Foreign Language Indonesian: Paper 0545/02 Reading and Directed Writing Key Points

Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education
0545 Foreign Language Indonesian November 2011

Principal Examiner Report for Teachers
FOREIGN LANGUAGE INDONESIAN

Paper 0545/02
Reading and Directed Writing
Key Points
Even strong candidates should take care to avoid misinterpretation of questions and
carelessness in answers.
Candidates should always read the comprehension questions with care.
Proofreading of answers is essential.
Unselective lifting of material from the text will not always provide an acceptable answer to
comprehension questions.
It is important to be familiar with the particular requirements of Section 3, Exercise 1.
General Comments
As in previous years, the overall standard this year was high, with a majority of candidates performing very
well, and there were some extremely high scores. The majority of the examination Centres are based in
Indonesia and a large proportion of candidates is of native or semi-native speaker standard.
Most candidates had a clear understanding of the questions and were able to demonstrate linguistic
accuracy for this level.
As in the previous year there were many candidates who simply lifted a section of the text related to the
question: this sometimes included irrelevant or contradictory material, and therefore could not be rewarded.
Candidates are reminded always to be selective in the material from the text that they use to form their
answers. The questions on the reading comprehension required careful reading and the candidates should
always re-read the questions and their answers to ensure that they are correct. When candidates lift from
the text without carefully selecting the relevant elements it can be it difficult for the examiner to establish
whether the question and/or the passage were understood correctly.
As in previous years there were also many candidates with very small and cramped handwriting which was
very difficult to read. On the other hand, there were candidates with very large and clear handwriting who
ran out of space and continued the answers not always legibly - on the side or bottom of page. Candidates
must remember to write their answers in such a way that the Examiner can easily understand them.
Comments on Specific Questions
Part 1
Exercise 1 Question 1- 5
On this section candidates had to choose one right answer from four options. As in the previous year, most
candidates gained full marks on this multiple choice section.
Exercise 2 Questions 6-10
Candidates had to match the person described with the hobby. Again, most candidates gained full marks.
2011

Exercise 3 Question 11 - 15
Most candidates performed well and gained high marks on these questions. Candidates had to choose
whether the statement was true or false based on the text.
Exercise 4 Question 16
On this exercise candidate were required to write a brief story based on 3 pictures. A maximum mark of 5
was available; 2 marks for accuracy and 3 for communication. Most candidates found no problem,
addressing the rubric appropriately and gaining full marks for both language accuracy and communication.
However there were candidates who wrote as a third person in response to the question (a) What did you
see? by describing the action of two people passing by and what they did. Unfortunately most of the
candidate who wrote as a third person then answered the following question (b) What did you do by
describing what the two people (whom he/she saw) did, and not what the writer did. The failure to give full
attention to the question in this case prevented them from gaining full marks.
As in the previous year, there were also a small number of candidates who seemed unclear about what they
should do. As well as writing the story in the box /space provided they also answered the questions by the
pictures, which was not necessary. A few candidates wrote more than the total word limit allowed and lost
marks due to missing one or two communication marks.
Part 2
Exercise 1 Questions 17 24
The majority of candidates did very well in this Reading Comprehension Exercise about the Sumatran tiger,
which was completed well on the whole. A few candidates gave answers relating to their general knowledge
of Indonesian fauna and flora: answers must, of course, be based on information from the text. Lifting
commonly occurred here: although sometimes it was unavoidable, and appropriately rewarded, irrelevant
passages from the text were sometimes offered, presumably as a result of poor understanding of the
question.
Exercise 2 Question 25
Candidates were required to write between 80-100 words about their childhood; who were they brought up
by, likes and dislikes and a memorable event. They were required to cover all 3 tasks and use the word
count well. A maximum mark of fifteen was available; ten marks awarded for communication by covering the
3 tasks stated (plus extra marks for further details) and five marks for accuracy which was based on the ticks
given for the correct usage of verbs and affixes, adjectives, prepositions, conjunctions, idioms, etc. Most
candidates scored highly and some gained full marks.
On the whole, the majority of candidates did well. Almost all of the candidates gained full marks for accuracy
and only a small minority of candidates lost marks for communication by covering only 2 or fewer of the tasks
or as a result of disobeying the word limit by writing either too little or too much.
Part 3
Exercise 1 Question 26 32
On this section candidates were asked to decide whether the statements based on a story about Rima, a
candidate from a poor single parent family, were true or false. This worked well as a series of true / false
questions with only a few candidates failing to identify and correct the false sentences. Most candidates
scored highly and some gained full marks.
As in previous years, there were candidates who also gave explanations on the true statements, which was
not necessary. Although it did not affect the mark, however, it may have affected their timing in completing
the other exam tasks. Others answered the statement correctly as false, but gave no corrected statement: it
is therefore recommended that candidates should familiarise themselves with the demands of past papers
before sitting the examination.
2011

Exercise 2 Questions 33-39
This description of a hotel and its facilities was understood well by most candidates, and some gained full
marks. Some candidates clearly made an effort to answer in their own words or to rework sections of the text
to provide specific and precise answers to the questions. However, others were less ambitious. Those who
understood the question and identified the correct section of the text, but then copied a lengthy, partly
irrelevant chunk of text, risked losing marks unnecessarily.
Some candidates answered Question 33 with two details of which only one was actually relevant to the
question about guests who like swimming in the sea.
The answer for Question 36 required a specific answer about the fact that there were many places to eat
within walking distance of the hotel.
2011


Paper 0545/03
Speaking
Key Points
Teacher/Examiners must use all the prompts in the Role Play.

Role Play tasks should not be changed or embellished.
Teacher/examiners must not invent extra Role Play tasks.
On the Role Plays, 3 marks for each task can only be awarded if the task is fully completed.
Marks can not be awarded for Role Play tasks invented by the teacher/Examiner.
It is acceptable for the Examiner to rephrase tasks or nudge candidates to help them obtain full
marks for a Role Play task.
In the Topic Discussion and Conversation, the teacher/Examiner should generally talk less than the
candidate.
In the Topic Discussion, over-ambitious topics may disadvantage candidates.
In the General Conversation, candidates are not required to give a presentation.
All teacher/Examiners should study the Teachers Notes closely before conducting the examination.
General Comments
The overall standard was very high, and there were only a very small number of candidates who obtained a
low mark. As in the previous year, the majority of the examination Centres are based in Indonesia and most
candidates are of native speaker standard. As in the previous year there were some elements which
prevented them from obtaining full marks due to the use of slang, dialects and also colloquial language
especially on the Topic and General Conversations, which should be carried out in formal language.
As in the previous year, generally, Centres carried out the exam well. All the detailed work involved,
including labelling and packaging cassettes/CDs, is highly appreciated by the moderator. However, in order
to ensure that the examination process and administration are carried out correctly, it is worth reminding all
Examiners that it is essential of follow the instructions and requirements which are provided in the Teachers
Notes.
Examiners need to study and follow the instructions given in all aspects in order to be able to carry out the
examination process correctly (e.g. on role plays, there should be no questions omitted, extra tasks should
not be avoided, correct cues must be given, marking must be in accordance with the guidelines, etc.) On the
Topic and Discussion as well as in General Conversation there should be plenty of questions from the
Examiners to cover all the areas required. Examiners need to remember that the purpose of the examination
is to measure the candidates linguistic abilities, therefore the Examiner should talk less than the candidates.
The candidates need to be active and should be given the maximum opportunity to speak and to
demonstrate their linguistic skills.
As in the previous year, there were occasional concerns regarding the exam administration. Moderation can
be difficult if, for example, there are any arithmetical errors (incorrect addition of marks), cassettes/CDs are
not labelled or the files not labelled with the candidates name and number, role play numbers are not stated,
candidates names are not in order or are not in the same order as in the MS. Although most Centres
completed all the requirements, there were a few Centres did not send the copy of the MS1 for the
Moderator. Centres also need to double check the addition to avoid arithmetical errors.
Overall, both Examiners and candidates carried out their roles realistically on the role plays and worked hard
on the discussions and conversations. These were often interesting as well as informative and enjoyable to
listen to.
2011

Comments on specific questions
Test 1: Role Plays
General
The majority of candidates scored highly on this section. Most candidates performed very well and sounded
as if they were enjoying this section. As in previous years, though, there were still some Examiners who
added extra tasks beside the tasks provided by CIE. This could disadvantage the candidates as it would
confuse them as well as running the risk of missing or not completing the specified tasks, which could result
in lost marks.
The Examiners need to remember to not give full marks when candidates did not complete the tasks
specified by CIE. Providing all the specified tasks are completed then full marks should be given even when
the candidates did not manage to complete the Examiners extra task/s. On the other hand, full marks
should not be given when candidates do not complete the tasks given/set by CIE even if they successfully
completed the addition tasks given by the Examiner/s. Examiners should not deduct a mark when the
candidate fails to complete the extra task/s created by the Examiners.
There is no requirement to add more tasks or embellish the role play as this will create confusion for the
candidates and could also result in not completing the specified tasks. Clear points of communication following the prompts given - are what are needed.
Role Play A Card 1, 2 and 3
Candidate at a ticket agency to buy tickets for rock music concert
Candidates were required to state what they want, the total number of tickets, the day, and the preference of
location of the seat/s in the building. Finally the candidates have to enquire about the concert or the facility
(e.g. the starting time, car park, etc.).
Most candidates did very well. As in the previous year, when candidates did not manage to score full marks,
usually due to missed/incomplete tasks, this was often caused by the Examiner who did not give the correct
cues or failed to use the prompts given. Some Examiners added extra tasks or created their own prompts
and missed the given prompts. Others gave the information before being asked by the candidates, which
prevented the candidates from completing the task.
Candidate was invited by a friend over the phone to go to a cinema together.
Candidates were required to respond to a friends phone call invitation to go to the cinema together.
Candidates have to offer their thanks and acceptance of the invitation, the preferred day to go, the type of
film they would like to watch, where they should meet up and respond to the question about going to a
restaurant afterward, asking what kind of food their friend would prefer to eat.
Most candidates scored highly. Again, when candidates who did not gain full marks it was mainly due to
incomplete prompts given by the Examiners. Many Examiners missed giving the prompts specified or gave
the information which should be provided by the candidates. Examiners should follow the prompts given,
listen carefully to the candidate responses, and nudge candidate/s or rephrase the question in order for
candidates to complete the tasks and obtain full marks.
Candidate was on holiday in Indonesia but felt unwell and needed to visit a doctor/ clinic
On this particular occasion the candidate needed to explain to the clinic receptionist why they came. Then
the candidates was required to state how long they had been feeling ill, then to choose when they would like
to see the doctor, state where they come from and finally to say thank you and ask whether there was a
chemist near the clinic.
2011

In general, the candidates found no problem in visualising the situation and performed well in their role. Most
candidates gained full marks, however, there were a few who missed the last task where they had to ask
about the chemist. In this situation the Examiner could have give a prompt by asking whether the
candidate/s need anything else.
Some Examiners were engrossed in giving advice and forgot that their role is to guide the candidates to
obtain full marks by giving correct cues and complete prompts to allow candidates to complete the tasks.
Role Play B Card 1, 4 and 7
Candidate was staying at a hotel, would like to eat out and ask the receptionist for a
recommendation.
This role play begins with the candidate required to state what he/she wanted then answer how much money
he/she wants to spend, then state/choose the type of restaurant he/she prefers. The B role plays are
intended to be a slightly more challenging and involve explanation. The explanation required on this role
play was that the candidate had to explain why he/she liked the chosen restaurant/food. Candidates are
then required to ask directions to the chosen restaurant. Finally, the candidate is required to demonstrate
enthusiasm and state the time he/she would like to eat.
Most candidates gained full marks and candidates as well as the Examiners took their role seriously and
realistically. It was entertaining to listen to, although it was frustrating to listen to some Examiners who
missed giving the prompt/s specified or let the candidates not complete the task/s and create/add their own
tasks as well as talking more than they should. Some candidates lost their marks on the second task due to
the Examiner missing out the prompt; not asking the question (How much money do you want to spend?)
therefore many candidates did not state/ complete the task and consequently their lost the marks.
As in the other role plays, there were Examiners who gave incorrect cues which could prevent candidates
from completing the task/s, e.g. instead of giving the opportunity to the candidate to ask the direction,
Examiners gave the direction regardless. This should be the question asked by the candidates: however,
when it was completed by the Examiners, the candidates lost their opportunity to ask the question and,
therefore, their marks. This could be avoided if the Examiners kept to the prompt/s given and did not rush.
Some Examiners missed out the prompt of asking whether the candidate would like the table to be booked.
Candidate has booked a hotel in Indonesia but requested to change the dates he/she wanted to stay.
Again, the situation here involves a problem where candidates need to explain the problem and give the
information required by the hotel receptionist why he/she wanted to change the dates. The role play began
with the candidate greeting the receptionist and explaining the reason for his/her call and stated his/her
name. Candidate also has to respond to the receptionists enquiry about the date the hotel has been
booked, state what changes he/she wanted and why, then had to give the new dates. Finally, candidates
had to thank the receptionist and ask the opening time of the office.
The majority of candidates and the Examiners performed well. Both parties played their roles in a very
realistic way and it was very entertaining and enjoyable to listen to. However, once again problems arose
through Examiners failure to follow the prompt material.
Candidate phoning a friend who he/she was going to a cinema with explaining that he/she was going
to be late.
Candidates need to make a phone call to her/his friend and explain the reason of phoning. The Candidate
had to explain why he/she was going to be late. Candidates also had to say sorry and state the time they
would be arriving at the cinema. Candidates then had to thank the friend and invited her/him to have dinner
together at a restaurant after the film. Finally the candidate had to name and describe the restaurant near
the cinema where they were going. Most candidates and Examiners kept to the outline of the script,
although a few Examiners were carried away with the role play and disadvantaged candidates.
It cannot be emphasised too strongly that Examiners need to be aware of the roles and should always be
observant of the situation in order to enable candidates to complete all tasks required.
2011

Test 2: Topic (prepared) Discussion
Overall, most candidates performed well and gained high scores. The majority of the Examiners were well
prepared and conducted this section very well. Although there were a few Centres which did not include the
1-2 minutes topic presentation but went straight to discussion instead, and other Centres which combined
the two conversations together (topic discussion and general conversation), in general the performance of
most Centres was better than in the previous year. Most Centres kept closely to the specified timings: this
aspect was a lot better than the previous year, although there is still a minority who continue to ignore the
correct timing and procedures.
As in previous years, the topics chosen were very broad and interesting to listen to and very informative.
Nevertheless My ambitions and hobbies were still the most popular topics beside My Country and other
topics which sometimes were over-ambitious. It was very clear that most candidates have a personal
interest in the topic chosen and have really prepared for it. At the same time, there were candidates who
sounded unprepared, or were not given enough opportunity to express their linguistic abilities because the
Examiners talked more than the candidates or because too few questions were asked due to excessive time
given to the presentation.
Although most Examiners did well and conducted the examination accordingly, there were a few Examiners
who forgot that the core of the test is the performance of the candidates and not of the Examiners. Some
Examiners sounded unprepared and some did not seem to understand the format of the test. Again, it is
worth reminding Examiners that they should always carefully read and follow the Teachers Notes.
As mentioned the choice of topics was probably broader than previous years. There were Centres where
candidates seemed to choose more challenging topics (e.g. social, economical, environmental, moral issues,
etc.). This of course would lead to more challenging questions and could disadvantage them, especially
candidates whose knowledge of the issues/topics is limited, even if the language skills are adequate.
The Examiner should not encourage candidates to choose over-ambitious topics, so that they do not
disadvantage themselves. However, as mentioned in the Teachers Note that it is the candidates linguistic
abilities/skills which are to be measured and not the candidates knowledge or other skills. Therefore, the
marks should be based on the candidates performance of their language and not the knowledge of the
subject chosen.
There was also a great deal of Jakartan slang as well as colloquial Indonesian and or English used.
Examiners are advised to encourage candidates to use formal Indonesian language by setting an example
on this section.
Test 3: General (unprepared) Conversation
In general most Examiners conducted this section very well and as in the previous year most candidates
scored highly. Topic conversations were varied and the number of subject areas required was covered.
Subject areas covered were similar to the previous year i.e.: family life, studies, hobbies, plans for the future,
and their general interests.
Some Examiners used some of the information given in the topic to lead into the general conversation. This
is acceptable provided these had not already been dealt with in the earlier discussion. Some Examiners,
however, continued asking the same questions for the Topic and Discussion and for the General
Conversation.
As in the previous year, there were some cases of over-challenging questions which were beyond the
candidates knowledge, affecting confidence and performance; and others where candidates were marked
on their knowledge rather than their language skills.
The allocation of time was usually well-handled, although some Examiners only used up to one or two
minutes of the time provided and did not ask more than two or three questions, or did not cover the three
subject areas required. A small number of Examiners conducted this session as in Topic (prepared)
Discussion where candidates have to prepare and present a presentation, which is not required.
Although most of the Examiners has already followed and complete the requirements, there were some who
remain unfamiliar with the instructions and are encouraged to read the Teachers Notes and to familiarise
themselves with the requirements so that they can assist candidates to do well in all sections.
2011


Paper 0545/04
Continuous Writing
Key points
The use of Jakartan slang should be avoided.
Candidates should check their work carefully for spelling errors after writing.
General Comments
Compared to 2010, the 2011 Continuous Writing (0545/04) exam paper was of a similar level of difficulty,
and, as in 2010, most candidates performed well.
The specific linguistic problems encountered by candidates included:
1.
Slang quite a number of candidates still used Jakartan slang, such as the use of the suffix in
instead of kan, e.g.: dibeliin should be dibelikan (to be bought by); bangunin should be
membangunkan (to wake up somebody). Likewise the use of some vocabulary, e.g.: kasih should
be memberi (to give); bilang should be mengatakan/berkata (to say); sama should be dengan
(with); buru-buru should be terburu-buru (in a rush/hurry) etc..
2.
Spelling care needs to be taken to avoid errors such as the following: mengunakan should be
menggunakan (to use); tingal should be tinggal (to live in/at); perkerjaan should be pekerjaan
(work/job); menyari should be mencari (to look for); mentukar should be menukar (to change)
etc..
3.
Use of prepositions pada followed by time, e.g.: pada hari Senin (on Monday), pada pagi hari
(in the morning); kepada followed by person, e.g.: kepada guru saya (to my teacher), kepada
kepala sekolah (to the head teacher); di/ke followed place, e.g.: di rumah (at home), ke sekolah
(to School). Thus, it would not be acceptable to say: di hari Senin instead of pada hari Senin; ke
guru saya instead of kepada guru saya etc..
4.
Plural forms the use of banyak (a lot of, a number of), semua (all) followed by nouns, e.g.:
banyak orang-orang should be banyak orang (a lot of people); semua murid-murid should be
semua murid (all candidates/candidates).
5.
Personal pronouns saya/aku (first person singular = I): a lot of candidates still mixed the use of
saya (formal) and aku (informal) in the same piece of writing.
2011

Comments on specific questions
Question 1a
The word main (to play) in writing the report about the use of computers (Question 1a), quite a
few of the candidates mixed the word mainan (toys) and permainan (games). Instead of using
permainan komputer (computer games) they used mainan komputer (computer toys?)
Computer terms candidates tended to use English vocabulary instead of Indonesian, e.g.: to
upload (mengunggah), to download (mengunduh), website (situs web) etc. Quite a number of them
also mixed both languages, e.g.: mengdownload permainan komputer (to download computer
games), bermain game di komputer saya (to play games on my computer), membrowsing Internet
untuk mencari informasi (to browse the Internet to find some information) etc. For some terms, for
example online there is no Indonesian equivalent. Everyday language is obviously a mix of
Indonesian and English terms.
Question 2
The word sarapan (breakfast) is a noun, but a lot of the candidates used it as a verb, e.g.: Saya
mandi lalu sarapan dengan cepat should be Saya mandi lalu menyantap/makan sarapan dengan
cepat (I had a bath/shower and then had breakfast quickly).
2011

Foreign Language Indonesian: Paper 0545/02 Reading and Directed Writing Key Points

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Foreign Language Indonesian: Paper 0545/02 Reading and Directed Writing Key Points

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Foreign Language Indonesian: Paper 0545/02 Reading and Directed Writing Key Points

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education

0545 Foreign Language Indonesian November 2011