25 October 2018, 4pm E304 EDB Kowloon Tong Centre

Dr. Neil DRAVE

Senior Manager (English) Assessment Development Division

HKDSE 2018 Literature in English – Briefing

Rundown

• Welcome and introductions

• Overview of the 2018 exam

• Paper 1

• Paper 2

• Paper 3

• Set texts 2022-24

• SBA: Trial & 2019 arrangements

Candidates’ performance

• 372 candidates sat (+22% cf. 2017)

• 3+ c.78% (-c.4% cf. 2017)

• 4+ 54% (-c.7%)

• 5+ c.19% (-c.6%)

• Comparable to 2017/16, with fewer top-performers

• Samples of 2018 performance posted on web early November

Questions • Aims

– coverage of important issues – test what candidates know rather than trick them – stimulate critical thinking rather than plot recall – focus on how (technique) as well as what

(effect/outcome) – Film technique and language

• Allow for choice of texts to answer on • Too much choice? (22 questions in P1 with 8

choices in Pt II)

Marking scheme

• Aims – indicative only, not model answers

– give markers a sense of the range of answers that might be expected

– quantitative (marks) and qualitative

– appropriate literary terms are included but may not be required to score well

– intended to be used with training and feedback from CE, not a guide to teaching

Mark penalties for incomplete coverage

Genres NOT covered (2017 figure in brackets)

Genre Novel Play Film Stories TOTAL

No. cases 3 8 5 11 27 (16)

Candidates with 1 genre missing

12 (12)

2 genres missing

2 (1)

3 genres missing

1 (0)

Blank all/Pt2 2/3

Paper 1 Essay Popularity [nq/N] & (Mean raw score /66)

Part 1 Novel MB / LF

Play T / C

Q1 Q2

Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8

Pop. (%) Mean

3 (--)

6 (--)

11 (28)

44 (37)

43 (33)

23 (30)

5 (--)

2 (--)

Film PV / LP

Short Stories

Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14

Pop. (%) Mean

8 (--)

13 (30)

5 (--)

6 (--)

20 (33)

9 (--)

Paper 1 Essay Popularity & (Mean raw score)

Part II

Q15 Q16

Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q21 Q22

Pop. (%) Mean

5 (--)

19 (31)

10 (32)

25 (26)

17 (27)

5 (--)

3 (34)

13 (28)

Paper 1 Strengths

• In general, candidates performed reasonably well

• Strong candidates offered insightful textual criticism as well as original thinking.

Areas for Improvement (1) • Formulating succinct and organised answers

Issues

– Tendency to write more than necessary

– Information was presented in a way that did not suit the overall purpose

Areas for Improvement (1)

Result

– Script became unnecessarily long, repetitive and superficial

Suggestions

– More practice on academic essay writing

– Guide the reader through our work by providing a thesis statement and topic sentences

Areas for Improvement (2)

• Close reading of the questions

Issues

– Missing part of the question, e.g. Qs 6, 15, 16, 22

– Not fully appreciating the scope of the question, e.g. Qs 3, 12, 14

Areas for Improvement (2)

Result

– Unbalanced answers

– Restricted answers, focusing on plot and/or character, without considering technique

Suggestion

– Read questions carefully to accurately interpret them

Question 4

• Generally well-answered

• Strong responses were comprehensive in scope, analysing the different aspects and layers of ‘hunting’ – theme – plot – characterisation – irony

Question 5

• A number of effective answers

– showing understanding of the term ‘disguise’ and the various roles it plays

• Weak scripts were under-developed. Ideas were often unsubstantiated by reference to the text

Question 10

• Generally well-answered

• Most answers were able to:

– draw on specific incidents and examples from the text to substantiate the stimulus quotation

Question 13

• Strong responses:

– Probed characters’ interactions and language, as well as literary techniques and devices to support their argument

• Weak responses:

– Relied considerably on narration, regardless of the stance they took

Question 16

• Engaging responses addressed both parts of the question, i.e. how tension and the resolution of tension are presented

• Weaker responses were unbalanced, with greater attention paid to how tension is presented

Question 18 (1)

• Most candidates offered superficial reasons as to why characters are considered ‘lucky’ or ‘the luckiest’

• Others offered more reasoned answers e.g.

– Given the sombre mood and tone of the set texts, any characters who gain something positive at the end could be considered lucky

Question 18 (2)

• High scoring responses:

– Demonstrated a good grasp of the term ‘lucky’ or ‘luckiest’

– Showed how by chance certain positive outcomes are achieved, or how a character manages to prevail despite circumstances working against them

Paper 2 Appreciation Popularity & (Mean raw score)

A Q1 T

Max 40

Q2 C

Q3 MB

Q4 LF

Max 40

B Q5 SP

Max 48

Q6 SP

Max 48

C Q7 UP

Max 32

Q8 UP

Max 32

Pop. (%)

Mean

53

(28)

9

(--)

8

(--)

30

(25)

27

(27)

70

(32)

75

(19)

22

(15)

Section A: Critical Analysis Common weakness was not addressing question:

• 1(i) Explain Petruchio’s behaviour

[Simply describing what he does in extract]

• 2(i) How is tension developed? [Tension is caused because of their mutual disappointment

The reason why they are tense is because...]

• 4(i) How is the language of sound used? [Listing the obvious sounds mentioned]

Section B: Poetry

Cross-text analysis questions • Candidates can identify points specific to each poem but

tend to discuss them individually, rather than constructing a cohesive answer covering shared connections

• Candidates who try to establish meaningful connections between the poems will generally score higher marks

More focused approach 5(i) Compare the treatment of age & ageing Answer does not require a comment on aspects of contrast or general comments about ageing. Substantial number of responses discussed death

5(ii) Comment on the significance of the rhyme scheme Reference to meter, enjambment, punctuation, imagery not relevant here 6(i) Discuss the use of simile and metaphor Reference to personification and free verse not relevant here

Tone - still causing confusion

The tone of the poem is futile

It has a boring and annoying tone

The tone is never-ending

Redundant quoting

Use of heavy quotes which explain the obvious make answers very repetitive and unnecessarily long

Candidates need to be better aware of what they are being asked to do by:

Comment on…

Discuss how…

Discuss the use of…

Explain the significance of…

The run-on lines symbolize the bird as soft

The rhyme makes the poem regular

The poem has no rhyme to show how relaxed the poet was

‘The mountains I raise’ refers to the leaves being everlasting

‘Like rabbit and deer’ shows the lifelessness of nature

Section C: Unseen Poetry

Q7

(iii) Confusion over ‘imagery of sound’

Q8

(i) + (iii) Repetition of same material

(ii) Misunderstanding about ‘the form of the

poem’

Paper 3 Portfolio

• Analytical essays on films or adaptations of books were the most popular

• Comparative essays on one or two films • Creative writing getting more popular • Film reviews and book reviews least

popular

What is a good portfolio?

• A well-defined and focused topic or thesis that provides a framework for discussion

• Avoid using a noun phrase e.g. differences in gender, patriarchal influence etc. as the title

• Key terms like ‘dystopian Literature’, ‘identity’, etc. need to be defined to contextualise the discussion

• Thesis or topic should

– be controversial or debatable to allow critical discussion from different angles or perspectives

– demonstrate critical understanding of the texts

• Critical and relevant use of textual materials or filmic/narrative techniques to substantiate the central argument

• Demonstrate understanding of literary texts and applications of literary terms on the texts

• A balance between research and original insights

• Widen the scope of research from authentic and reliable sources other than that of online dictionary, Wikipedia, online film reviews or online essays

• Well-referenced with proper use of footnotes for any quoted materials

• Purposeful rather than decorative use of pictures or screen shots to illustrate ideas

• Coherent organisation rather than writing in sections or headings with no connection between them

• Discussion of individual shots should be relevant and contextualised

Technicalities

• Paragraphing – avoid long and wordy paragraphs

• Grammatical and spelling mistakes

• Quality of screen shots and pictures

• Sources of references and secondary materials

• Creative short stories with plausible and convincing development of plot and characters

• Effective use of the different elements of story like setting, symbolism, use of suspense, dialogues etc.

• Stories that come to a convincing ending

• Avoid stories that span over a long period of time

• 2019 Examination (13 April) – Paper 1 Essay (50%, 3 hours)

• Double marked • Align MS mark bands with SBA

– Paper 2 Appreciation (30% 2 hours) • Double marked • A – 2 or 3 sub-questions

– Paper 3 = Portfolio (20%) – SBA (20%)

• 2019 Texts – Lord of Flies Great Gatsby – Yellow wallpaper, Roman fever Rip van Winkle, Araby – Bishop Stevens

• Assessment Frameworks – 2021 on web

http://www.hkeaa.edu.hk/en/hkdse/assessment/subject_information/category_a_subjects/hkdse_subj.html?A2&2&17_1

– 2022-2024 TBC by end 2018 – send EDB suggestions for texts

2019 Paper

SBA

• 2018-2021 SBA Handbooks on web http://www.hkeaa.edu.hk/en/sba/sub_info_sba/dse_subject.html?17&2

• 2018 optional trial (SBA marks not counted) – Efficiency of process

– Reliability of marking

• 2019 full implementation

• Same format as Portfolio

SBA 2019 Key dates • Sept 2018 – (annual) letter to schools explaining process & giving links • Late Nov/early Dec 2018 –S/DC details sent out • December 2018

– Schools’ internal marking and moderation – Consult your DC if necessary – Review & mark your students’ work (see Ch 2 of HB for new MG)

• End January 2019 – Schools submit 6 samples of SBA work and school’s marks online (h-m-l);

plagiarism detection software (PDFs converted from Word OK)

• March 2019 – SBA work marked by S/DCs/Assessors – Scores of schools adjusted if necessary but school’s rank order is maintained

More information

• www.hkeaa.edu.hk

• ndrave@hkeaa.edu.hk