VCE English Question Thread

[literally lauren]

Can someone please give me a rundown on what to include in the intro of context? I am doing expository and identity and belonging

No definitive rules beyond 'make it interesting, and make it relevant.'
If it's just a regular expository introduction, then try to unpack the prompt and outline your ideas (in that order.) Alternatively, you could use an example /  the text / a quote / something to create a 'hook' to make it engaging, and there are no limits on how you could choose to begin. Probably best to just work out what you've been doing so far this year, and just refine that for the exam.

For language analysis, if a device you want to point out seems kind of obscure (e.g. citing "eight per cent" instead of "8%" hides the statistic since it blends in with the other words), should we scrap it? Or should we justify it by saying why we think it's significant, in brackets? For instance, "(figures are usually used in conjunction with percentages)"

Ideally you'll have enough language to talk about that you won't need to mention everything you come across, so if there are some points that are kind of dodgy or not as efficacious as others, definitely showcase your ability to be selective by leaving them out. Statistics tend to be kind of pedestrian techniques to point out anyways ('Author uses numbers because numbers are persuasion' tends to be the gist of most analyses) so unless you think it's especially pertinent, it'd be better to focus on the more important stuff.

In regards to text response, how much "construction"or metalanguage do we need to employ for the 9-10 marks.
And in regards to in depth analysis of particular quotes and scenes, how much in detail are we meant to go?

1) depends on the prompt, and the text come to think of it, but I'd say try to have a minimum of one structural thing in each paragraph ~that's really arbitrary though; you could easily flout that 'rule' and still get a perfect score. In terms of metalanguage, almost all your sentences should contain metalanguage because you'll be discussing and analysing the text.
2) You can assume that your assessor has read the text, but you should go into enough depth such that a clever five year old could follow your logic. When it comes to summative details (ie. This event happens following this character's revelation that this was a lie all along) you can be very brief, but in terms of interpretation, try to back yourself up wherever possible.

How many outside sources at the least do we need for context? I've got 2 but my third one is a bit hazy still..

I'd aim to have more than you need, so perhaps read up on some other ones tomorrow and give yourself four in total, just in case. If the three that you've got are incredibly flexible, then you might be okay, but you'd want to be as prepared as you can be.
As a preparation exercise, read through the prompts here and here. If you think your examples are sufficient for you to cover the majority of those prompts, then you're ready. If there are still a few key areas in your Context that you can't cover though, maybe do a bit of reading and research tomorrow just in case.

Is there some sort of trick to identify the 'key players' in L.A faster? I tend to spend along time during reading time trying to identify them and make links between the article, comments and visuals.
THANKS!

1. What is the contention? eg. space exploration = good
2. How does the author argue that^ to be true? eg. there are benefits for humanity; chasing dreams is good; exploration is cooperative and productive
3. You now have your three key players: 'the benefits of space exploration;' 'the advantage of pursuing dreams;' & 'the cooperative and productive nature of exploration'

If you end up with more than you need, try to group them so that you don't end up spending too much time on L.A. but ensuring that you cover the article in sufficient detail,
eg. 'financial gains to be made from exploring space' and 'global interest in attaining knowledge and other benefits (see: 2nd visual)' could easily be grouped into a big 'benefits for humanity' paragraph.

Likewise, if you end up only having two key players, try to split the bigger or more dominant one into two smaller arguments
eg. if you've only got 'benefits to humanity' and 'chasing dreams is good'
then perhaps turn 'benefits' into --> 'tangible improvements to technology and livelihood' + 'spiritual fulfillment at having pursued and accomplished something'

The other thing to keep in mind is that the assessors are never looking for a single, definitive breakdown. It may put your mind at ease to know that so long as your method is working for you, the assessors will approve. It's not as though they look at your essay and say 'that's not how I would've done it, so -4 marks instantly.' It's all about what you think are the most important parts of the article, and there's a lot of flexibility to move around within your body paragraphs, so don't stress. The fact that you're showing some awareness of the key players will already make you stand out amongst all the standard chronological/by-technique methods people tend to apply blindly.

[Rainbow19]

Hi Lauren!
So with a comparative language analysis, which format is best??

1. Analyse main text
2. Linking sentence (ie: on the contrary ___ contends___ through.....)
3. Second text?

or

1. Analyse main text
2. Analyse second text
3. Comparative Paragraph

can you do it like this?
1. Analyse main text
2. Analyse second text weaving in comparisons/differences?

[literally lauren]

Hi Lauren!
So with a comparative language analysis, which format is best??

1. Analyse main text
2. Linking sentence (ie: on the contrary ___ contends___ through.....)
3. Second text?    <-- this is best!!

or

1. Analyse main text
2. Analyse second text
3. Comparative Paragraph  <-- if you were doing it this way, this paragraph would be unnecessary. You don't get any marks for comparison, so it's better if you can weave in the secondary texts together with your discussion of the main text, using a related idea as a pivot

can you do it like this?
1. Analyse main text
2. Analyse second text weaving in comparisons/differences? <-- yes, if you have to, but the first method would be preferable.

In other words:
Each paragraph would have:
  - 75% worth of analysis of the main piece
  - 25% of visual and/or comment analysis
very approximately, of course, the assessors aren't too fussed about the breakdown.

Having said that, if you're more familiar with a different method, then I'd recommend just refining that for the exam.

[schooliskool]

In other words:
Each paragraph would have:
  - 75% worth of analysis of the main piece
  - 25% of visual and/or comment analysis
very approximately, of course, the assessors aren't too fussed about the breakdown.

Having said that, if you're more familiar with a different method, then I'd recommend just refining that for the exam.

Is it fine to have 2-3 paragraphs on the main article and then a separate for the sub-article? Or will that not allow for much comparative analysis?

[cosine]

I need to develop some ideas; 'You women are all the same' To what extent are Jason's judgments validated?

So far I have:

- Euripides epitomises Medea's own personal beliefs encircling vengeance and selfishness
- On the contrary, the Nurse and Chorus' (also women) views and values differ from that of Medea's.
- ??

Any ideas/thoughts?

[99.90 pls]

Just a small grammatical question, would the film Wag the Dog be underlined or wrapped in quotation marks? Same goes for websites in Language Analysis (e.g. this opinion piece was published on the website Activism Australia)

[appleandbee]

Just a small grammatical question, would the film Wag the Dog be underlined or wrapped in quotation marks? Same goes for websites in Language Analysis (e.g. this opinion piece was published on the website Activism Australia)

quotation marks

Also this is probably a stupid question, but are we allowed to use dictionaries during reading time?

[99.90 pls]

quotation marks

Also this is probably a stupid question, but are we allowed to use dictionaries during reading time?

For both? I've been underlining films my whole life and a website can be likened to an anthology of sorts, so wouldn't that be underlined too? Sorry for doubting, just very confused

[appleandbee]

For both? I've been underlining films my whole life and a website can be likened to an anthology of sorts, so wouldn't that be underlined too? Sorry for doubting, just very confused

I'm not too sure about websites, it's just that I'm doing a film for text response and I use quotation marks .

[Cristiano]

I don't think it makes a difference if you underline or use quotation marks

[heids]

Don't believe it makes a difference, as Cristiano says; underlining is possibly better imo (since you'll be using quotation marks to quote parts of the text), but it won't make a millimetre of difference in your marks.

Yep, can use dictionaries in reading time.

[literally lauren]

Is it fine to have 2-3 paragraphs on the main article and then a separate for the sub-article? Or will that not allow for much comparative analysis?

Yes, that's fine if you can't find a way to incorporate ideas from the comment(s) in to your main body paragraphs, but you really want to try and bring it up when it's relevant, rather than just stick it at the end.

eg. Para1: 'Yergon says dreams are good...' >analyse< 'Contrarily, Laikis suggests that dreams are a waste of time...' >analyse<
^that's all the comparison you need; a single sentence to transition from one to the other, making it clear that you are contrasting one author's portrayal of something with the other author's.

If those connections aren't possible for you, or you frequently run out of time with L.A. perhaps leaving it till the end would be best, but make sure you analyse it properly. Much like the visuals, not spending enough time on these elements can impact the mark a little, even if your discussion of the main piece is quite good.

Just a small grammatical question, would the film Wag the Dog be underlined or wrapped in quotation marks? Same goes for websites in Language Analysis (e.g. this opinion piece was published on the website Activism Australia)

Convention is to have the text in single quote marks, and things the characters say are in doubt quotes, so in 'Wag the Dog' the Connie says "A good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow." But so long as you're consistent with whatever you're doing, the assessors won't mind.
A website would be considered a title in this case, so single quotes would be preferred, but again, it doesn't really matter. You wouldn't really even need to mention the specific website; it might be given as part of the background info, but that's unlikely to help your analysis much, especially if it's just a general audience, so you can leave out parts of the biographical details that don't seem all that relevant.

[elysian]

In other words:
Each paragraph would have:
  - 75% worth of analysis of the main piece
  - 25% of visual and/or comment analysis
very approximately, of course, the assessors aren't too fussed about the breakdown.

Do you have an example of that? Would you need to compare the two or just analyse the visual as a single analysis?

[GeniDoi]

Is the second topic of The Complete Maus always about the graphic novel and it's relationship to exploring the narrative?

I noticed Free Original Practice Exams - 2015 does for all four practice exams, as does the 2014 one from VCAA.

I seem to score better on these, and find it easier because you can use a lot of visual evidence, which I find easier to recall than quotes. It would be comforting to know that it will be an option on the exam.

EDIT: Also, an interesting but somewhat annoying thing about Maus quotes is that a lot of them are intentionally grammatically incorrect, which makes for an interesting thing to analyse but at the same time makes remembering quotes word for word a difficult task. If I provide a quote but accidentally correct its grammar, will I lose marks for "misquoting" the text?

[imaware]

Can someone please explain how to effectively do tonal analysis in the bodyparagraphs?
how much depth do we need to go into?

Thanks