ATAR Notes: Forum

VCE Stuff => VCE English Studies => VCE Subjects + Help => VCE English & EAL => Topic started by: literally lauren on February 01, 2016, 08:54:43 pm

Title: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: literally lauren on February 01, 2016, 08:54:43 pm
English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown

As you may know, the malevolent beasts up at VCAA HQ have taken it upon themselves to shake things up a bit, and 2016 is the official transition year where the Year 12s will be completing the final year of the 'old'/current study design, and the Year 11s will be learning the new stuff. Unfortunately for us mere mortals, the changes are written in that most impenetrable of ancient tongues: VCAA jargon.

So this thread is here to help clear up any uncertainties, and to provide some general advice when it comes to tackling the tasks to come. A quick note before we start, just so everyone's on the same page:

If you are in Year 12 in 2016, you will be assessed under the old study design, which will be the same as what you have done in Year 11, and is what most of the resources on this board apply to.
If you are in Year 11 in 2016, so will be in Year 12 in 2017, you have the honour of being part of the very first cohort doing the new study design, which is what this thread will aim to explain.

I'll also be making occasional reference to the old version by means of explanation for those tutors or helpful past students among us who are more familiar with that terminology. So this will serve as both a change log of how the study designs differ, and a breakdown of the key features of the new one that the Class of '17 will have to grapple with.

Keep in mind that I'm basing this off what little information I've gleaned from VCAA and other sources, and it's quite possible that my advice might change as more details are released (especially when they finally get around to putting out a practice exam) but I'll be sure to update here if that is the case. Most of this advice is generalisable enough to be safe across the board, though you may find you need to refine this if your own teachers are giving you highly specific instructions or recommendations.

With that out of the way, I'll take this opportunity to link you to a) The New Study Design itself even though I'll be breaking it down into more manageable chunks below, and b) The Official Text List for 2017 from which your school will choose the three or four texts you will study over the course of Year 12. The specifics of this will also be examined below.

For those nerds intelligent people who are familiar with the English curriculum, the changes can be summarised thusly:
• Context is gone; replaced by Text Comparison
• SAC weighting has changed quite a bit, with the oral now being worth significantly more
• English and EAL are now much more distinct subjects with EAL having more modified tasks, different SAC weighting, added listening tasks like other FL/SL subjects, and different exam content
• There is a compulsory creative SAC in Semester 1

But to the uninitiated, this probably won't make much sense, so let's go through this bit by bit. We'll first examine the mainstream English course, and I'll add details pertaining to the EAL course once more information is published about it.

For starters, this is what the Unit 3/4 Course Outline looks like, keeping in mind that your Unit 3 and Unit 4 results will each contribute to 25% of your overall mark with the exam making up the remaining 50%, so all these percentages pertain to their individual categories:

~English Outline~

          Unit 3
          Area of Study 1: Reading and Creating Texts
                    Outcome 1: Analytical Text Response (30%)
                                     Creative Text Response + Written Explanation (30%)
          Area of Study 2: Analysing Argument
                    Outcome 2: Language Analysis (40%)

          Unit 4
          Area of Study 1: Reading and Comparing Texts
                    Outcome 1: Comparative Text Essay (60%)
          Area of Study 2: Presenting Arguments
                    Outcome 2: Oral Presentation + Written Explanation (40%)

          The Exam
               1 x Text Response (33%)
               1 x Comparative Text Essay (33%)
               1 x Language Analysis (33%)


What follows is a breakdown of each of these Areas of Study, as well as an assortment of recommendations regarding how to approach these different tasks.

Unit 3
Area of Study 1: Reading and Creating Texts
In Year 12, your school will choose two texts from List 1 of the official guide, and you will write on both of them within this Area of Study.
Texts for 2017 are listed here for reference
All About Eve by Joseph Mankiewicz (film)
Behind the Beautiful Forevers: Life, Death, and Hope in a Mumbai Undercity by Katherine Boo (non-fiction)
Burial Rites by Hannah Kent (novel)
Cloudstreet by Tim Winton (novel)
Frankenstein by Mary Shelley (novel)
I for Isobel by Amy Witting (novel)
Island by Alistair MacLeod (short stories)
Mabo by Rachel Perkins (film)
Measure for Measure by William Shakespeare (play)
Medea by Euripides (play)
No Sugar by Jack Davis (play)
Old/New World by Peter Skrzynecki (poems)
Selected Poems by John Donne (poems)
The Complete Maus (graphic novel)
The Golden Age by Joan London (novel)
The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula Le Guin (novel)
The Lieutenant by Kate Grenville (novel)
The Thing Around Your Neck by Chimamanda Adichie (short stories)
The White Tiger by Aravind Adiga (novel)This Boy’s Life by Tobias Wolff (non-fiction)
The first thing to note is that because there are two tasks within this AOS, you will have to write on both texts, meaning that you'll use one for the analytical essay, and one for the creative piece. It is unknown at this point whether you will be able to choose which of your texts you write on for each task, but I would guess that the school would make that decision for you. (Please comment if you are able to clarify!)

Outcome 1: Analytical Text Response

This one should be very familiar to you, and remains largely unchanged from the previous study design. The task involves writing an essay in response to a prompt that is specifically about the text you are studying, for instance 'Frankenstein's monster is a tragic hero. Do you agree?' or 'To what extent does Measure for Measure endorse virtue and honesty?' These will likely be the kinds of questions you've dealt with in previous years, and whilst the standards are a little higher in Year 12, the core criteria is ostensibly the same: respond to the prompt, and construct a contention using textual evidence (especially quotes!) to substantiate your points.

If you read anything pertaining to 'Text Response' on these forums, then this is the essay type it relates to; the Resource thread on the main English and EAL board contains many helpful threads and sample essays for you to peruse too.

Outcome 1: Creative Text Response

This is a new addition to the study design, but might be familiar to anyone students of VCE Literature. For this task, you will have to write on a different text from the one selected in your Analytical Text Response, and the final product will be in some kind of imaginative style (e.g. a short story, a letter, a diary entry, an interview, etc.) You will still be assessed on how effectively you can unpack the text's ideas, but you will be showcasing those ideas within a piece of your own, rather than just presenting them in an essay.

Also, you will be required to write a Written Explanation, which are technically on the current study design as a complement to the Context Area of Study, but will be given more weight in the new outline. This will be in the form of a written addition to your piece where you explain the decisions you've made and discuss how your creative piece relates to the set text. There are various strategies for doing this, including some borrowed from the Creative SAC in Literature which is an almost identical task, but more on that later.

In terms of your actual piece, you can choose to recreate, rework, or extend the text by creating a companion piece consistent with the style and concerns of the original text, meaning that there can be connections in your subject matter (i.e. writing from the perspective of the protagonist in your text, or writing a piece that touches on similar concepts, like racial intolerance, adolescent relationships, the responsibilities of authority, etc.) OR connections based on the language and form (i.e. if you're studying a collection of poetry, then you could write a poem that calls upon very similar techniques and devices as the ones in your set text, or if you're studying a play, then you might write a script for a scene and appropriate some of the metaphors for your own ends.)

Appropriation is a core point here - you're not meant to simply 'copy' things from the text in that if, let's say, you were studying The Great Gatsby and you loved the metaphor of the green light and how it represented Gatsby's unattainable dream. But if all you do is write a story that uses the green light in this exact same context (e.g. writing from the perspective of a couple whose relationship has broken up, and one person stands at the door of the other's apartment looking at the flashing green light of a doorbell/intercom knowing they won't be let in) because you're not doing anything new with that idea, you're just retelling the story in a different context.

Appropriation involves taking these elements - whether they're highly specific symbols and structural features, or big things like entire characters and plot points - and using them to create your own meaning. So you're able to 'borrow' the kinds of connotations and ideas that the author employs, but you have to do so in a way that allows you to construct some bigger, overall idea. If my point is that 'In Gatsby, the green light represents an untenable ideal, so in my story, the green light also represents an untenable ideal' then I haven't done anything with that symbol. I haven't appropriated it, I've just stolen it, and left it there. I'm like an awful burglar who steals your television but never plugs it in to watch it.

Instead, aim to do something more impressive; take an idea in the text you find interesting and put it into a different context. Consider how you might expand upon it and take it a step further.

Purely in terms of the form and style you choose, you have four main options:
• write a piece that uses the style, setting, or core structural features of your set text, which would require an attentive eye for textual details, as well as a skillful application (and appropriation!) of these.
• write a piece that could be added to the text (e.g. a 'lost scene' that fits in between two moments, or something that happens before or after the main plot,) which would
• rewrite a part of the text by changing some key detail(s)
• rewrite a part of the text by telling it from a different point of view, or changing the narrative voice, which would involve the construction of a believable new perspective, and for a good reason (i.e. you couldn't just retell things from someone else's point of view without fleshing out that character and providing insight into some idea that the original text does not.)

Then, for the Written Explanation, you will make all these choices obvious by explaining yourself. You are allowed to use the first person here, as in 'I have written a point of view narrative piece from the perspective of character X in order to explore...' Not only will you explain these textual links, but you should also endeavour to identify the author's intention and perspective and then discuss how you have replicated, or better yet, challenged and expanded upon their views.

I'll try to post a few examples of this as more information surfaces about what VCAA are looking for here, but your best bet for this piece of assessment is to consult your teacher! There's no creative component or written explanation on the exam, meaning that this is just something you'll have to deal with for a Semester 1 SAC, and the specific requirements won't be uniform across the state. You're still completing the same basic task, but each school and each teacher will have their own unique preferences regarding how you approach it, so work closely with them if you want to maximise your chances of scoring highly in this section.

Your scores for both of these pieces - the analytical and the creative - will combine to form 60% of your Unit 3 mark overall.

Area of Study 2: Analysing Argument
This AOS will only have one outcome, which will be worth 40% of Unit 3 overall. The task is a Language Analysis, also known as a 'Media Journal' or 'Using Language to Persuade' as per the old versions. You will complete this task using material that has been printed in the Australian media since September 1st of the previous year, meaning it will be based on a fairly topical news story or current affair concern.

Outcome 2: Language Analysis

Happily, this task is mostly unchanged from its counterpart on the previous study design, though there are potential changes in terms of the kinds of material you'll be analysing, and the intention behind the analysis.

In the simplest terms, 'Language Analysis' involves being given an assortment of written and visual stimuli (e.g. a newspaper article, a letter to the editor, and a cartoon) and discussing how language is used to persuade. Much like the Analytical Text Response task, you can read through the current resources and sample essays to get some idea of what this is all about, though it's likely that your schools will have prepared you for this in Years 7-10 in some form.

And, again like Text Response, this task will also be a part of your end of year examination. The exact nature of the material you're analysing will change, as your SAC has to be a recent piece or collection of pieces from the Australian media, but the exam won't be because they don't want to give any students an unfair advantage. The Language Analysis material in the exam will be compiled by the assessors specifically for the exam, so it will be a totally original, totally unseen collection of written and visual language to explore.

There's some indication in the new study design that VCAA are looking for more focus on how students present their understanding of the arguments, rather than how many techniques they can identify, and this has been a trend over the past couple of years in English. Your capacity to point at something and say 'that's a rhetorical question!' is pretty unimportant and unimpressive to assessors in the grand scheme of things, and this new study design cements that.

There's also much more emphasis on your ability to discuss the conventions of texts, and given that VCAA like to spice up the exam with the occasional blog post or speech, it's likely that you'll see some of these less-than-straightforward presentations of information over the course of this syllabus.

And please note:
Quote from: the new study design
Key Skills:
•    identify and analyse
         – the intent and logical development of an argument
         – language used by the writers and creators of texts to position or persuade an audience to share a point of view
         – the impact of texts on audiences by considering the similarities and differences between texts
         – the way in which language and argument complement one another and interact to position the reader
Comparative material is possible and very, very likely, so be prepared to deal with multiple written pieces by different authors with different contentions in both your SAC and the exam.

As with the creative response, you might want to consult your teacher about their recommendations in approaching your schools SAC material, as some places will give you three long written pieces and expect you to just analyse them one at a time, whereas others will give you one main piece and a couple of smaller ones (e.g. letters to the editor, blog comments, etc.) and want you to draw connections throughout your essay. For the exam though, your best bet is to adopt something akin to the 'key player method' (explanations here and here if needed, and drop by the Q and A thread if you're still unsure about this) will be the most advantageous. This is a very argument-centric mode of tackling Language Analysis, which makes it even more ideal for this slightly refined version of the task.

Now, this will comprise of 40% of Unit 3, but you'll notice that neither this task, nor the Analytical Text Response one can be seen in Unit 4. This means that by the time you hit the halfway point of the year, you will have completed the 2/3 of the course that is relevant to the exam (since the Text Response and Language Analysis pieces are already done, and all you have left is the Comparative Essay, which is studied as part of Unit 4).

Thus, English seems to be more akin to other subjects that require you to recall information and skills used at the start of the year in order to score well in the exam. So as you head into the second half of the year, it's up to you to maintain your knowledge and writing ability in these two key areas so that you're not too stressed when it comes to the end of year assessment.

Unit 4
Area of Study 1: Reading and Comparing Texts
In Unit 4, your Outcomes will come down to one assessment task each. The first and biggest of these is the Comparative Text Essay. It's worth 60%, and will be a third of your exam too. This is an entirely new thing for VCE English, though there are some parallels with the HSC course, interestingly. But because this is so new to everyone, we'll have to wait for more information in terms of what the actual assessment will consist of in this regard. I'm assuming the exam will be akin to the Text Response section in that you'll be given a prompt to respond to, only this prompt will relate to the two texts you've studied for your Comparison AOS, and will call on you to contrast the similarities and differences in each. I will update here when more info surfaces.

Outcome 1: Comparative Text Essay

For this task, your school will select a pair of text from List 2, so you will not be writing on the same texts that you had in Semester 1.
Fancy table with all the pairs listed here
(http://i.imgur.com/svO55jc.png)
I'll be making another post soon that will explore these texts in more detail, since they'll be the same for 2017 and 2018, but all you need to know for now is that each of these pairs has a great deal of overlap in terms of their subject matter and thematic messages. So if your school were to pick Pair 5 (in dark green above) you'd be studying The Crucible and Year of Wonders, which both touch on the notion of superstition, paranoia, and groupthink, as well as themes like nature, the role of women, and the importance of our decision-making. Thus you could reasonably expect to have to compare and contrast what each text says about these kinds of ideas, as they're present in both texts.

At this point, I am unsure how specific these prompts will be. It's possible you will get highly targetted discussion topics like 'Is Anna in Year of Wonders a more stronger character than Abigail Williams in The Crucible? Discuss.' or just broader, more idea-based questions like 'Discuss the portrayal of community in Year of Wonders and The Crucible.' I think the latter is more likely, but it's even possible VCAA will alternate and give you an assortment of both to work with. And until the sample exam is published, it's also unknown whether you will be given a choice of prompts to respond to (in the same vein as Text Response where you always have a choice of two) or if it'll be more like the bygone Context task it's replacing where you will be given a single prompt that you have to base your piece around.

Either way, you will be writing an analytical essay that should be making frequent comparisons and contrasts between your two texts. Your teachers will hopefully provide you with some examples of what this will look like, but it is my recommendation that you do not divide your paragraphs so that you're talking about one text at a time. An essay that has four body paragraphs (i.e. excluding the introduction and conclusion) and alternates between talking about Text A and Text B each time is not really an effective comparative essay.

e.g. Introduction
--> Paragraph 1: Text A
--> Paragraph 2: Text B
--> Paragraph 3: Text A
--> Paragraph 4: Text B
Conclusion                                   =  :-\

Even a structure like this is probably a bit too pedestrian:

e.g. Introduction
--> Paragraph 1: Text A
--> Paragraph 2: Text B
--> Paragraph 3: Text A & Text B
Conclusion                                   =  :-\

Instead, aim to compare as you go by incorporating a bit of each text in each paragraph. You can still focus on one particular one for certain paragraphs, but don't analyse one in isolation at the expense of making valid connections between the texts.

e.g. Introduction
--> Paragraph 1: 75% on Text A & 25% on Text B
--> Paragraph 2: 50% on Text A & 50% on Text B
--> Paragraph 3: 75% on Text B & 25% on Text A
Conclusion                                   =  8)

That way, you'll be telling your marker that you not only have the skills to dissect textual details, but also that you can structure your essay in a way that enables you to showcase your understanding of how the two texts link together. There's a reason VCAA have chosen these particular pairs, and the more you demonstrate an awareness of that, the easier it will be for you to score highly.

Similar (unofficial) rules will apply here to the Language Analysis task in that the spread of your analysis should reflect the spread of the material. This is only in terms of broad estimates, but if you're studying two texts in equal measure and spend 80% of your essay writing about one of them, then your piece probably won't feel very balanced overall. Just like how in Language Analysis if you were to spend an entire body paragraph (so 1/3 or 1/4 of your analysis as a whole) on a single sentence of the written material when you're meant to be covering two whole pages, plus visuals; so too must you aim to strike a balance here for the Comparative Essay. The assessors won't penalise you too harshly for a 60/40 split, but you should make sure you have enough to say about both texts such that you aren't just relying on your knowledge of one to pull you through.

Area of Study 2: Presenting Arguments
Finally, we come to the last of the SACs - the oral presentation. This was a part of the previous study design, but it used to only be a minor part of Unit 3, whereas it is now a fairly major part of Unit 4 (40%). As such, you'll likely be required to do a decent amount of research, and has to be based on an issue that's been in the media since September of the previous year, much like the Language Analysis task in Unit 3. Some schools may choose to assign your oral topics on the same issue that you study for the Language Analysis task, but others will give you complete freedom to decide what you'd like to discuss. You will also be required to complete another Written Explanation, much like you were back in the Creative Text Response section, which will constitute 10% of the overall 40% weighting, meaning your speech itself will be worth 30%.
Outcome 2: Oral Presentation + Written Explanation
Oral presentations can be a cause for trepidation for some students, and if even thinking about public speaking makes you queasy, don't worry because there are plenty of ways to combat this and get you through this assessment task.

This can broadly be divided into three sections: the writing of the speech, the writing of the written explanation, and the delivery of the speech.

When composing the speech itself, you'll be aiming for roughly 4--6 minutes, or possibly more depending on your school's restrictions. The primary goal here is to write persuasively both in terms of the presentation of your ideas, and the words you choose to express them. You will need to select a clear and concise contention which will be the basis of your argument, and you should then construct a series of sub-arguments and points which revolve around that core point of view. Try to select something that you believe to be a valid contention, too; don't go for something wacky like 'Australia should declare war with Tasmania' or 'Parents should not only be able to smack their kids, but also roundhouse kick them in the face occasionally' for the sake of being different and standing out. You want your piece to be logical, and believable - that way, half of your persuasion work has already been done.

When writing your piece, try to avoid writing an essay in terms of an 'introduction + body paragraphs + conclusion' structure. You want your piece to flow as a proper speech, and something with clearly demarcated sub-arguments and body paragraphs isn't a very believable speech - it's just going to sound as though you're reading an essay aloud. Instead, compose 3-7 sentence 'chunks' and separate those into paragraphs. This will ensure that you are having to continually link ideas as you go, rather than having a whole section devoted to one idea, followed by a linking phrase, and then the next big idea. Flow and pacing are important, and you want to give the sense of building up an argument as you go. Think of it this way - there's a difference between building a staircase one stair at a time, making sure the previous step has set a solid foundation for the next one, and building groups of stairs before combining each chunk to form a proper staircase. You're going to be reading your speech from start to finish, and that's the journey that your audience will be taking too, so make sure you explore things properly and take them with you every step (no pun intended) of the way.

The Written Explanation is a new addition to the Oral SAC, but is very similar to the one outlined in the Creative Text Response section. Focus on explaining the decisions that you made. For instance, why did you choose to begin your piece in a certain way? How did you make an effort to engage the audience? Were there any particular words which you emphasised, and if so, why? And how have your language choices served to reinforce your contention and sub-arguments?

The Written Explanation should be around 300-500 words according to VCAA, but again, your school may alter this or impose other restrictions about what needs to be included here. Just concentrate on justifying the choices that you've made and see if you can spell out your thought process to your marker as clearly and efficiently as possible.

The Exam

And last but not least we have the October Exam, which constitutes 50% of your mark overall (give or take rankings and SAC scaling). There are three essays you have to write, all of them analytical: a Text Response (one text, choice of prompts), a Comparative Essay (two texts), and a Language Analysis piece (based on a selection of written and visual material).

Each essay is weighted equally with your exam mark being out of 60. Each piece is worth 20 marks, but you will have two assessors each assigning you a mark out of 10 in order to prevent any bias or confusion. Therefore, you will have at least six different people looking at your work - two per essay - and the scores from each of them will be added up to give you a total out of 60.

The most obvious challenge here is that your in-class study of Text Response and Language Analysis is limited to Semester 1 unless you get an especially good teacher who prepares you for these alongside your Unit 4 work. Thus you'll get to the end of October (or perhaps more accurately the September practice exams) and suddenly be asked to complete tasks that you haven't had to do since March or April. As such, it's important you keep things up in the meantime and refine your skills constantly. Unfortunately the Creative SAC and Oral Sac are only tangentially applicable to the exam tasks, and even the SAC versions of those three primary pieces might differ from the content and standards expected in the exam (depending on your school,) so the burden falls on you to pick up the slack and ensure that you can prepare for both your in-class assessment, and the end of year exam. But at least you've got ATAR Notes here to help you :)
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: literally lauren on February 01, 2016, 08:55:49 pm
Mainly posting here just in case I have to come back and edit in stuff that doesn't fit in the first post, but just to let you know, questions and comments are welcome in this thread, especially if you've heard more or conflicting information from your teachers. This will be a working progress over the course of this year as the final details of the study designed are ironed out by VCAA, but hopefully this current version will give you Year 11s some idea of what will be expected of you next year :)
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: heids on February 01, 2016, 08:58:47 pm
It has come at last.  Let the upvotes begin to shower.

[guys, I don't think it's possible to realise just how much work must have gone into a post like this]
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: literally lauren on February 01, 2016, 09:02:37 pm
Thank the broken unimelb site for costing me a whole day of proper work.
But at least I did something productive whilst glaring at the refreshing icon of doom for like nine hours ::)
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: Splash-Tackle-Flail on February 01, 2016, 09:20:59 pm
Not all heroes wear capes.

This is going to help my little sister so much :D
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: Alter on February 01, 2016, 09:34:46 pm
Amazing thread.

When are we having a funeral for context, aka the best section of the former study design? It was legitimately the best section of the three and will be sorely missed. :(
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: Splash-Tackle-Flail on February 01, 2016, 09:43:22 pm
When are we having a funeral for context, aka the best section of the former study design? It was legitimately the best section of the three and will be sorely missed. :(

110% agree. VCAA have lost their ways :'(

Serious though- can we actually do this funeral procession?
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: heids on February 01, 2016, 09:45:31 pm
When are we having a funeral for context, aka the best section of the former study design? It was legitimately the best section of the three and will be sorely missed. :(

U WOT M8?

110% agree. VCAA have lost their ways :'(

Serious though- can we actually do this funeral procession?

U WOT WOT WOT M8?

We've already organised a massive celebration dinner.  The sparklers and party hats are all prepared.
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: keltingmeith on February 01, 2016, 09:51:40 pm
When are we having a funeral for context, aka the best section of the former study design? It was legitimately the best section of the three and will be sorely missed. :(

Yeah, but they replaced it with imaginative.
They literally just removed the crap and saved the gold. ;)
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: literally lauren on February 01, 2016, 10:08:50 pm
Amazing thread.

When are we having a funeral for context, aka the best section of the former study design? It was legitimately the best section of the three and will be sorely missed. :(
110% agree. VCAA have lost their ways :'(

Serious though- can we actually do this funeral procession?
Yeah, but they replaced it with imaginative.
They literally just removed the crap and saved the gold. ;)
You three have been un-invited from the party.  >:(

Tbh I hated Context as much as anyone, but there are some bad missteps in this new version - the fact that SACs no longer have an (almost) 3:3 correspondence is going to take its toll just like it does in Literature where people get to the end of the year and are like 'why were four out of five of these SACs basically irrelevant?' Granted the English ratio will be more like three useful SACs to two less than useful ones, but it's still a tad frustrating. The EAL outline is more than a little muddled too; I approve of splitting it off from English more definitively, but there's some weird stuff going on with the text selection and the assessment - apparently they won't be doing the Comparative bit on the exam, but still have the big 60% SAC in Unit 4, as well as the oral. If that's right, it means the entirety of Unit 4 for EAL students will have nothing to do with what will be on the exam... which seems... flawed at best.

Also, don't you love how VCAA will put a text like Stasiland on the list for four years under the current study design, and then put it on a different section of the new list and call it a 'first year text?' ::) That 2017 list made me kind of mad actually; half the "new" texts on there had either been on the English/Lit lists before, or were written by authors who'd been on the lists before. THERE ARE OTHER BOOKS, VCAA! I COULD GIVE YOU A LIST OF TWENTY WAY BETTER REPLACEMENTS JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD FFS I THOUGHT ENGLISH TEACHERS WERE MEANT TO BE WELL READ -.-
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: Alter on February 01, 2016, 10:14:28 pm
Also, don't you love how VCAA will put a text like Stasiland on the list for four years under the current study design, and then put it on a different section of the new list and call it a 'first year text?' ::) That 2017 list made me kind of mad actually; half the "new" texts on there had either been on the English/Lit lists before, or were written by authors who'd been on the lists before. THERE ARE OTHER BOOKS, VCAA! I COULD GIVE YOU A LIST OF TWENTY WAY BETTER REPLACEMENTS JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD FFS I THOUGHT ENGLISH TEACHERS WERE MEANT TO BE WELL READ -.-
All the better when you're so lazy that you make Stasiland one of your resources for German so that unit 4 German and and unit 4 English are basically just the same subject with different teachers. It got so messy that I'd call the GDR the 'DDR' in English and 'GDR' in German. #gamethesystem 

I hope that my children will one day have to write essays on Stasiland. God bless you Anna Funder :')

That point about the SACs not reflecting skills necessary for the exam is what annoys me the most. I'm all for integrating imaginative pieces into VCE English, but the way it's done in this new study design just irks me.
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: heart on February 01, 2016, 10:17:15 pm
Also, don't you love how VCAA will put a text like Stasiland on the list for four years under the current study design, and then put it on a different section of the new list and call it a 'first year text?' ::) That 2017 list made me kind of mad actually; half the "new" texts on there had either been on the English/Lit lists before, or were written by authors who'd been on the lists before. THERE ARE OTHER BOOKS, VCAA! I COULD GIVE YOU A LIST OF TWENTY WAY BETTER REPLACEMENTS JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD FFS I THOUGHT ENGLISH TEACHERS WERE MEANT TO BE WELL READ -.-

Damn I did Stasiland for literature in 2011 they really like stealing texts from the literature list :P
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: brenden on February 01, 2016, 10:18:16 pm
You three have been un-invited from the party.  >:(

Tbh I hated Context as much as anyone, but there are some bad missteps in this new version - the fact that SACs no longer have an (almost) 3:3 correspondence is going to take its toll just like it does in Literature where people get to the end of the year and are like 'why were four out of five of these SACs basically irrelevant?' Granted the English ratio will be more like three useful SACs to two less than useful ones, but it's still a tad frustrating. The EAL outline is more than a little muddled too; I approve of splitting it off from English more definitively, but there's some weird stuff going on with the text selection and the assessment - apparently they won't be doing the Comparative bit on the exam, but still have the big 60% SAC in Unit 4, as well as the oral. If that's right, it means the entirety of Unit 4 for EAL students will have nothing to do with what will be on the exam... which seems... flawed at best.

Also, don't you love how VCAA will put a text like Stasiland on the list for four years under the current study design, and then put it on a different section of the new list and call it a 'first year text?' ::) That 2017 list made me kind of mad actually; half the "new" texts on there had either been on the English/Lit lists before, or were written by authors who'd been on the lists before. THERE ARE OTHER BOOKS, VCAA! I COULD GIVE YOU A LIST OF TWENTY WAY BETTER REPLACEMENTS JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD FFS I THOUGHT ENGLISH TEACHERS WERE MEANT TO BE WELL READ -.-
Just because YOU didn't write a low-scoring but fun creative piece!
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: keltingmeith on February 01, 2016, 10:20:51 pm
Just because YOU didn't write a low-scoring but fun creative piece!

This speaks to me on a personal level.
Except not, because I just made sure to write good and get a high-scoring creative piece.
 8)
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: literally lauren on February 01, 2016, 10:27:28 pm
Damn I did Stasiland for literature in 2011 they really like stealing texts from the literature list :P
Can't work out whether it's the Lit mob that are pilfering from English or vice versa. Either way they need to get some new books. I'm not knocking on Stasiland either; I think it's one of the better texts. And obviously there's always going to be some Shakespeare floating around, but there are certain authors (i.e. Kate Greenville, Geraldine Brooks, Margaret Atwood etc.) who, whilst good, shouldn't be on such a high frequency rotation. Hell, I like Arthur Miller but he's barely been off the lists for longer than a year... give the man a break.

Just because YOU didn't write a low-scoring but fun creative piece!
I did for both of my SACs :P And would've done in the exam if it weren't for the terrifying assessor who told me in Term 3 to stop messing about and write a goddamn expository piece...

This speaks to me on a personal level.
Except not, because I just made sure to write good and get a high-scoring creative piece.
OOOOOOOH! FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: Deshouka on February 01, 2016, 10:41:48 pm
Aww no more Wuthering Heights  :'(
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: shazziie on February 28, 2016, 07:02:15 pm
okay, please excuse the silly question but does this change apply to year 12 2017  NSW students as well ?  :P :P :P :P
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: literally lauren on February 28, 2016, 07:08:18 pm
okay, please excuse the silly question but does this change apply to year 12 2017  NSW students as well ?  :P :P :P :P
Nope! You New South Welshmen and Welshwomen have nothing to worry about - this is solely about the VCE curriculum, so very little of this will be applicable to you :) The HSC English Boards here will have relevant resources, guides, and question threads for you guys :)
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: coolaths on November 21, 2016, 10:59:00 pm
Thank you so much +literally lauren !!!!!!
I feel so much better now knowing what I need to do next year!
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: EvangelionZeta on December 24, 2016, 01:21:16 pm
This is a great guide illustrating the changes in the new curriculum for VCE English 3/4 - I do want to offer a few alternate points of view though.

The first is with regards to analysing argumen. The study design sounds mostly the same as with language analysis, but it does mention at one point analysis of the quality of "reasoning", which suggests to me that ~perhaps~ there might be some necessity to look at the logic of the piece and assess the soundness and validity of its argumentation (e.g. Are there gaps? Do they make logical leaps? Etc). I say perhaps because this would be a massive change and I think they would make a much bigger deal about it if it was a legit focus, but the frustrating thing about VCAA is that they're often vague until the next year's examiners report comes out so who the hell knows what the deal is.

The second thing I want to say is I actually strongly disagree with Lauren on comparative essay structure. I think it is a perfectly viable choice to have one paragraph (or even two) focus exclusively on one text in comparative; I did this in VCE Classical Studies (which had a comparative component much like this), where I got a 50, and did so in my university literary essays (and have read professional critics who do the same). The reasoning behind this approach is that sometimes, before you can get into the nitty gritty and thoroughly compare things, it is important to establish the "big picture" first.

For example, let's say 80% of both texts (let's say The Crucible and Year of Wonders) suggest devastating conflict arises from hysteria; in this case, it might be worthwhile to first flesh out the core ethos of the texts, and look in detail at the main picture they present through a thorough analysis of each. Often, when I did it this way, I'd have a paragraph on the first text in pure isolation, and then one on the second text focusing on it but with comparisons to the first sprinkled throughout the essay (some something like the 80-20 approach suggested by Lauren...but more like 90-10 really). Then, after you've done a paragraph (or two), you could have one, two, or even theee (preferably two or three tbh) going more microscopic and saying something like "in spite of the broad similarities, however, the two texts differ in that..." etc. 

The other strength of this approach is that it guarantees you go into sufficient detail on both texts to real give your analysis depth. From experience, a common issue people have when they constantly compare both texts in their essays in all paragraphs is that they aren't ever able to really fully flesh out analysis of one text, as they have to move on before they say something particularly interesting.

Note that I also think you can do an essay where you constantly compare throughout - I just want people to be wary of being prescriptive with their approach and saying there's only one right way of doing things (or that one approach is necessarily "pedestrian"), without considering the merits of both things.
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: hola on December 24, 2016, 03:40:48 pm
This is a great guide illustrating the changes in the new curriculum for VCE English 3/4 - I do want to offer a few alternate points of view though.

The first is with regards to analysing argumen. The study design sounds mostly the same as with language analysis, but it does mention at one point analysis of the quality of "reasoning", which suggests to me that ~perhaps~ there might be some necessity to look at the logic of the piece and assess the soundness and validity of its argumentation (e.g. Are there gaps? Do they make logical leaps? Etc). I say perhaps because this would be a massive change and I think they would make a much bigger deal about it if it was a legit focus, but the frustrating thing about VCAA is that they're often vague until the next year's examiners report comes out so who the hell knows what the deal is.

The second thing I want to say is I actually strongly disagree with Lauren on comparative essay structure. I think it is a perfectly viable choice to have one paragraph (or even two) focus exclusively on one text in comparative; I did this in VCE Classical Studies (which had a comparative component much like this), where I got a 50, and did so in my university literary essays (and have read professional critics who do the same). The reasoning behind this approach is that sometimes, before you can get into the nitty gritty and thoroughly compare things, it is important to establish the "big picture" first.

For example, let's say 80% of both texts (let's say The Crucible and Year of Wonders) suggest devastating conflict arises from hysteria; in this case, it might be worthwhile to first flesh out the core ethos of the texts, and look in detail at the main picture they present through a thorough analysis of each. Often, when I did it this way, I'd have a paragraph on the first text in pure isolation, and then one on the second text focusing on it but with comparisons to the first sprinkled throughout the essay (some something like the 80-20 approach suggested by Lauren...but more like 90-10 really). Then, after you've done a paragraph (or two), you could have one, two, or even theee (preferably two or three tbh) going more microscopic and saying something like "in spite of the broad similarities, however, the two texts differ in that..." etc. 

The other strength of this approach is that it guarantees you go into sufficient detail on both texts to real give your analysis depth. From experience, a common issue people have when they constantly compare both texts in their essays in all paragraphs is that they aren't ever able to really fully flesh out analysis of one text, as they have to move on before they say something particularly interesting.

Note that I also think you can do an essay where you constantly compare throughout - I just want people to be wary of being prescriptive with their approach and saying there's only one right way of doing things (or that one approach is necessarily "pedestrian"), without considering the merits of both things.

Hey EvangelionZeta! Thanks for your insight into the new study design. I have a question regarding your comparative structure; in your 2nd paragraph (where you talk about the 2nd text, with a "sprinkling" of the first), how would you go about that? If not too much of a hassle, could you please provide a brief plan of sorts? Also with the remaining paragraphs, would you just talk about differences or similarities too?
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: EvangelionZeta on December 24, 2016, 06:31:42 pm
^yeah you should talk about and focus on differences and similarities after the first paragraphs for sure.

Here's a sample of what a Classical Studies comparative essay looks like (from 2009, lol). Note that I was in year 11 so there are still some reasonably sized flaws in this, and also there's some history stuff in this essay cos Classical Studies requires you to discuss that too.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cwax4j6nldga9ud/Classical%20literature%20explores%20the%20attempts%20of%20individuals%20to%20deal%20with%20unbearable%20conflict.doc?dl=0

What I would probably do in transferring this structure to English is get rid of the two history paragraphs, and then expand the very last paragraph to at least two (dividing them up more clearly by particular themes of differences).
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: peterpiper on December 24, 2016, 07:17:12 pm
This is a great guide illustrating the changes in the new curriculum for VCE English 3/4 - I do want to offer a few alternate points of view though.

The first is with regards to analysing argumen. The study design sounds mostly the same as with language analysis, but it does mention at one point analysis of the quality of "reasoning", which suggests to me that ~perhaps~ there might be some necessity to look at the logic of the piece and assess the soundness and validity of its argumentation (e.g. Are there gaps? Do they make logical leaps? Etc). I say perhaps because this would be a massive change and I think they would make a much bigger deal about it if it was a legit focus, but the frustrating thing about VCAA is that they're often vague until the next year's examiners report comes out so who the hell knows what the deal is.

The second thing I want to say is I actually strongly disagree with Lauren on comparative essay structure. I think it is a perfectly viable choice to have one paragraph (or even two) focus exclusively on one text in comparative; I did this in VCE Classical Studies (which had a comparative component much like this), where I got a 50, and did so in my university literary essays (and have read professional critics who do the same). The reasoning behind this approach is that sometimes, before you can get into the nitty gritty and thoroughly compare things, it is important to establish the "big picture" first.

For example, let's say 80% of both texts (let's say The Crucible and Year of Wonders) suggest devastating conflict arises from hysteria; in this case, it might be worthwhile to first flesh out the core ethos of the texts, and look in detail at the main picture they present through a thorough analysis of each. Often, when I did it this way, I'd have a paragraph on the first text in pure isolation, and then one on the second text focusing on it but with comparisons to the first sprinkled throughout the essay (some something like the 80-20 approach suggested by Lauren...but more like 90-10 really). Then, after you've done a paragraph (or two), you could have one, two, or even theee (preferably two or three tbh) going more microscopic and saying something like "in spite of the broad similarities, however, the two texts differ in that..." etc. 

The other strength of this approach is that it guarantees you go into sufficient detail on both texts to real give your analysis depth. From experience, a common issue people have when they constantly compare both texts in their essays in all paragraphs is that they aren't ever able to really fully flesh out analysis of one text, as they have to move on before they say something particularly interesting.

Note that I also think you can do an essay where you constantly compare throughout - I just want people to be wary of being prescriptive with their approach and saying there's only one right way of doing things (or that one approach is necessarily "pedestrian"), without considering the merits of both things.

I actually prefer this method, because if you're a simple basic poop like me and can't deal with so many texts and their ideas at the same time, it's probably best if you focus on one thing at a time before realising effective links for further interesting discussion (for that lasting wow factor). But I probably wouldn't recommend structuring it so you have two BP for isolated discussion for both texts eg. one BP for text 1 and one BP for text 2, because examiners might take that as an inability to express ideas fluently.

This is an example of how I usually structure my comparatives for literature last year as well as classics.
BP 1: Text 1 100% (you would have to be selective which text you choose for a starting point for your discussion/essay)
BP 2: Text 1 60% + Text 2 40%
BP 3: Text 2 80% + Text 1 20%

And if you have time:
BP 4; Text 2 60% + Text 1 40% (for symmetry)

This way of structuring things help me register the prompt in a way where it would allow for fluid transitions between ideas from both texts...ie. like the first paragraph might be about love and its benefits (how Character A needs it to overcome daddy issues or whatever) as emphasised by text 1 ---> and then the second BP is talking about how we return to the properties of love and how diplomacy and communication was fundamental as seen with how Character B in text 1 overcame her marital issues etc, but then later in the paragraph you might add a poisonous relationship remarked in Text 2 and the implications of how the author of text 2 views love through the miserable death of Jane at the end (is love simply depicted as illusory? Why was it unsuccessful -- was it because they were too career-driven? What does this say about marriage in their society? Is text 1 naive in the way it portrays love? etc). idk something like that (I really didn't know where I was going with that, but hopefully you get what I mean there).

But it just gives you more time and space for making interesting and valid points in tandem with whatever prompt you get.

There's a number of ways you could structure an essay, but in this way, it's a lot easier, and I'd definitely recommend it for someone who likes to think slowly upon ideas before writing them down.
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: EvangelionZeta on December 24, 2016, 08:26:20 pm
I actually prefer this method, because if you're a simple basic poop like me and can't deal with so many texts and their ideas at the same time, it's probably best if you focus on one thing at a time before realising effective links for further interesting discussion (for that lasting wow factor). But I probably wouldn't recommend structuring it so you have two BP for isolated discussion for both texts eg. one BP for text 1 and one BP for text 2, because examiners might take that as an inability to express ideas fluently.

This is an example of how I usually structure my comparatives for literature last year as well as classics.
BP 1: Text 1 100% (you would have to be selective which text you choose for a starting point for your discussion/essay)
BP 2: Text 1 60% + Text 2 40%
BP 3: Text 2 80% + Text 1 20%

And if you have time:
BP 4; Text 2 60% + Text 1 40% (for symmetry)

This way of structuring things help me register the prompt in a way where it would allow for fluid transitions between ideas from both texts...ie. like the first paragraph might be about love and its benefits (how Character A needs it to overcome daddy issues or whatever) as emphasised by text 1 ---> and then the second BP is talking about how we return to the properties of love and how diplomacy and communication was fundamental as seen with how Character B in text 1 overcame her marital issues etc, but then later in the paragraph you might add a poisonous relationship remarked in Text 2 and the implications of how the author of text 2 views love through the miserable death of Jane at the end (is love simply depicted as illusory? Why was it unsuccessful -- was it because they were too career-driven? What does this say about marriage in their society? Is text 1 naive in the way it portrays love? etc). idk something like that (I really didn't know where I was going with that, but hopefully you get what I mean there).

But it just gives you more time and space for making interesting and valid points in tandem with whatever prompt you get.

There's a number of ways you could structure an essay, but in this way, it's a lot easier, and I'd definitely recommend it for someone who likes to think slowly upon ideas before writing them down.

Yeah this is definitely a strong and viable alternative as well. It's probably true you want to get into the constant comparative sooner rather than later because VCE examiners often subconsciously look for "tells" of higher or lower essays. I think the most important point is that people find what works for them, and just stick to that! :)
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: SnackPack on January 05, 2017, 09:31:43 pm
I would be very careful with the 'block' approach to a Comparative analysis. The examination specifications were released a couple of weeks ago and the examination criteria for Section B is quite specific:

Quote
• knowledge and understanding of both texts, and the ideas and issues they present
• discussion of meaningful connections, similarities or differences between the texts,
in response to the question
• use of textual evidence to support the comparative analysis
• control and effectiveness of language use, as appropriate to the task

Keep in mind that at the end of the year you'll be writing a response to an unseen topic and you'll only have sixty minutes writing time to do it. Within that sixty minutes you'll need to demonstrate knowledge and understanding of both texts. Also the second criterion; discussion of meaningful connections... etc etc. Do you think its possible to create a detailed comparison between texts in an exam based scenario if you are spending one or two of your key body paragraphs only discussing one text?

Given that this is the first year of the new study design at Year 12 level, I would suggest that VCAA are being quite obvious in what they are looking for with their exam criteria. I'd also look at Insight's English Year 12 textbook. You can get it new for just under $50 on the Insight website. I haven't seen any on eBay yet but you might strike gold. That textbook gives some great pointers about the Block approach vs Integrated approach when it comes to Comparative essay writing.

My recommendation is that the core of the task is asking you to compare and so the brain dead obvious thing you should be doing from the get-go is drawing comparisons. You can still 'paint the picture' or 'focus more on one text' or whatever it is you want to do, but I would ensure that you are focusing on identifying similarities and differences between your texts from the outset.

This is coming from a teacher and head of department by the way. :)
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: literally lauren on January 24, 2017, 10:54:20 am
The first is with regards to analysing argumen. The study design sounds mostly the same as with language analysis, but it does mention at one point analysis of the quality of "reasoning", which suggests to me that ~perhaps~ there might be some necessity to look at the logic of the piece and assess the soundness and validity of its argumentation (e.g. Are there gaps? Do they make logical leaps? Etc). I say perhaps because this would be a massive change and I think they would make a much bigger deal about it if it was a legit focus, but the frustrating thing about VCAA is that they're often vague until the next year's examiners report comes out so who the hell knows what the deal is.
Yeah, I wasn't sure if they were actually going to start allowing for a genuine unpacking of effective rhetoric and logic, but it seems like they're still very anti-evaluation, unfortunately.
(some pretty boring af videos of senior teachers talking about the changes - more or less confirms it's a shift in focus from L.A. but not a substantial overhaul :/ )

Apparently there'll be a sample exam published "in Term 1" at some stage, so should have more clarity then :)

The second thing I want to say is I actually strongly disagree with Lauren on comparative essay structure. I think it is a perfectly viable choice to have one paragraph (or even two) focus exclusively on one text in comparative; I did this in VCE Classical Studies (which had a comparative component much like this), where I got a 50, and did so in my university literary essays (and have read professional critics who do the same). The reasoning behind this approach is that sometimes, before you can get into the nitty gritty and thoroughly compare things, it is important to establish the "big picture" first.

For example, let's say 80% of both texts (let's say The Crucible and Year of Wonders) suggest devastating conflict arises from hysteria; in this case, it might be worthwhile to first flesh out the core ethos of the texts, and look in detail at the main picture they present through a thorough analysis of each. Often, when I did it this way, I'd have a paragraph on the first text in pure isolation, and then one on the second text focusing on it but with comparisons to the first sprinkled throughout the essay (some something like the 80-20 approach suggested by Lauren...but more like 90-10 really). Then, after you've done a paragraph (or two), you could have one, two, or even theee (preferably two or three tbh) going more microscopic and saying something like "in spite of the broad similarities, however, the two texts differ in that..." etc. 

The other strength of this approach is that it guarantees you go into sufficient detail on both texts to real give your analysis depth. From experience, a common issue people have when they constantly compare both texts in their essays in all paragraphs is that they aren't ever able to really fully flesh out analysis of one text, as they have to move on before they say something particularly interesting.

Note that I also think you can do an essay where you constantly compare throughout - I just want people to be wary of being prescriptive with their approach and saying there's only one right way of doing things (or that one approach is necessarily "pedestrian"), without considering the merits of both things.
Absolutely, I'm not suggesting an integrated approach would be the only viable method, but I think it's one worth striving for since there's been soooo much emphasis placed on the marks for comparison. Not sure if they've finalised the criteria for this AOS yet, but I'm pretty confident that next year's assessor's report will be railing against "the tendency for students to spend too much time analysing each text in isolation at the expense of making connections between them" or something to that effect.

That said, a really erratic approach where you're jumping between both texts every couple of sentences would also be phenomenally disadvantageous, so getting the balance right will probably be a key separating factor between mid and high range pieces.

Yeah this is definitely a strong and viable alternative as well. It's probably true you want to get into the constant comparative sooner rather than later because VCE examiners often subconsciously look for "tells" of higher or lower essays. I think the most important point is that people find what works for them, and just stick to that! :)
^^
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: Carolacat on March 30, 2017, 02:43:32 pm
Is there a new version of this excellent article on atar notes?
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: Corey King on September 04, 2020, 10:58:59 am
Anyone know if this will be updated for the 2021 curriculum? :)
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: literally lauren on September 04, 2020, 11:40:57 am
Hey Corey, the English study design has actually been extended until the end of 2022, so all of this info is still relevant! :) The only things that have changed are the set texts, but the curriculum itself will be the same :)
Title: Re: English Study Design 2017-2020 Breakdown
Post by: Corey King on September 14, 2020, 02:18:06 pm
Hey Corey, the English study design has actually been extended until the end of 2022, so all of this info is still relevant! :) The only things that have changed are the set texts, but the curriculum itself will be the same :)

Oh sweet, thank you for letting me know Lauren :)