expressing their viewpoints consistently.Some candidates wrote on more than one incident. Some responses were tooshallow, lacking textual evidence and development. Weaker candidates justwrote something about the novel, usually narrating events in the novel withoutaddressing the task.


STRENGTH

Candidates responses were consistently relevant and very convincing with amarked ability to provide well-developed textual evidence. There was evidence ofcritical thinking.

The language used was accurate with sophisticated structures and a wide rangeof vocabulary. Responses were well-organised and the pieces of writing werecohesive.

WEAKNESSES

Responses were either not relevant or task were partially addressed e.g.discussing incident without giving reasons. Candidates wrote on more than oneincident.

Some of the candidates did not address the task at all. There were instances ofmere narration of the novel read, characterization or values in novel

The responses lacked textual evidence to support the viewpoint. Someresponses lacked development. There were textual errors showing inaccurateand poor understanding of the novel read indicating there were candidates whohad not read the novel at all.

Weak candidates showed poor language ability – high frequency of seriouserrors of various kinds with fractured syntax. There were serious tense errors.Responses were poorly organized and lacked logical connectors. Sometimeswritten in just one paragraph

Some candidates reproduced learned or memorized responsesDETAILED PERFORMANCE

Question 34Based on the novel that you have read, write about an important incident that youremember. Give reasons why you remember the incidents.


An Example of a Good Answer




Strength

1. Response was relevant as candidate focused on an important incident andgave reasons why he or she remembered the incident

2. Convincing response to the task.3. Always provided precise textual evidence to support viewpoint with close

reference to text4. Provided personal response to task5. Good organization of thoughts and ideas. First paragraph set up the

response well.

Weakness

1. Language was not very accurate. Tense errors and some inappropriate wordsused (imprecise vocabulary).


An Example of a Fairly Good Answer


Strength

1. Could comprehend the task. An incident was identified and opinion given.2. Able to provide some textual evidence with little development3. Tried very best to give an opinion even though lacked language competency

Weaknesses1. Poor organization and planning2. Language errors were quite frequent but meaning was never in doubt


An Example of a Weak Answer


Strength

1. Able to discuss about an important incident

Weaknesses

1. Little textual evidence, lacked development2. Language errors with some blurring in meaning3. Poorly organized

An Example of a Very Weak Answer

Strength

1. Able to give some details on a character of the novel

Weaknesses

1. Response had no relevance to the task. Narrating some of the events in thenovel without any understanding of the requirement of the task

2. Language errors with some blurring in meaning



1. Read the novel and understand it well. Textual evidence is always importantwhen responding to a task.

2. Read the rubric carefully and address the task relevantly.3. Know the details of the main or significant events in the story so as to

produce accurate and sufficient textual support.4. Be familiar with the plot and characters in the story.5. Do not memorise themes, plot, characters etc without any understanding6. Learn to relate what has been learnt to the requirements of the task and give

an appropriate response.


1. Ensure students read and comprehend the contents of the novel.2. Teach students all the elements of the novel: theme, plot, character etc.3. Do not encourage mere memorization.4. Teach and train students to respond relevantly to a task, or to give their

opinions on the elements in the story. This can be done through debates.5. Teach students to respond with textual support.6. Remind and advise students to answer all the questions.7. Allow students to view the CD provided by the Curriculum Development

Centre to help them visualize and understand the story8. Teachers should encourage students to read the text and not the synopsis9. Guide and teach the students on how to analyze the characters, events,

themes

Analisis Pemarkahan b. Inggeris 2 Spm 2010

Documents

section c

comprehension questions

section b

section d tests

years question

toanswer questions

section d literature

short story question