GCE EXAMINERS' REPORTS
GERMAN
AS/Advanced
SUMMER 2014
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
Grade boundary information for this subject is available on the WJEC public website at:
https://www.wjecservices.co.uk/MarkToUMS/default.aspx?l=en
Online results analysis
WJEC provides information to examination centres via the WJEC secure website. This is
restricted to centre staff only. Access is granted to centre staff by the Examinations Officer
at the centre.
Annual Statistical Report
The annual Statistical Report (issued in the second half of the Autumn Term) gives overall
outcomes of all examinations administered by WJEC.
Unit
Page
GN1
1
GN2
5
GN3
9
GN4
11
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
GERMAN
General Certificate of Education
Summer 2014
Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced
GN1 - ORAL EXAMINATION
Principal Examiner:
Dr. Jo Desch
Most centres again cooperated very well when arranging a mutually acceptable date for the
examinations. They appreciate that it is not easy for an examiner to spread all exams across
some four of five weeks and to visit centres in one area at a time so as to keep long distance
travelling to a minimum. Conversely, examiners try to accommodate centres’ wishes as best
they can in order to avoid clashes with other activities. Some centres, however, seem to
believe that it is their prerogative to stipulate a date as late as possible every year, forgetting
that this is unfair to other centres who might also prefer a later date from time to time but do
accept that this is just not feasible logistically.
Examiners are not always given the name and address of the German teacher(s). It would be
helpful, therefore, if examination officers or anyone else responding to an examiner’s initial
contact copied their reply emails to their MFL colleagues so that everybody is informed from
the start.
Virtually all centres provided good, quiet accommodation with a preparation room not too far
away. Examiners are aware that this is far from easy and appreciate it all the more. Most
centres also reserved a parking space. If that is the case, please make sure to tell the
examiner.
Since it has become fashionable for German parents to send their offspring to England or
Wales for a year, more and more German students take these exams as well. Now and then,
those were the only candidates since the school no longer offers German. In one centre
these candidates were totally unaware of the format of the exam and had to be briefed by the
examiner!
As always, schools made examiners welcome and usually provided some refreshments.
Even where examiners had to dash from one centre in the morning to another in the
afternoon there was usually time for a brief chat with teachers. Those informal contacts are
important.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
1
GN1(a) Tests conducted by visiting examiners
Most candidates prepared short notes or key words for discussion of the cards. However, the
habit of writing whole paragraphs to be memorised or even read out still survives, in spite of
all advice against this. In those cases examiners invariably interrupt or divert this, as subtly
as possible. Such interception, it must be emphasised yet again, is in the interest of
candidates because lengthy monologues cannot be counted as real, spontaneous
conversation and therefore do not allow examiners to award marks in the higher bands. It
would be helpful if teachers made the purpose of those ‘interruptions’ clear to their
candidates, as examiners usually do when they have a chance to talk to the candidates
informally before the exams.
All cards worked well as springboards for little mini-discussions on the respective topic areas
though some candidates do not think much beyond what they see or read. When comparing
a construction worker and a sports photographer, for example, stating that one has ein
weißer Hut and the other ein roter Hut is not much of a comparative observation; neither is
commenting that der Mann hat keine Haare aber die Frau hat lange blonde Haare when
comparing the respective merits of fitness centre versus open-air cycling. Candidates are too
keen to simply describe what is obvious rather than think about the situation or scene
portrayed, as suggested by the rubric.
One problem arose when candidates drew cards A4 and B2 together. One was intended to
focus on topic area A, i.e. leisure, sports, hobbies, part-time job (Warum haben die beiden
Mädchen nie genug Zeit für alles?), the other on topic area B, i.e. relationships and
responsibilities (Was haben diese Freundschaftspaare gemeinsam?). In the event, the two
proved to be too close together so that discussions on both cards veered towards friendship
and relationships as indicated also by the titles - unfortunately. With hindsight a heading such
as Keine Freizeit instead of Beziehungen might have prevented this.
Language was generally less than what one would expect at this stage and little changed
from previous years. Only few candidates had a sound grasp of grammar and were able to
construct reasonably complex sentences with ease. Even for AS level, there were still far too
many basic errors in word order, especially inversion, inflection, common genders and
tenses. However, virtually all candidates did make an attempt to apply some rules of
grammar, successfully or otherwise, with only a very small number disregarding grammar to
a degree that impaired communication.
GN1(b) Tests conducted by teachers
The picture has gradually changed from previous years to an extent that it causes concern.
While initially there was close correlation between performance levels of the two cohorts of
candidates who took the test with external examiners or with their own teachers, that was no
longer the case this year. On average, candidates performed less well than their GN1a
counterparts, and by a significant margin. There was no sufficient evidence of spontaneity
and interaction in many cases for examiners to award marks in the higher bands.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
2
It is important for teachers to realise that the focus of assessment is on communication, and
the criteria are laid down quite clearly by the marking scheme. If there is no evidence of a
‘good interactive atmosphere’ as stipulated in the top band of criteria, then the examiner
cannot award a mark in that band, however ‘fluent’ a candidate may appear. Fluency as such
is by no means an overriding criterion and must be seen in the context of spontaneous
interaction. A candidate who has learned by heart all expected answers can, of course, be
quite fluent. However, it would be quite wrong to acknowledge such ‘fluency’ as a linguistic
achievement comparable to that of candidates who produce ad hoc answers in a genuine
two-way exchange, and the marking scheme does not allow that.
There is no doubt that in some cases the system is sometimes exploited to gain higher marks
unfairly. Occasionally there were some bizarrely identical pairings of cards, such as four
candidates ‘drawing’, one after another, the same two cards out of a pack of 12, and the
three remaining candidates also drawing identical cards with identical pairings. Extensive
answers to the three set questions took up the 4 minutes and allowed no more impromptu
questions.
Regrettably, there was evidence also that more and more candidates know the questions of
the general conversation beforehand. Some teachers run through a catalogue of questions,
identical for all candidates, and in some cases the answers, similarly identical, come before
the question has even be fully stated. Many such answers contain unusual, subject-specific
lexis far beyond the scope of an ordinary everyday conversation. There is a sense of
candidates being presented in the best possible manner rather than given a test that satisfies
certain criteria. A well-prepared presentation, however, is no basis for assessing genuine
linguistic competence in a given situation, and that is what this test is about.
The marking scheme was devised with all that in mind, so that it could be used for both
cohorts alike. It puts the onus on examiners and examining teachers to present candidates
with reasonable challenges so that they can respond spontaneously, and to follow up their
answers and gradually build up a two-way conversation. It also prevents examiners from
awarding high marks where there is no evidence of interaction. Lengthy monologues of five
memorised sentences or more in response to one question, followed by another unrelated
question with similar results, do not constitute interaction. While weaker candidates may
benefit slightly from such practice where they can memorise certain answers, better
candidates do not fare as well for reasons explained above.
Having said that, it is even more important to stress that a large number of teachers did
succeed in generating a natural, informal and genuinely interactive atmosphere where both
parties were able to participate alike. They kept a proper pace, did not allow candidates to
present pre-meditated answers and listened and responded directly to what candidates had
to say. Their follow-up questions obliged candidates to respond directly with ad hoc answers.
As a result, there were few if any candidates who came close to the criterion of ‘little natural
interaction’ – as some of the ‘well prepared’ candidates did.
Examiners saw a clear division between genuine exchanges with proper challenges and ad
hoc questions and answers, and over-prepared or rehearsed interviews that provided little or
no basis for them to award marks in the higher bands. That is a comment that has been
stated previously in quite a number of reports to centres, but to no avail it seems. Many
candidates would definitely have profited from a more interactive approach. Teachers need to
be aware that candidates will not score high marks if they do not have the opportunity - or do
not seize it - to respond spontaneously in a conversation that is supposed to be interactive.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
3
There were very few administrative problems this year. Most recordings arrived just after the
deadline, very few earlier, and a small number well after the deadline. Whether the tests had
taken place within the stipulated period was hard to tell because the recording equipment is
not always set to the current date.
Most recordings were on CD in a variety of formats. Where a standard digital format is used it
would be helpful if teachers could re-name the files to correlate with the candidate numbers
and/or names rather than leave the original track01, track02 etc. It helps to prevent mistakes
when examiners listen to the recordings on their laptops or PCs. Audio CDs should be clearly
labelled. In some cases they were completely blank with no centre details even, and it is all
too easy in those cases for them to get mixed up or lost. Some teachers record general data
such as centre details, date of recording, the names of the teacher(s) conducting the tests in
a separate file, which is helpful.
The sound quality was usually very good, but in some cases the candidates were too far
away from the digital recorder so that the teacher’s voice was much louder than the
candidate’s was. If anything, it should be the other was round.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
4
GERMAN
General Certificate of Education
Summer 2014
Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced
GN2 - LISTENING, READING AND WRITING
Principal Examiner:
Renate Jahn, M.A.
The paper yielded a fairly balanced spread, with evidence of stronger performance
particularly in the upper ranges. A good proportion of candidates this year also achieved high
marks in the first part of the paper. Most marks were lost in the listening comprehension
Aufgabe 1 and in the translation section Aufgabe 5,1.
In Aufgabe 1, a number of candidates stated particulars that related to the question in some
way but failed to satisfy the demands of the question. Nur Erwachsene können diese Spiele
kaufen in answer to question 1, for instance, does not fulfil the requirements since it simply
states a fact but does not answer: Was wollte Anita testen? Marks were also lost in this
question since a considerable number of students did not know the German conjunction ob
and used wenn instead. A high proportion of students failed to score marks since they are not
familiar with reflexive, personal and possessive pronouns. A common answer to question 2,
Wie reagiert die Kassiererin, als Anita das Spiel kaufen will? was Sie hat sich noch nicht
einmal angesehen instead of Sie hat sie noch nicht einmal angesehen. Likewise no mark
could be awarded for deinen Eltern or seinen Eltern in answer to question 5 where the
answer should have been ihren Eltern. Question 4 specifically asks for Anita’s reaction
therefore Sie kann alleine nichts tun does not answer the question as set. The same applies
to question 4, which asks for Robert’s thoughts on the cashier and therefore necessitates
an introduction such as er denkt…; but es ist illegal on its own could not be credited.
Aufgabe 2
This question was generally done well, with quite a few candidates scoring middle marks.
Surprisingly, a number of candidates did not know the 3rd person present singular of freuen.
Others struggled with the accusative of Jugendliche.
Aufgabe 3, Teil 1
On the whole this exercise was done well, but question 4 and question 6 caused problems
for a high number of students. Even though westlichen in question 4 may be grammatically
correct, it contradicts the text and is therefore wrong. Obviously, the correct word mehreren
had not been recognised as an adjective. Since the text was concerned with Freizeit this
word was erroneously inserted into the slot for question 6 by quite a number of students,
even though it does not make sense in this context.
Aufgabe 3, Teil 2
As in previous years, this exercise was generally done well. A good number of candidates
who analysed the text and checked their answers carefully scored high marks. Question a,
however, carried a high error rate, possibly because the words Straßenbahnen and Protest
occurred in the first sentence of the text about Graffiti.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
5
Aufgabe 3, Teil 3
A good proportion of students scored high marks in this task. Nevertheless, some marks
were lost because either the answers were not precise enough or were devoid of any logic.
For question 3, for instance, some students claimed that the City of Innsbruck built walls for
graffiti: they build new walls especially for legal graffiti. Others answered question 3 in terms
of the social workers but not in terms of the City of Innsbruck. A number of points were lost
because the concepts of sexist and sexual were mixed up in question 4. Some candidates
misunderstood the last question about the target group for the graffiti project and stated as
the aim of the project …to graffiti a 45 metre long wall.
Aufgabe 4
Overall, students scored high marks in this part of the exam, with many achieving at least
one point for each sentence. Careful checking of answers could have avoided losing marks
by overlooking words such as viel in the last sentence. The position of offensichtlich in the
first sentence caused problems since it was identified as an adverb rather than an
adjective: …bereitet Martin viele offensichtlich Probleme. In many cases, the rearranged
sentences did no longer make any sense, for example: Dass viele depressiv Jugendliche
sind. A frequent rendering for the second sentence was: …klagt er über mehrere Probleme
gesundheitliche. It is difficult to see the reasoning behind this.
Aufgabe 5, Teil 1
A number of candidates struggled with this first translation task partly because of a lack of
vocabulary. Words such as reinigen, verlängert, begeistert, Ergebnis and even Bauer turned
out to be stumbling blocks. The word Bauer was frequently translated as builder, Ergebnis as
event or experience. A number of students assumed that the inscription on his slurry tank
must have taken the farmer aback, and therefore wrote: The farmer was shocked by the
result. Some students were not sufficiently aware of the rubric which specifically stresses the
need for good English, a criterion that helps differentiate good from very good candidates.
For example: Sie suchen immer nach neuen Wänden was often translated as They always
look for new walls – which is not quite the same as They are always looking for new walls.
Aufgabe 5, Teil 2
Here, too, quite a few candidates struggled with lexical items, even quite common ones such
as Pfund, arbeitslos, erzählen and, perhaps somewhat more demanding, stolz. A high
number of students took the two genitive forms in the text, namely eines Graffitikünstlers and
des Grafham Water Centres, for plurals and therefore lost marks. Elsewhere it was gratifying
to find that some students do have a good command of their mother tongue and make use of
appropriate English or Welsh idiomatic expressions, e.g. they raised (the) 2900 pounds
for …hatten auch die 2900 Pfund für Farben …..organisiert. Those less aware of such finer
idiomatic differences simply adopted the German word: …they organised 2900 pounds.
When students got stuck with a certain phrase they sometimes became quite creative, more
or less successfully. The phrase “was man noch sehr lange sehen kann” was sometimes
mistranslated as …which you can see from afar, but also rendered quite elegantly as …that
you can see for a long time / for many years / in many years to come.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
6
Aufgabe 6
A good number of candidates presented well-reasoned essays written in clear fluent
language, showing sound command of grammar, and achieved justifiably high marks. There
was a clear preference for questions a) and b), i.e. a) „Ich will meine Freizeit nicht mit
Computerspielen verschwenden, ich will meine Freizeit lieber aktiv gestalten“. Was ist deine
Meinung dazu? and b) „Jeder Schüler sollte eine Fremdsprache in der Schule lernen!“ Wie
denkst du darüber?
The better candidates argued in their essays on question a) that computer games might well
have a positive effect on people’s lives providing the games had an educational focus or
helped to relax youngsters who feel under stress. Others maintained that computer games
might lead to an increase in aggressive behaviour or sexist attitudes, and that there was a
clear risk of addiction. Most of those essays were also well supported by suitable examples.
On the other hand, quite a few candidates turned their essays into a general „health
essay“ that simply listed the dangers of an inactive lifestyle but did not focus on the question
set.
In response to question b) some students rehearsed the familiar utilitarian arguments:
Knowledge of a foreign language leads to a better job, eases travel and is good for the
economy of a country. Others addressed the more educational merits, namely that speaking
a foreign language could be considered a skill as important as numeracy and literacy: It has
an influence on the perception and command of one’s mother tongue, broadens one’s
horizon, fosters access to and understanding for foreign cultures, and enriches one’s life
generally.
Quite a number of candidates claimed that students should not be forced to learn a foreign
language since that might lead to resentment. It makes you wonder whether the same
argument would be applied to the learning of mathematical skills.
It was pleasing to read some quite mature answers to question c) „Ich bin noch zu jung für
eine Beziehung. Erst wenn ich erwachsen bin, möchte ich einen Partner/eine Partnerin.“ Ist
das auch deine Meinung? A small minority of candidates argued that young people needed
to get to know themselves first before they enter into a relationship and that some youngsters
obviously achieved that earlier than others.
Some essays on question d) „Die olympischen Spiele haben mir gezeigt, dass es im Sport
immer nur um Geld geht.“ Ist das auch deine Meinung? were turned into general essays on
the importance of sport, but the pecuniary aspect of sport was often neglected.
Students need to be reminded yet again that, in order to gain high marks, they must address
the question as set, and not reinterpret it the way they want. Where essay questions ask
specifically for a candidate’s opinion, many students still talk in abstract terms about the topic
set: Manche Leute sagen…..andere meinen…;or Für jede Person ist es unterschiedlich, aber
viele Jugendliche denken, dass nicht jeder Schüler eine Fremdsprache lernen sollte.
Other students who do try to state their opinion do so in such a wordy manner that often
obscures the meaning. As a result, their input gets lost because it is couched in pre-learnt
phrases that do not contribute to the quality of the response; e.g. Jedoch auf der anderen
Seite kann ich nicht zu leugnen, dass man viel Spaß haben kann am Computerspiele. In yet
some other instances students used pre-learnt phrases they had not fully understood; e.g. Es
ist auch nicht zu bezweifeln, ob wir sollten unsere Freizeit draußen passieren.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
7
Grammar, as always, left much to be desired. Too many candidates were unfamiliar with the
basic grammatical categories. As a result, a fair number of students gained only low marks
for accuracy. Frequently there was no distinction between nouns, adjectives and verbs.
Entspannend, for instance, was used as a noun and a verb; e.g. Wir brauchen entspannend
in unserem Leben. Jeder muss sich entspannend. In a similar fashion, Übergewicht and
Gewalt were employed as adjectives: Viele junge Leute sind übergewicht. Manche
Computerspiele sind Gewalt.
As in previous years, word order errors were widespread, even in essays by candidates who
achieved high marks in the word order exercise. Frequent errors were found in fairly basic
verb forms, and it was not uncommon to read phrases such as meine Schwester bist...
Possessive pronouns are another concern, and errors abounded; e.g. Computerspiele
können ein soziales Hobby sein, besonders wenn man sie mit ihren Freunden spielt.
Other errors included wrong use of tags and idiomatic devices such as persönlich, einerseits
– andererseits or im Gegenteil that are not properly integrated into the sentence as a whole.
For example: Persönlich sind die Fremdsprachen sehr wichtig (instead of Für mich persönlich
sind…); or einerseits is mentioned but not followed up by andererseits; or Diskos finde ich
toll. Im Gegenteil ist Sport langweilig (instead of ...im Unterschied dazu...).
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
8
GERMAN
General Certificate of Education
Summer 2014
Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced
GN3 - ORAL EXAMINATION
Principal Examiner:
Renate Jahn
Summary
Performance levels were virtually unchanged from last year’s, and a sizable proportion of
candidates again scored marks well into the 50s. Students were well prepared for the topics
relating to the cards and for their exposés. In most centres, students had chosen different
titles and presented quite different, individual exposés. That always makes it easier for
examiners to explore the aspects presented quite differently and individualistically. It is,
however, appreciated that in large centres it is not always feasible to find a different and
challenging exposé title for each and every candidate.
Speaking
The comments made about GN1(a) in the AS report apply here in equal measure. Examiners
appreciated the excellent cooperation with colleagues in all but a handful of centres.
Examinations were usually arranged in sessions of five tests, though that could vary
depending on the centre’s lunch break, students’ travel arrangements and other
circumstances. Most centres allocated 25-30 minutes per test which gives examiners time in
addition to the actual tests for administrative duties such as reorganising the cards, handing
out a card to the next candidate and exchanging a few friendly words before each test.
Structured discussion
As before, candidates chose one of two cards after the examiner had briefly outlined what the
text was about. The choice was between two aspects that could both relate to one and the
same topic area or one each to the two topic areas. Where one of the two cards offered was
related to environmental issues then that would again be the predominant choice by far.
Therefore Umweltfreundlicher Aschram and Der Pfandflaschenprofi were chosen most
frequently, yet Eine Woche ohne Handy turned out to be very popular as well. The majority
of students were able to discuss the topics in a knowledgeable way. Cards that were less
frequently chosen included Jugendarbeitslosigkeit and Essen an der Armutsgrenze.
Nonetheless, they gave rise to fruitful discussions. Interestingly, most of the candidates who
had chosen Essen an der Armutsgrenze claimed that they would themselves have taken part
in a project that required them to live on six Euros for five days. Those who had chosen
Jugendarbeitslosigkeit proved to have a good insight into the impact of youth unemployment
on the individual and on society. Some students were even able to suggest possible solutions
to the problem. Few chose Freeganism: Die Alternative zum Konsumrausch., but those who
did showed real interest and were able to sustain an animated discussion either for or against
consumerism.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
9
Oral Exposé
Most exposés were within the time limit, were well structured and left some loose ends to be
discussed afterwards. It needs to be pointed out, however, that the exposé is meant to be the
basis of the ensuing discussion. The discussion is examiner led, and candidates are not at
liberty to set the parameters. In a small number of cases, the exposé simply consisted of a
summary of the plot of a film or book, followed by a list of the aspects the candidate intended
to discuss afterwards. Obviously, examiners took no notice of such prescriptive agendas and
followed their own.
The most successful exposés had a title in the form of a question, which obliged the
candidates straight away to take an analytical rather than descriptive approach to their
presentation. Most exposés centred around films or books taken from the set list, with Good
Bye Lenin and Die fetten Jahre sind vorbei being the most popular. But some other films and
books were also used; for example Das Wunder von Bern, Das Parfüm (book), Das weiße
Band, Nosferatu, Vincent will Meer, Knocking on Heaven’s Door, Die Fremde and Das Leben
der Anderen.
Most conversations gave evidence of the students having taken a real interest in their chosen
topic and being able to discuss it from an analytical point of view. Again, there were only very
few exposés on Regions, which in many cases tended to lack substance and made further
discussion difficult.
Quite a few candidates were not familiar enough with their chosen region overall and
therefore encountered difficulties with general questions intended to explore aspects related
to those presented in the exposé in a wider context. In a similar fashion to last year, a fair
number of candidates whose pronunciation in other parts of the exam was good, failed to pay
sufficient attention to their pronunciation during the exposé, which in extreme cases led to the
examiner not being able to understand parts of the presentation.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
10
GERMAN
General Certificate of Education
Summer 2014
Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced
GN4 - LISTENING, READING AND WRITING
Principal Examiner:
Renate Jahn and Dr. Jo Desch
Aufgabe 1
Results overall were not quite as encouraging as last year. Although there was, once again, a
good proportion of high performing candidates, linguistic competence overall was little
changed for the better. In comprehension questions, fewer candidates than in previous years
used answers from general life experience, and the majority did focus more closely on the
text to answer the questions. However, a small but significant number still need reminding to
read the question more carefully and answer it as set. They copied out chunks of the original
text, in which case the answer was invariably wrong. The questions are designed in such a
way that lifted passages, although they may contain some of the factual information, do not
answer the question correctly.
It might help candidates if teachers reminded them that comprehension questions follow the
text, so that the answer to the first question will be found at the beginning of the text and the
answer to the last question will be found towards the end of the text.
As always, grammar remains a problem. Many candidates seemed not to have spent any
time during their course considering even the most basic aspects of German grammar. For
example: nouns have capital letters; nouns ending in -heit or -keit are feminine; there is a
difference between ‘das’ and ‘dass’, between ‘bevor’ and ‘vorher’, between irgendwo und
überall (Aufgabe 3); umlauts are not a whimsical add-on but do change meanings
(konnte/könnte, hatte/hätte/, waren/wären, wurde/würde), and so on. On the other hand, the
work of good number of candidates – and by no means only native speakers – did reflect a
very high standard in accuracy and idiomatic use of structures as well as range of lexis.
Although there has been a noticeable improvement in word order since the introduction of the
test targeting that specific aspect of German syntax in paper GN2, there are still too many
candidates who have problems when it comes to more extended structures where placing the
predicative supplement is not quite as straightforward. It also appears to have gone
unnoticed that some idiomatic phrases, usually learnt to make an impression in essays, go
drastically wrong in the majority of cases. ‘Meiner Meinung nach ist, dass…’ remains a very
common error and should be analysed with regard to both syntax and grammar.
In any case, many of these idiomatic phrases are over-used and superfluous in most cases.
An introduction, for example, should present itself as such by its content, and it is not
necessary to preface it by stating “Einleitend möchte ich sagen…” –occasionally still followed
by …dass diese Frage mich sehr interessiert.” The same goes for similar phrases or
expressions used to signpost the conclusion, such as abschließend suchte Claire nur Rache.
Indeed not, she sought revenge from the very beginning.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
11
Students often forget that it is the author of the essay who concludes or summarises and not,
as in this case, the character in a book or film. Abschließend or zusammenfassend kann man
sagen /möchte ich sagen might be a reasonable expression, but why not just say it without
such preamble?
Other such phrases included am Ende des Tages (not meaning the evening!), es ist
allgemein bekannt (irrespective whether the information stated is or isn’t), es liegt auf der
Hand (not meaning ‘it is obvious’), überall meine ich (not meaning ‘everywhere’) – and many
more.
Aufgabe 1
The best candidates read the question carefully and gave precise, relevant answers from the
text, others lost marks unnecessarily by not answering the question directly and gave some
roundabout response that contained the relevant facts but did not answer the question.
‘Why…?’, for example, always requires a reason as an answer. Therefore, simply stating
‘mobile phones and internet cafés’ did not answer question 1. ‘Where?’ in question 3 is not
the same as ‘when?’ and asks for a location, not a specific time or temporal continuum. In
daily life could therefore not be accepted as an answer to the question ‘Where do people
witness racial incidents?’ Interpreting and responding to the question correctly is part and
parcel of the test – here as elsewhere in the paper (cf. Teil 4,5).
In question 2, weaker candidates failed to distinguish between täglich and alltäglich: a case
of everyday racism is not a daily case of racism. Nor was a report on racism’ accepted
because the text was about one incident as an example, not the wider problem in general
terms.
In answer to question 3 (‘Where do people…witness racial incidents?’) some candidates
stated phone boxes, inside as well as outside, at home, or in publicity. Others tried to include
the idea of passers-by witnessing the incident als eine private Erfahrung mitten in der
Öffentlichkeit (not required for the answer) and wrote privately but in public or even an
experience in public but private parts (!). Here as so often it was not their understanding of
German but their command of English or Welsh that let candidates down.
A number of candidates left out the idea of unwanted/nuisance calls (question 4) and thus
lost a mark. Conversely, it was logic that failed some of the candidates in stating that 230
picked up the receiver but only 2000 listened to the end (question 5), or that there were 230
or 200 ‘listeners’ (let astray by the double meaning of Hörer!).
Aufgabe 2
In Teil 1 quite a few candidates stated that the Ethiopian cook suchte einen guten Job (2)
rather than expecting it, the former being the more common, everyday concept and thus
triggering the wrong answer. Similarly in (4) where candidates wrote schon, immer or häufig
instead of erst, quite a few even wrote Angestellte. (6), (7) and (8) were generally correct,
even among the weaker candidates.
Teil 2 was generally well answered with the right number of crosses. A few candidates
marked more than 4 boxes and lost marks accordingly.
Teil 3 and Teil 4 again caused some problems, irrespective of whether the questions were in
German or English/Welsh. Direct and concise answers suffice in this exercise, and they need
not be complete as long as they address the question directly. Nor does the question have to
be repeated as the first part of the answer, as some candidates did. Some candidates failed
to analyse sufficiently what exactly the question actually asked for.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
12
In Teil 3, (1) an answer like “sie wollte reisen” was far too general to warrant a mark. In (2) a
number of candidates unnecessarily lost marks by not including a reference to the time
involved, i.e. ein Jahr – and not forever. (3) was generally well done, but in (4) the most
common mistakes were thinking that the customer gave her a loan, secured her a salary of
500 Euros or recommended / publicised the restaurant, leading Lakech to receive 500 Euros
from the restaurant. Some candidates added such details after stating correctly that the
customer helped her to escape, which then invalidated the otherwise correct answer.
A few candidates also lifted the relevant sentence from the reading text, i.e. Schließlich
gelang ihr mit Hilfe eines Stammgastes…die Flucht. However, as explained in the
introduction that does not answer the question Welche Rolle spielte ein Stammgast…? The
question asks about the restaurant guest and about his assistance whereas the lifted
passages has Lakech as the subject and relates to her lucky escape.
In Teil 4, (1) (2) and (3) the answers were largely correct except that some candidates used
‘pass’ or ‘papers’ instead of ‘passport’(2). A common incorrect answer in (4) was ‘Sexual
exploitation and human trafficking were also forced labour’, which reversed the linkage now
established and left out the crucial addition to the protocol. Furthermore, Sexual exploits is
regarded as forced labour did not quite match the observation made in the text.
Corresponding to the general comments in Aufgabe 1,4, additional information deemed
irrelevant but not contradicting the otherwise correct answer was simply ignored, as in (5)
‘Why is it difficult to investigate … diplomats? A couple of answers read ‘…because they
enjoy immunity and cannot be executed’ (sic!). Immune even to the guillotine…? Some
thought that diplomats had been ‘immunised’ or that they were ‘immune’; immune to what?
Aufgabe 3
There were some excellent translations, which demonstrated that candidates had a clear
understanding of the intrinsic differences between German and their mother tongue.
However, the majority were less than competent and a fair proportion rather mediocre. The
concept of being well trained should not cause problems at this stage, especially since it is
central to one the AS topic areas, but it did. The difference between Training und Ausbildung
was largely ignored , and very many candidates used trainieren instead of ausbilden. Others
wrote ‘Lakech wurde’ instead of ‘war gut ausgebildet’. The significant changes in meaning in
both cases lost them the mark. Others tried to paraphrase, some to good effect: …hatte eine
gute Ausbildung, …war hochqualifiziert. Others were not so successful: Lakech war gut
gebildet, hatte viel Erfahrung mit/in ethnischen Küche, …viele Erfahrungen/Erlebnisse in
ethnische Cuisine, …hatte gute / viele / tolle Erfahrungen mit ethischen (sic!) Kusinen (sic!),
...hatte viel über ethnische Essen gelernt / erfahren – and many more.
The pluperfect ‘she had hoped’ was often not recognised, a grammar error that affected the
mark for grammar but did not affect the general meaning which was therefore credited.
However, the phrase ‘…could go to school’ expressed Lakech’s hopes for her children and
the subjunctive was required, könnten instead of konnten – which lost many candidates a
point because konnten did not convey the right meaning.
The idiomatic phrase ‘nothing short of forced labour’ was another problem that not many
candidates were able to handle. Most tried, more or less successfully, to simplify. Good
renderings included: In Wirklichkeit war es nichts Anderes als Zwangsarbeit, …genauso wie
Zwangsarbeit, ...gab es keinen Unterschied zu Zwangsarbeit. Tatsächlich war es
Zwangsarbeit, nicht Anderes. Die Wahrheit ist, es war Zwangsarbeit. It was noticeable that
many of those more imaginative translations came from candidates with a bilingual WelshEnglish background.
As in the past, a small number of candidates lost marks by leaving out whole sentences,
often simpler ones, presumably through carelessness.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
13
Aufgabe 4
General
The use or, rather, misuse of continuation sheets, booklets and tags is getting out of
hand. In some centres they appear to be handed out regardless of whether they are needed.
It has become the habit to just scribble a few preliminary notes or doodles on one page of the
question paper and immediately write everything else in a separate booklet or on two or three
extra sheets, with luck loosely connected to the question paper. In some cases spare
question papers were used for that purpose, presumably because there were no plain paper
booklets available, and only one page or less was used. In many cases there would have
been enough space in the actual question paper. If they do need extra pages, candidates
must carefully reference any additions. In many cases it was not clear at all where further
comments or whole paragraphs were to be inserted in the essay.
Another grouse is poor and/or microscopic handwriting. Candidates should bear in mind
that, what cannot be read clearly cannot be credited. Alterations and additions to the text
must be clear. There is plenty of space to re-write a sentence or a passage rather than
squeeze whole lines into the space of a word. Drafts that are not to be marked should be
crossed out.
The essays reflected less of a variety than in recent years, and the standard was
disappointing in many cases. A very high proportion of candidates dealt with the questions in
a perfunctory manner as if they could not care less. The general approach seemed to have
become so standardised and uniform that there was little to differentiate one essay from
another. Only the better candidates approached this task in an individual, imaginative
manner, and most pressed any question regardless of its scope into the familiar pattern of
einerseits – andererseits, Vorteile – Nachteile, manche Leute sagen – andere Leute sagen,
even where such contrasts were quite remote from the aspects to be discussed.
There was less evidence this year of any preliminary brainstorming or essay plans, but a
great deal more meaningless introductory blurb in which candidates re-stated the question in
a variety of ways, culminating in the firm decision to investigate all those aspects and then
come to a conclusion. Occasionally that sequence would be prefixed by stating Ich stimme
mit dieser Frage; full stop (no überein). In any case, how can one agree with a question?
Others had obviously been taught to start with a pre-learned, general introduction,
mentioning things like the name of the author or film director, the date of publication and
other data irrelevant in the task set. Weaker candidates still prefer to regurgitate an essay
already written, even if it fails to answer the question. They remain unable to refocus what
they have learnt in order to write an answer that is relevant to the question as set. The
success of using a learnt essay as a basis depends very much on how well it can be
moulded and adapted but can sometimes lead to unexpected results.
Quotations were used to good effect by only a small number of candidates, but were
generally poorly used, often remembered incorrectly and with no attempt to incorporate them
neatly into the structure of the sentence in which they occurred. More often than not they
were a distraction because they did not suit the question under discussion.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
14
The World of Cinema
The choice of films was more limited than in the past. Good Bye Lenin and Die fetten Jahre
sind vorbei accounted for nearly two thirds of all essays, followed by Jenseits der Stille at
quite some distance. Regrettably however, the increasing popularity of the two forerunners
did not correspond to the quality of the essays presented. Good Bye Lenin, in particular, is
beginning to become problematic. It seems that a great deal of information about the film and
its political background has been accumulated over the years by teachers and their students
with the result that the film itself moves further and further into the background. Rather than
interpret the film itself and explore its themes, the main focus now seems to be its historical
context which does, of course, play an important part. However, it is not the film. Irrespective
of what question is set, candidates will not budge from the familiar themes of lies, East
versus West, communism versus capitalism, and the impoverished lifestyle of a Germany
where all Ossis survived on a meagre staple diet of Spreewaldgurken. The latter were
nothing of the kind and more of an archetypal expression of a certain lifestyle, rather like an
English cuppa and floppy butty might be regarded as quintessentially English. And then there
is Ostalgie, a term widely used, often misunderstood and sometimes cited as if it were a
terrible disease. Neither of those aspects suited this year’s questions particularly well.
Nevertheless, a good number of very perceptive essays referred to none of those aspects.
Instead, they focused specifically on the importance of Jähn (question 4a), not simply in
relation to the plot and situations in which he appears but, instead, analysing the wider
implications of this character as a focus of people’s dreams of freedom which, after
reunification and freedom gained, made him dispensable and ‘ordinary’ – like a taxi driver.
Those candidates usually also referred to Jähn being created ‘Staatsratsvorsitzender’ in that
sham AK mock-up, alluding also to the irony implicit in Dennis having his trousers down
during the shooting of the news item.
In answer to question 4b, weaker candidates did little more than repeat the list of symbols or
leitmotifs, give a couple of examples and say that they were important. The list had been
included in the question merely as a starting point and not as a definitive catalogue (…zum
Beispiel…!) to work through. Better candidates were able to explain why they were important,
and the best candidates went beyond the list to introduce their own, well-chosen examples,
for example exploring the use of colours in the film overall or the symbolism implied in the
numerous allusions to rockets and space.
Die fetten Jahre sind vorbei fared little better. Not many candidates referred to the social
injustices, let alone debate them. Instead they debated whether their actions were
responsible or irresponsible per se – which was not the question. Quite a few argued that the
young people’s actions were just as reprehensible as any perceived unfairness in the
capitalist system – which is a fair point. The better ones discussed the justification or
otherwise of the aims intended and the actions undertaken, weighing carefully what the pros
and cons of taking action in a global economic system that allows such wide discrepancies
between rich and poor, and what other means, if any, there might be to bring about change.
Several candidates spoke of the Edukators (!) – the use of that term speaking volumes about
the manner in which the film had been discussed or prepared.
There were some excellent essays in answer to question 6b discussing the changing interrelationships between the three young protagonists. Yet many of the essays lacked
substance. Some candidates concentrated on one or the other aspect of their relationships
without analysing it in any great depth. Some described their similarities or differences,
explored the question of loyalties, or the question which of the three was more mature or
responsible – most of them quite competent but often neglecting the aspect of development.
Others wrote excellent essays about the development of the characters as individuals rather
than of the relationships between them, thus failing to get the highest marks and illustrating
again the need to read the question carefully.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
15
Both questions on Jenseits der Stille yielded some perceptive essays despite the fact that
there was only a small number of takers. Those on the Klezmer music theme (question a)
stood out because they reflected the obvious interest in music of students who could identify
with the sentiment expressed in the question and were able to write discerning essays.
Equally perceptive and detailed were essays dealing with the question of responsibility
carried by such a young person, possibly also because they had some similar experience.
The other essays were shared fairly evenly between the remaining films. However, there
were too few takers to summarise any characteristic features though the quality of those
‘special interest’ choices was generally high..
Die Welt der Literatur
There was a slightly wider spread of essays here compared to those under the film option.
Der Vorleser was again the most popular choice by far, followed by Der Besuch der alten
Dame and, at quite some distance, Das Brot der frühen Jahre and just a few on Homo Faber.
The rest, a surprisingly small number, was spread fairly evenly across the remaining texts.
Many essays were of high quality, focusing immediately on the question as set without
deviation or lengthy interpretations of what the question actually meant.
Although question 9a on Der Vorleser asked about changes that Hanna underwent in prison
a large number of candidates wrote either their general essay on her illiteracy or on the
renewed contact between her and Michael, which was last year’s question. Only the better
ones focused on her growing awareness of guilt and the various psychological changes that
triggered, leading to her eventual suicide. Many of those attempting question 9b concentrated
almost exclusively on Hanna and her illiteracy, again last year’s theme, rather than debating
whether and to what extent reading to Hanna was more or equally important for him as it was
for her. The view of the better candidates, some of whom presented excellent, well structured
and argued essays, was divided between those who maintained that it helped him mature
from school boy to young adult and made his relationship relevant – hence his devastation at
her sudden departure as well as his later discoveries in court. Others took the less analytical
view that it was merely a device for Hanna to show her superiority and for him to gain sexual
favours.
Der Besuch der alten Dame also yielded a good number of clearly focused essays, divided
fairly evenly between the two questions. Equally divided was the view candidates took with
regard to the question, some agreeing some disagreeing with the notion that only Ill’s and
Claire’s relationship reflected true love. The question what was realistic and what unrealistic
in this play was approached from different angles, most examining whether the portrayal of
characters or their actions was creditable in an everyday situation, or whether certain
features had been heightened so as to be deliberately unrealistic and rather more symbolic –
such as the yellow shoes or the ritualistic ‘killing’ of Ill. Only weaker candidates resorted to
summarising the plot.
In answer to questions 1a and 1b on Das Brot der fühen Jahre, all candidates were on the
side of love rather than financial security, and therefore Walter Fendrich suffered no loss
when quitting his job (question 1a), and Hedwig was the better partner for him by far
(question 1b).
Deutschsprachige Regionen
Since essays on the regions hardly ever attract high marks the gradual decline in numbers to
just over 2% is noted. They are usually under-researched and tend to be entirely descriptive.
What is presented here often smacks of information copied straight from tourist pamphlets,
and most of the essays received this year made no exception. Regrettably this option is seen
very often as a shortcut, enabling candidates to write a general knowledge summary with
very little preparation or, indeed, commitment.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
16
WJEC
245 Western Avenue
Cardiff CF5 2YX
Tel No 029 2026 5000
Fax 029 2057 5994
E-mail: exams@wjec.co.uk
website: www.wjec.co.uk
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.