Grade 12 Home Language Examinations, 2012 2014: Trends And .

Grade 12 Home Language Examinations,2012 – 2014: Trends and IssuesAfrikaans, English, isiNdebele, isiXhosa, isiZulu, SiSwati,Sepedi, Sesotho, Setswana, Tshivenda, and Xitsonga1

Grade 12 Home Language Examinations,2012 – 2014: Trends and IssuesAfrikaans, English, isiNdebele, isiXhosa, isiZulu, SiSwati,Sepedi, Sesotho, Setswana, Tshivenda, and XitsongaMarch 2015COPYRIGHT 2015 UMALUSI, COUNCIL FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE IN GENERAL ANDFURTHER EDUCATION AND TRAININGALL RIGHTS RESERVED2

3

ContentsAcknowledgements . 9Abbreviations . 10PART I: THE CONTEXT OF THE STUDY. 111.1 Introduction . 111.2 Research aims and questions . 121.3 The rationale for the study . 13PART II: METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH . 142.1 The examination paper analysis instrument . 142.2 The documents used in the analysis of the examinations . 152.3 The structure of Home Language examination papers . 162.4 From the NSC to CAPS HL examinations: Differences and similarities . 172.5 Historical candidate enrolments in Home Languages . 172.6 Participation and success rates during the period under study . 18PART III: PRESENTATION OF RESULTS. 223 Afrikaans Results . 223.1 Compliance in terms of format and structure . 223.2 Distribution of cognitive demand in the papers . 223.2.1 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 1 . 223.2.2 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 2 . 233.2.3 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 3 . 243. Distribution of levels of difficulty in the papers . 253.3.1 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 1 . 253.3.2 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 2 . 263.3.3 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 3 . 263.4 Topic or content and/or skills area weightings . 273.5 Other points regarding the quality of the examination . 273.6 Difficulty of stimulus/source material. 283.7 Concluding discussion . 324. English Results . 344.1 Compliance in terms of format and structure . 344.2 Distribution of cognitive demand in the papers . 344.2.1 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 1 . 354.2.2 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 2 . 364.2.3 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 3 . 384.3 Distribution of levels of difficulty . 394.3.1 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 1 . 394.3.2 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 2 . 404.3.3 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 3 . 414.4 Topic or content and/or skills area weightings . 414.5 Invalid sources of question difficulty or ease . 424.6 Rating the quality of examination papers . 424.7 Level and depth of subject knowledge . 434.8 Difficulty of stimulus/source material . 434.9 Other points regarding the standard of the examination . 454

4.10 Comparability of examination papers . 454.11 Recommendations for improving the quality and standard of EnglishHome Language examinations . 465. IsiNdebele Results . 475.1 Compliance in terms of format and structure . 475.2 Distribution of cognitive demand in the papers . 475.2.1 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 1 . 475.2.2 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 2 . 485.2.3 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 3 . 495.3 Distribution of levels of difficulty in the papers . 505.3.1 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 1 . 505.3.2 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 2 . 515.3.3 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 3 . 515.4 Invalid sources of question difficulty or ease . 525.5 Quality of examinations papers . 535.6 Quality of examination papers . 535.7 General comments . 545.8 Concluding discussion . 546. IsiXhosa Results . 566.1 Compliance in terms of format and structure . 566.2 Distribution of cognitive demand in the papers . 566.2.1 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 1 . 566.2.2 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 2 . 576.2.3 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 3 . 586.3 Distribution of levels of difficulty in the papers . 596.3.1 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 1 . 596.3.2 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 2 . 596.3.3 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 3 . 606.4 Other points. 616.5 Invalid sources of question difficulty or ease . 616.6 Level and depth of subject knowledge . 636.7 Difficulty of stimulus/source material . 636.8 Other points regarding the standard of the examination . 636.9 Comparability of examination papers . 646.10 Concluding discussion. 646.11 Recommendations for improving the quality and standard of IsiXhosaHL examinations . 647. IsiZulu Results . 667.1 Compliance with the SAG/examination guidelines . 667.2 Distribution of cognitive demand in the papers . 667.2.1 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 1 . 667.2.2 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 2 . 677.2.3 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 3 . 687.3 Distribution of levels of difficulty in the papers . 697.3.1 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 1 . 697.3.2 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 2 . 707.3.3 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 3 . 715

7.4 Are the abilities examined typically associated with the HL curriculum?. 737.5 Level and depth of subject knowledge . 737.6 Quality of examination papers . 747.7 Difficulty of stimulus/source material . 757.8 Concluding discussion . 758. Siswati Results . 778.1 Compliance in terms of format and structure . 778.2 Distribution of cognitive demand in the papers . 788.2.1 Weighing of cognitive demand in Paper 1 . 788.2.2 Weighing of cognitive demand in Paper 2 . 798.2.3 Weighing of cognitive demand in Paper 3 . 808.3 Distribution of levels of difficulty . 818.3.1 Weighing of difficulty level in Paper 1. 818.3.2 Weighing of difficulty level in Paper 2. 828.3.3 Weighing of difficulty level in Paper 3. 838.4 Level and depth of subject knowledge and quality of examinationpapers . 848.5 Levels of difficulty of source or stimulus material of the optional questions. 848.6 Other points regarding the standard of the examination . 858.7 Comparing the extent to which each of the paper(s) reflectappropriate levels and depth of subject knowledge . 858.8 Concluding discussion . 868.9 Recommendations for improving the quality and standard of Siswati HLexaminations . 879. Sepedi Results. 889.1 Compliance in terms of format and structure . 889.2 Distribution of ccognitive demand in the papers . 889.2.1 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 1 . 889.2.2 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 2 . 899.2.3 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 3 . 909.3 Standard of the examination papers. . 919.3.1 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 1 . 919.3.2 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 2 . 929.3.3 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 3 . 939.4 Topic or content and/or skills area weightings . 939.5 Difficulty of stimulus/source material . 949.6 Invalid source of difficulty or ease. . 959.7 Other points regarding the quality of the examination . 959.8 Rating the quality of the examination papers . 969.9 Recommendations for improving the quality and standard of SepediHome Language examinations . 9710. Sesotho Results . 9810.1 Compliance in terms of format and structure . 9810.2 Distribution of cognitive demand in the papers . 9810.2.1 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 1 . 986

10.2.2 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 2 . 9910.2.3 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 3 . 10010.3 Distribution of levels of difficulty in the papers . 10110.3.1 Weighting of difficulty levels in Paper 1 . 10110.3.2 Weighting of difficulty levels in Paper 2 . 10210.3.3 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 3 . 10310.4 Invalid sources of difficulty . 10410.5 Comparability of quality . 10410.6 Concluding discussion. 10510.7 Recommendations for improving the quality and standard of HLexaminations . 10611. Setswana Results . 10811.1 Compliance in terms of format and structure . 10811.2 Distribution of cognitive demand in the papers . 10811.2.1 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 1 . 10811.2.2 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 2 . 10911.2.3 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 3 . 11011.3 Distribution of levels of difficulty in the papers . 11111.3.1 Weighting of levels of difficulty in Paper 1 . 11111.3.2 Weighting of levels of difficulty in Paper 2 . 11211.3.3 Weighting of levels of difficulty in Paper 3 . 11311.4 Topic or content and/or skill area weightings . 11311.5 Comparability of examination papers in terms of quality and standards. 11411.6 Concluding discussion. 11511.7 Recommendations for improving the quality and standard of the HLexaminations . 11511.8 General suggestions on the setting of questions . 11712. Tshivenda Results . 11812.1 Compliance in terms of format and structure . 11812.2 Distribution of cognitive demand in the papers . 11812.2.1 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 1 . 11812.2.2 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 2 . 11912.2.3 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 3 . 12012.3 Distribution of levels of difficulty in the papers . 12112.3.1 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 1 . 12112.3.2 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 2 . 12212.3.3 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 3 . 12412.4 Invalid sources of question difficulty or ease . 12512.5 Evaluating difficulty of stimulus/source material in the papers . 12512.6 Coverage of examination curriculum . 12612.7 The standard, quality of the language and format of the questions inPaper . 12712.8 Recommendations for improving the quality and standard ofTshivenda Papers. 12713. Xitsonga Results . 12913.1 Compliance in terms of format and structure . 1297

13.2 Distribution of cognitive demand in the papers . 12913.2.1 Weighting of cognitive demand in paper . 12913.2.2 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 2 . 13013.2.3 Weighting of cognitive demand in Paper 3 . 13013.3 Distribution of levels of difficulty in the papers . 13113.3.1 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 1 . 13113.3.2 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 2 . 13213.3.3 Weighting of difficulty level in Paper 3 . 13313.4 Difficulty of stimulus/source material .

1 Grade 12 Home Language Examinations, 2012 – 2014: Trends and Issues Afrikaans, English, isiNdebele, isiXhosa, isiZulu, SiSwati, Sepedi, Sesotho, Setswana .