Assessment Report

Level 2 German 2020

Standards 91123  91126

 

Part A: Commentary

There was a mixture of topics that allowed candidates to demonstrate an understanding of a variety of German texts. Candidates were generally able to relate to the themes of the texts and offer evidence of personal connection in their answers. Although the vocabulary was at the appropriate level, the text proved difficult for some candidates.

There was little glossing in AS91123 which is preferrable for a listening standard and all the vocabulary used was taken from the vocabulary lists – either Level 1 or Level 2. This made the content accessible to those candidates who had a good knowledge of these lists.

Candidates working digitally are encouraged to be concise in their responses, where guidance about the length of their response is less obvious.

 

Part B: Report on standards

91123:  Demonstrate understanding of a variety of spoken German texts on familiar matters

Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:

  • demonstrated basic knowledge of the Level 1 and 2 vocabulary lists and a basic understanding of relevant grammar points 
  • provided some accurate but simple information from the passage
  • selected answers from narrow sections of the text.

Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:

  • showed little understanding beyond simple vocabulary, obvious cognates and loan words
  • provided inaccurate chunks of information
  • misinterpreted significant details of the text
  • answered the questions with minimal and superficial information.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:

  • identified key information
  • connected ideas appropriately
  • produced answers which included significant amounts of accurate passage evidence
  • demonstrated a good knowledge of the Level 1 and 2 vocabulary lists and a sound understanding of relevant conventions.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:

  • demonstrated comprehensive understanding of the passage by writing full answers with most or all relevant details correct
  • justified their ideas unambiguously using evidence from the passage
  • did not repeat information already written in a previous section but used new information understood from the passage.

Standard specific comments

First passage
Some candidates did not respond to “extending their original ideas” in (c) and wrote down everything that they had heard with a lot of unnecessary detail.

Candidates should be concise and avoid being repetitive.

Vocabulary items that caused problems were compound nouns:

  • Fußballschuh-Tests
  • Sportartikelfirmen.

Third Passage
The questions (a) and (c) were phrased well, and most candidates felt able to provide some sort of response. The question (b) asking “about his living situation” did cause some confusion for some candidates.

Vocabulary items that caused problems were:

  • the idea of “der nette Junge von nebenan” was omitted by many candidates
  • “bei seinen Eltern zu Hause in Hannover” – the preposition “bei” was misunderstood by quite a few so that Lukas was living next door to his parents, not with them
  • the sentence “Es ist nicht so, als müsste ich um 18 Uhr beim Abendessen sitzen” was either understood well or left out of the candidate’s answer.

91126:  Demonstrate understanding of a variety of written and/or visual German texts on familiar matters

Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:

  • demonstrated understanding of the general meaning of the texts by including key relevant information, ideas and opinions
  • made valid points but lacked depth.

Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:

  • demonstrated limited or no engagement with the language of the texts by including very little relevant or correct information
  • did not show evidence that they had understood the general and wider meaning of the text.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:

  • demonstrated a clear and unambiguous understanding of the texts by including in their responses relevant and detailed information, ideas and opinions
  • showed in their responses some attempts to communicate implied meanings, but these were partial or undeveloped.

Candidates who were assessed as Achieved with Excellence commonly

  • included relevant information, ideas and opinions in detailed and well-developed answers
  • showed explicitly they had understood the nuances suggested in the texts and drew conclusions from them
  • communicated implied meanings explicitly and effectively justified their conclusions with supporting details from the texts.

 

German subject page

 

Previous years' reports

2019 (PDF, 294KB)

2018 (PDF, 95KB)

2017 (PDF, 42KB)

2016 (PDF, 212KB)

 
Skip to main page content Accessibility page with list of access keys Home Page Site Map Contact Us newzealand.govt.nz