Should English Really Be Under Timed Conditions?

[Geoo]

Here's the thing, I love writing (especially creative) and I feel that being rushed to write an essay or any other pieces of work is just ruins everything.
If I take the time to write out a good essay and make sure everything is nicely done, it can come out a great. However, when I have to rush through doing an essay, things are bound to not be so high quality. I know that some people can get really good at writing amazing essays quickly, and it is a better to assess peoples ability's in the subject, but I just don't think is should be timed.

Imagine what having the time could do to your essays! I don't mean that you have forever to do them, but if you had a day to get a solid essay down instead of 1 hour, I believe it could make a dramatic difference.

So what do you guys think?

[Snow Leopard]

Yeah, I agree with you in that having more time will probably produce better essays, but at the same time how could you hold an examination for a whole day? And if it wasn't under exam conditions, wouldn't that result in cheating or sharing of ideas etc.

[DrDusk]

I believe the Subject is a waste of time for people trying to pursue something in STEM so it would be even better if they make it non compulsory and people who want to can do it.

[Aaron]

I don't agree with the idea of writing multiple essays in different areas during one exam session. I see time and time again comments re: memorising quotes, memorising whole essays and jesus that defeats the purpose of why we assess in the first place, to see what we know, not what we can regurgitate.

I don't mind the idea of time-based assessment in moderation but the English exam packs way too much into it. I think the way which VCAA assesses students in the end of year exams (in general) is wrong purely because it causes unjust anxiety and forces students to go on the defensive rather than genuinely demonstrate what they know. Just my thoughts on it anyway.

I was never any good at English purely because (like DrDusk has mentioned) I am STEM-inclined and my key strength is computing/IT but variety is good - I would argue that nothing is a 'waste of time' if you are positively learning from the subject. I'm glad they're undertaking a massive review of VCE English purely because it's the only compulsory subject in the VCE program (which imo it shouldn't be) but it may address some shortfalls currently present.

[Geoo]

Yeah, I agree with you in that having more time will probably produce better essays, but at the same time how could you hold an examination for a whole day? And if it wasn't under exam conditions, wouldn't that result in cheating or sharing of ideas etc.

Completely forgot about plagiarism when I made the comment on a day, but in general maybe having the 3 essays split up with longer writing periods and breaks in between? But yes, that would be a problem.

I believe the Subject is a waste of time for people trying to pursue something in STEM so it would be even better if they make it non compulsory and people who want to can do it.

I wouldn't say it is a waste of time as everyone needs english skills, however does it need to be in the top 4, no.
I'm also a STEM student and would rather english be taught to me for skills needed in the future, e.g writing reports.

I don't agree with the idea of writing multiple essays in different areas during one exam session. I see time and time again comments re: memorising quotes, memorising whole essays and jesus that defeats the purpose of why we assess in the first place, to see what we know, not what we can regurgitate.

I don't mind the idea of time-based assessment in moderation but the English exam packs way too much into it. I think the way which VCAA assesses students in the end of year exams (in general) is wrong purely because it causes unjust anxiety and forces students to go on the defensive rather than genuinely demonstrate what they know. Just my thoughts on it anyway.

I was never any good at English purely because (like DrDusk has mentioned) I am STEM-inclined and my key strength is computing/IT but variety is good - I would argue that nothing is a 'waste of time' if you are positively learning from the subject. I'm glad they're undertaking a massive review of VCE English purely because it's the only compulsory subject in the VCE program (which imo it shouldn't be) but it may address some shortfalls currently present.

Definitely agree with you there! What they want you to know and regurgitate is ridiculous and doesn't teach you much other than how to do an exam..
I do think that this is the case for alot of subject though at the moment, with more emphasis of memorisation and regurgitation. The exam should be split up, another thing I don't think people realise is the amount of strain hands can get from writing that fast for so long, and it compromises performance if your in pain.

[DrDusk]

I'm also a STEM student and would rather english be taught to me for skills needed in the future, e.g writing reports. Definitely agree with you there! What they want you to know and regurgitate is ridiculous and doesn't teach you much other than how to do an exam..

I disagree. I don't know about the VCE English but the HSC English teaches no actual English skills. It is a literature study for us and quite frankly I never payed attention in any of the English classes ever except year 12 and still scored in the highest band in Naplan for English. I did not gain these skills from studying the subject because I never did anything for it ever except for HSC.

As for writing reports and what not. It does not require me to write a full out essay including fancy language and whatever. All they ask for is appropriate equations and concise explanations which was taught to me not in English. English has had no impact on by ability to write scientific reports to be honest.

[Sine]

Untimed conditions are impossible. I think if you were to at least lengthen the amount of time you got students would not treat it as a "3 hour exam but we have extra time" but they would think it's a 6 hour exam and that would be an increase in length/quality of every essay so I don't think it would make much of a difference.

Personally, whilst I definitely can see how students can be anxious about timings for exams and more time could benefit I don't think this is the answer for that as the quality would need to be better given the time so I don't see how that helps people rushing. The only way to counteract that is to have a word limit.

[J_Rho]

How about we make English NOT in our top 4 - so it contributes to our ATAR just as much/little as any other subject?

[Ionic Doc]

I feel like they should asses English similar to how they assess maths.

Exam 1: Text Response
Exam 2: Comparative Writing
Exam 3: Language Analysis

I feel like this would make a huge difference!
It seems unfair to just jam a bunch of essays in a 3 hour period. . .

does it need to be in the top 4, no.

I get where you're coming from, but if English wasn't in our top 4 then. would anyone really 'try' in the subject? 
It's one of those subjects where you do have to devote and apply yourself. Just some of my thoughts idk

 

[milanander]

If english wasn't examined under timed conditions, then we'd be required to write much longer & thoroughly planned out responses which turns from just an essay to a freaking thesis. I'd rather just take the 3hrs and get it over and done with.