2018 AA Club- Week 14

[clarke54321]

Background: With the annual NAPLAN impending, The Guardian's Dan Hogan published an opinion piece seeking to highlight the test's inability to appreciate the holistic learning that occurs in the classroom. Below is an excerpt from this piece and an accompanying visual.

Naplan's writing tasks are crude and arbitrary. As teachers we feel voiceless.

With Naplan examinations imminent, anxieties high and results down, it is fair to question the purpose and place of standardised testing in Australia.

Governing authorities such as Nesa, Acara and the NSW Department of Education have long refused to release the methods in which Naplan exams are marked, leaving teachers and students in the dark. However, this is all about to change - at least for writing tests. In a report written by leading US education academic, Les Perelman, and commissioned by the NSW Teachers Federation, Naplan’s methodology has been given a forensic analysis.

In the report, Perelman describes Naplan’s graded writing objectives as “extremely limited and highly reductive” before exploring these concerns. His essay writing guide is as cynical as it is bare bones fact. Perelman’s “cheat sheet” not only provides a tried and tested method for succeeding at Naplan essay writing, it exposes the poor pedagogical practices inflicted on students in the classroom as a result of Naplan and its ensuing pressures. The 15 points provided by Perelman are no secret to teachers who have dealt with standardised tests time and time again. The crudeness and arbitrary nature in which Naplan writing tasks are delivered and assessed undermines effective teaching and learning. But yet, schools are pressured into spending copious amounts of time and resources analysing results, entering data, and teaching to the tests and data. In my experience, the heavy weight placed on capricious data and standardised testing (not just Naplan) has left both teachers and students at a loss.

It will be music to educator’s ears to read Perelman’s evidence-based proclamation that children’s spelling is best taught via a rich exposure to texts – as opposed to time-heavy spelling tests and phonics training, which usually lurch on the side of absurd due to their lack of context.
The report titled Testing to the Teaching goes further, casting shade over the lack of public documentation regarding Naplan’s design; information that would be useful given that Naplan appears to have been built in a vacuum without any known consultation. Curiously, Naplan utilises an excessive 10-point scale for marking essays.

“It is difficult to see how totalling these 10 categories with different weights could represent any commonly held consensus of a writing construct. Writing exists to communicate ideas and information. Yet Ideas [sic] is given only five marks, while spelling is given six,” writes Perelman.

At this stage of the year, I would encourage you all to have a go at marking someone else's work! Sometimes it can be just as good as writing. You'll thank yourselves when you receive your English SS 

[Anonymous]

That the Australian wide NAPLAN gives an accurate measure of learning and education quality is met with equally widespread doubt. Dan Hogan’s opinion piece in The Guardian (n.d.) contends that the use of NAPLAN is “crude and arbitrary”. His authoritative and declarative tone is directed members of the education industry, namely teachers students and parents as well as towards the various state and Federal governments. This is also reflected in its formal and informative style. There is the underlying intention of Hogan to have his audience convert to a different writing enrichment approach, however he attempts to avoid too much affirmation of his position of authority to avoid marring his piece with the semblance of bias as he is a teacher.

Hogan’s intention to be clear and concise in order to avoid confusion in what is considered a complex issue is reflected the statement of contention at the very beginning. By introducing the contention that NAPLAN is “crude and arbitrary” Hogan avoids this message being lost in the jargon and myriad arguments he presents. This is meant to ensure that his audience can read the piece with clarity and avoids putting potential readers off through vagueness or convoluted points. Interestingly the ‘we’ doesn’t intend to include the reader but instead present a united front of teachers to the reader, in order to make the teachers’ contention more appealing as well as establish the expertise of Hogan as a teacher. He uses his stake in the issue to present himself as knowledgeable without emphasising his career. He avoids this as to prevent the appearance of bias.

In order the counterbalance the acceptance of the NAPLAN in Australian society Hogan attempts to legitimise his analysis of it. The antithetical statement of ‘anxieties high and results down’ further intends to justify his choice of topic by portraying the NAPLAN as currently ineffective, painful and counterintuitive, which is unappealing on a personal level to the reader as it appeals to the notion of time is money. This is then reinforced by the appeal to logic the secedes it, as by arguing that ‘it is fair to question’ the NAPLAN, Hogan implies to the audience that there are already substantial flaws. 

There is a juxtaposition between the varying experts by acknowledging “NESA, ACARA and the NSW Department of Education’ yet portraying them as inferior to “Les Perelman’ and the “NSW Teachers Federation” by using words such  as “leading” and “academic” to elevate Perelman to a more authoritative status. This juxtaposition is framed to argue that  there is change happening to the NAPLAN system and that change is positive. It also preemptively rebuts potential objections of NAPLAN being a tried and true system, whilst supporting Hogan’s contention that NAPLAN is crude and uninformative with expert opinion. Additionally, he draws on the metaphor that “students [are] in the dark” which attempts to engage the audience as well as acting as a hyperbole to make the situation seem dire. Hogan later draws on a similar metaphor of “casting shade” and the repetition of this light and dark motif not only help create a visual image in the readers’ minds but also play into the connotations of light and dark with good and bad, subtly reinforcing the author’s position.

Hogan attacks the NAPLAN system, accusing it of being too data based and formulaic. Hogan repeats the words  ‘essay’, ‘test’ and ‘data’, particularly in the sentence ‘time and resources analysing of results…data… tests and data’ which intends to create a atmosphere around NAPLAN that it is bureaucratic and uninspired, which is unappealing to the reader. This is supported by the loaded language used that feeds into a negative image of NAPLAN, including ‘pedagogical’, ‘inflicted’, ‘cynical’ and ‘bare bones fact’. This intends to have the reader conclude that the NAPLAN system is ineffective.

This attack is sustained by the accompanying visual. The centralising of the children gives the impression that they should come first, however the similar colour palette, as so the children almost blend into their surroundings, amplifies the notion that they are being forgotten and left behind by the NAPLAN system. The pigtails of one of the children, a traditional happy-go-lucky motif of innocent girls, fosters the image that the students submitted to the NAPLAN are unfairly treated by the system.

Beginning his argument regarding the foolishness of keeping NAPLAN while there are better options with a cliche, Hogan is adopting an almost mocking tone. The concept that this new paradigm  will be ‘music to educator’s ears’ lays the impression that where the potential system is melodious in nature, the current system is distinctly unimpressive, which attempts to align the reader with the view that a new system should be adopted. referring back to ‘evidence -based’ information gives the author some credence in suggesting an alternative. There is also a denigration of the present system with negatively connotated lexemes of ‘time heavy’ and ‘lurch being associated with it, while a proposed system is described as ‘rich’.

To conclude his argument, Hogan emphasises his position of authority by the use of jargon, notably ‘writing construct’ that imply to the reader that all that he is saying and has said can be trusted as he is a person with expertise. This is accompanied by additional in depth knowledge, which the audience is unlikely to be aware of further attempts to establish him as a trusted figure.

Thank you in advance for your advice and feedback. Please be as harsh as you like - I need to improve. I wrote this in 40 minutes with about 10 minutes planning time.

[Anonymous]

The NAPLAN is intended to be a national exam to assess numeracy and literacy levels of students, however as this years NAPLAN approaches, many are questioning its validity of the writing tasks. Dan Hogan, a teacher, writes an opinion piece published in The Guardian declaring that standardised tests such as the NAPLAN have no place in Australia. He questions the marking objectivity of marking and instead suggests an alternate strategy for measuring student attainment.

Hogan begins by questioning the legitimacy of writing tests and suggesting that they are doing more harm than good. He reassures readers that ‘it is fair’ to question if standardised testing is necessary in Australia. This immediately implies to readers that there are other who are thinking the same thing. He appeals to his target audience of parents and teachers with the words ‘anxieties high and results down’. By clearly stating two things that both parents and teachers do not want to see in children, Hogan demands continued attention and pushes them to continue reading the article. Hogan continues his appeal to parents and educators by including an image of children sitting in a classroom. The photo is taken from behind the uniformed children, features that identify them as individuals are absent, instead leaving them as standardised as the tests Hogan is arguing against. The students are slumped over their desks, a portrayal of the stress Hogan attributes to NAPLAN. They do not have work in front of them and do not appear productive which reinforces Hogan’s argument that the NAPLAN does not improve academic ability and does not improve results. This bleak image of children contrasts with how parents normally see their own children and reinforces Hogan’s assertation that NAPLAN does more harm than good.

Hogan intends to reinforce his authority as a teacher whilst outraging parents that nothing has been done. He builds trust by telling readers that the report he is quoting is ‘bare-bones fact’ which is intended to convey to readers that Hogan’s article is similarly unbiased. He reinforces the authoritative tone of his piece by presenting all teachers as a united front, showing undecided educators and parents that the majority oppose NAPLAN. He continues to say that the points outlined in the report are ‘no secret’ to teachers. This suggests to parents that the NAPLAN is known to be irrelevant and ineffective, it may outrage some parents who did not previously know this. This outrage is intended to lead to them finding out more about NAPLAN and potentially talking to others to find out more about the NAPLAN. By presenting teachers as a united front and suggesting that this is a known issue, Hogan intends to leave his audience wondering why we aren’t doing better.

Hogan attacks the evidence behind the NAPLAN. He suggests that the NAPLAN was ‘built in a vacuum without any known consultation.’ This contrasts with the authority readers perceive him, as a teacher, to have. The audience is intended to recognise him as a voice for all teachers, giving his opinion authority. Readers are intended to recognise teachers as experts on how children learn, and so Hogan tries to convey his bewilderment that they were not consulted. He continues to highlight his bewilderment over teachers being ignored by telling the audience that the revelation that spelling tests are not the best way to learn is ‘music to educators’ ears’, implying that teachers were aware of the ineffectiveness of the method.

Through his authority as a teacher, Dan Hogan expresses his bewilderment over the lack of consultation during the creation of the NAPLAN. He insinuates that the written tests are a worthless measure of a students ability in order to suggest that standardised testing has no place in Australia.



Thank You!

[MissSmiley]

Thanks to Clarke for starting the AA club again!

In response to the impending Naplan testing and Les Perelman’s Naplan writing guide, The Guardian’s Dan Hogan fervently contends in his opinion piece that Naplan testing is not always standardised or relevant to real life context; it is merely a pressure on schools and students. His sardonic tone later shifts to an earnest one as he portrays to teachers, parents of students and the Government’s education department of Naplan’s lack of consideration for real life implication. An image of students sitting in a classroom seeks to aggrandise the writer’s argument.

With the intent of casting Naplan testing as rudimentary and an absurd method of education, Hogan begins his piece with an appeal to teaching and education values and the logic associated with these values. The antithetical juxtaposition “anxieties high and results down” carry undertones of fear and a lack of mental health balance. In turn, teachers are likely to feel apprehensive about their students sitting Naplan. Referencing reputable governing authorities such as “Nesa, Acara and the NSW Department of Education” but then claiming that their methods “leave teachers and students in the dark - the idiom implying uncertainty in our education system – the writer seeks to make teachers and parents of students feel despaired. This is because the writer questions whether high credentialed organisations such as the ones aforementioned can actually be trusted to control student’s education, for their “extremely limited and highly reductive” Naplan grading systems which are “crude” – the adjective carrying connotations of unprofessionalism and dryness that lacks consideration of students’ mental wellbeing and worldly knowledge. This sardonicism seeks to galvanise Hogan’s readership to protest against Naplan testing, contributing to the testing’s upheaval and hence eventual disappearance in our education curricula.

Mirroring Les Perelman’s sense of authority – a leading US education academic – Hogan sympathises with school teachers by using the agentless passive “are pressured into” - with its connotations of entrapment and coercion – to depict Naplan’s “capricious data and standardised testing” as a burden for teachers who must “analyse results, enter data” and use “copious amounts of time” at the expense of critically reviewing whether Naplan testing is fulfilling contextual relevance for students’ academic development. Hogan’s providing of solidarity is likely to help teachers realise that their efforts are being exploited in return for supporting a system that has been “built in a vacuum,” reflecting its “absurd” lack of conviction for helping students who need to “communicate ideas” in the 21st century. The image also intends to magnify Hogan’s argument that Naplan testing is not in the best interests of students. The young students with papers on benches and their backs towards the camera, symbolise hopelessness and apathy towards education; they seem unwilling to participate in this type of education and perhaps fear of it. This is likely to encourage teachers to refute Naplan testing in their schools and instead remodel their focus on a different type of testing which is practical to real life.

The shift to an earnest tone is intended to prompt action to investigate the implied unreliability of the expert claim “ideas is given only five marks, while spelling is given six.” Teachers are likely to empathise with Hogan’s critiquing and hence are likely to advocate for banning Naplan, taking side with Hogan.

Thank you very much!

[MissSmiley]

The NAPLAN is intended to be a national exam to assess numeracy and literacy levels of students good that you've explained what NAPLAN is, but probably won't need to in a SAC however as this years NAPLAN approaches, many are questioning its validity of the writing tasks. maybe 'the validity of its written tasks'? Dan Hogan, a teacher, writes an opinion piece published in The Guardian declaring that standardised tests such as the NAPLAN have no place in Australia. is this really the contention? Also, 'declaring' seems too strong and basically is his argument that strong as in 'no place in Australia'? Just my thoughts. But I really like this next sentence and that's an excellent signpost of his contention! -->He questions the marking objectivity objectivity of marking ? of marking and instead suggests an alternative strategy for measuring student attainment.

Hogan begins by questioning the legitimacy of writing tests and suggesting that they are doing more harm than good. He reassures readers that ‘it is fair’ to question if standardised testing is necessary in Australia. This immediately implies to readers that there are other who are thinking the same thing. this makes it sound like everyone's afraid or 'unfair' to critique Naplan. So maybe delete these two lines? also, they don't really add to your topic sentence, so just try and stick to proving only your topic sen. He aims to appeals to his target audience of parents and teachers with the words ‘anxieties high and results down’. By clearly stating two things that both parents and teachers do not want to see in children, Hogan demands continued attention and pushes them to continue reading the article. unnecessary/ obvious analysis Hogan continues his appeal to parents and educators by including an image of children sitting in a classroom I think you can experiment a bit with cohesive ties between your sentences i.e. link words, just to improve your sentence flow The photo is taken from behind the uniformed children, features that identify them as individuals are absent, instead leaving them as standardised as the tests Hogan is arguing against. I don't understand this The students are slumped over their desks, a portrayal of the stress Hogan attributes to NAPLAN. nice interpretation! wow I didn't go that deep into it!  They do not have work in front of them and do not appear productive which reinforces Hogan’s argument that the NAPLAN does not improve academic ability and does not improve results. This bleak image of children contrasts with how parents normally see their own children and reinforces Hogan’s assertation that NAPLAN does more harm than good. I like some of the points in your image analysis, but you might be just analysing it too deeply! to the point where you're just imagining things your own way, for example 'they don't appear productive...' Don't make judgements. Sorry if I sound confusing!

Hogan intends to reinforce his authority as a teacher whilst outraging parents unclear and informal that nothing has been done. He attempts to make sure you don't sound 'speculative,' - as Clarke would use this lovely word  builds trust by telling readers that the report he is quoting is ‘bare-bones fact’ which is intended to convey to readers that Hogan’s article is similarly unbiased no, I don't see that this is the effect of it. He reinforces the authoritative tone of his piece by presenting all teachers as a united front, showing undecided educators I don't understand this and parents that the majority oppose NAPLAN. He continues to say that the points outlined in the report are ‘no secret’ to teachers. This suggests to parents that the NAPLAN is known to be irrelevant and ineffective you say this a bit, but maybe a bit careful, because you don't have legitimate evidence to prove that naplan was always 'known to be irrelevant...' it may outrage some parents who did not previously know this. This outrage is intended to lead to them finding out more about NAPLAN and potentially talking to others to find out more about the NAPLAN. By presenting teachers as a united front and suggesting that this is a known issue, Hogan intends to leave his audience wondering why we aren’t doing better. You could've made a stronger topic sentence I feel, just to include some strong analysis about connotations behind words or some of the adjectives that Hogan uses. But just my suggestion

Hogan attacks the evidence behind the NAPLAN. He suggests that the NAPLAN was ‘built in a vacuum without any known consultation.’ This contrasts with the authority readers perceive him, as a teacher, to have. When you say 'evidence behind Naplan' do you mean 'its marking criteria' or something like that? What do you mean? Also, just make your sentences flow rather than having simple, abrupt sentences one after the other.  The audience is intended to recognise him as a voice for all teachers, giving his opinion authority. Readers are intended to recognise teachers as experts on how children learn, and so Hogan tries to convey his bewilderment that they were not consulted.He continues to highlight his bewilderment over teachers being ignored by telling the audience that the revelation that spelling tests are not the best way to learn is ‘music to educators’ ears’, implying that teachers were aware of the ineffectiveness of  the method. what method? the rigid spelling tests, etc. You need to quote evidence here to make your expression clearer

Through his authority as a teacher, Dan Hogan expresses his bewilderment over the lack of consultation during the creation of the NAPLAN. He insinuates that the written tests are a worthless measure of a students ability ok this is something different you are introducing that you haven't talked about in your paras. in your intro you said 'marking objectivity.' You could've talked more about this and what you meant by this, in your paras. in order to suggest that standardised testing has no place in Australia.



Thank You!

Hi there!
I like how you've taken your own take on this and the background knowledge you introduce in your writing. However, it just gets a bit too much sometimes and that's why you might not be building upon your topic sentence. Link everything back to your topic sentence.
Also, just include more linking words to connect your sentences a bit, so avoid them sounding abrupt...

Please please note, I'm a Year 12 student myself, so definitely very far from perfect, so please just take everything as a suggestion
And obviously, everything's easier said than done right?!!
So just practice is the key !

[MissSmiley]

That the These starting words make this sentence confusing. Maybe like "Australian NAPLAN's measures of learning are currently questionable?" Is that the gist of your opening? Australian wide NAPLAN gives an accurate measure of learning and education quality is met with equally widespread doubt. Dan Hogan’s opinion piece in The Guardian (n.d.) contends that the use of NAPLAN testing is “crude and arbitrary”. His authoritative and declarative tone is directed towards members of the education industry, namely teachers students and parents as well as towards the various state and Federal governments. This is also reflected in its formal and informative style. There is the underlying intention of Hogan to have his audience convert to a different writing enrichment approach, however he attempts to avoid too much affirmation of his position of authority to avoid marring his piece with the semblance of bias as he is a teacher. Yeah I really like these last two lines! But maybe save this for the body paras

Hogan’s intention to be clear and concise in order to avoid confusion is this his absolutely necessary purpose? maybe write about his first argument here which would make it a stronger topic sentence. in what is considered a complex issue is reflected the statement of contention at the very beginning. By introducing the contention that NAPLAN is “crude and arbitrary” Hogan avoids this message being lost in the jargon and myriad arguments he presents this sounds good, but is it absolutely necessary to mention this as a part of 'analysis'? This is meant to ensure that his audience can read the piece with clarity and avoids putting potential readers off through vagueness or convoluted points. Interestingly the ‘we’ doesn’t intend to include the reademaybe don't say this, because you don't know for sure. The readers may be parents of students, not just teachers. r but instead present a united front of teachers to the reader, in order to make the teachers’ contention what does this mean? more appealing as well as establish the expertise of Hogan as a teacher. He uses his stake in the issue to present himself as knowledgeable without emphasising his career. He avoids this as to prevent the appearance of bias. How does this add to his argument? Link everything to a central argument to do with NAPLAN.

In order the to counterbalance the acceptance of the NAPLAN in Australian society Hogan attempts to legitimise his analysis of it. The antithetical statement of ‘anxieties high and results down’ further intends to justify his choice of topic by portraying the NAPLAN as currently ineffective, painful and counterintuitive, this is really good! which is unappealing on a personal level to the reader as it appeals to the notion of time is money. Do you think so? I didn't think this was the effect. This is then reinforced by the appeal to logic the secedes it, as by arguing that ‘it is fair to question’ the NAPLAN, Hogan implies to the audience that there are already substantial flaws. 

There is a juxtaposition between the varying experts by acknowledging “NESA, ACARA and the NSW Department of Education’ yet portraying them as inferior to “Les Perelman’ and the “NSW Teachers Federation” by using words such  as “leading” and “academic” to elevate Perelman to a more authoritative status. This juxtaposition is framed to argue that  there is change happening to the NAPLAN system and that change is positive. Firstly I like this juxtaposition thing, but I don't think the effect is this. Yes I agree, with elevating Perelman's status but then link this to how Perelman has similar arguments to Hogan and that's why Hogan has selected evidence from Perelman. But I don't think so for the 'positive change' effect though It also preemptively rebuts potential objections of NAPLAN being a tried and true system, whilst supporting Hogan’s contention that NAPLAN is crude and uninformative with expert opinion. Additionally, he draws on the metaphor that “students [are] in the dark” which attempts to engage the audience as well as acting as a hyperbole to make the situation seem dire. Hogan later draws on a similar metaphor of “casting shade” and the repetition of this light and dark motif not only help create a visual image in the readers’ minds but also play into the connotations of light and dark with good and bad, subtly reinforcing the author’s position. Lovely writing about the metaphor, but link this to how the audience would feel and what they are likely to do as a result of reading this.

Hogan attacks the NAPLAN system, accusing it of being too data based and formulaic. Hogan repeats the words  ‘essay’, ‘test’ and ‘data’, particularly in the sentence ‘time and resources analysing of results…data… tests and data’ which intends to create a atmosphere around NAPLAN that it is bureaucratic and uninspired, which is unappealing to the reader. This is supported by the loaded language used that feeds into a negative image of NAPLAN, including ‘pedagogical’, ‘inflicted’, ‘cynical’ and ‘bare bones fact’. This intends to have the reader conclude that the NAPLAN system is ineffective. Rather than quoting so much evidence and language techniques, maybe just pick out two and unpack their connotations, impact on audience and likely action

This attack is sustained by the accompanying visual. The centralising of the children gives the impression that they should come first, however the similar colour palette, as so the children almost blend into their surroundings, amplifies the notion that they are being forgotten and left behind by the NAPLAN system. The pigtails of one of the children, a traditional happy-go-lucky motif of innocent girls, fosters the image that the students submitted to the NAPLAN are unfairly treated by the system. Try and just write about the more obvious features of the image. I really like your point about children being forgotten, but maybe link this to how they've got their backs to the camera.

Beginning his argument r Now you've talked about the 'beginning' of his argument towards the very end of your piece. This just doesn't sound coherent enough. Try introducing this argument earlier. egarding the foolishness of keeping NAPLAN while there are better options with a cliche what cliche?, Hogan is adopting an almost mocking tone. The concept that this new paradigm  will be ‘music to educator’s ears’ lays the impression that where the potential system is melodious in nature, the current system is distinctly unimpressive, which attempts to align the reader with the view that a new system should be adopted. yes! This is really good! referring back to ‘evidence -based’ information gives the author some credence in suggesting an alternative. There is also a denigration of the present system with negatively connotated lexemes of ‘time heavy’ and ‘lurch being associated with it, while a proposed system is described as ‘rich’. this sentence seems 'tacked on' and a bit incomplete.

To conclude his argument, Hogan emphasises his position of authority by the use of jargon, notably ‘writing construct’ I don't think this is jargon.  that imply to the reader that all that he is saying and has said can be trusted as he is a person with expertise. This is accompanied by additional in depth knowledge, which the audience is unlikely to be aware of further attempts to establish him as a trusted figure.

Thank you in advance for your advice and feedback. Please be as harsh as you like - I need to improve. I wrote this in 40 minutes with about 10 minutes planning time.

Hi there,
Really good points coming through this here!
I do sometimes feel though you focus more on what the 'author' desires to do with their identity, status etc, rather than focus on how the 'audience' feel and are likely to do as a result of reading his piece.
Yes you should focus on author, but like the proportion is 10-90. (90 is the audience part you should focus on).
Just insert like two lines somewhere in your piece about the author using their credentials to portray their point... and then move straight to their argument, audience analysis and effect.
And also I feel that you could even step back a little bit with using language techniques and examples, and instead just focus on 2 or 3 per para and really zoom into these analysing their impact on audience.

Please please take these as suggestions only - I'm in Year 12 as well, so far from perfect!!
Thanks!
(Hope I wasn't too picky! )

[Anonymous]

In response to the impending Naplan testing and Les Perelman’s Naplan writing guide, The Guardian’s Dan Hogan fervently (great word) contends in his opinion piece that Naplan testing is not always standardised or relevant to real life context; it is merely a pressure on schools and students (this is a very long contention, could it be summed up more concisely?). His sardonic tone later shifts to an earnest one as he portrays to teachers, parents of students and the Government’s education department of Naplan’s lack of consideration for real life implication. An image of students sitting in a classroom seeks to aggrandise the writer’s argument. (target audience? style?)

With the intent of casting Naplan testing as rudimentary and an absurd method of education, Hogan begins his piece with an appeal to teaching and education values and the logic associated with these values. The antithetical juxtaposition “anxieties high and results down” carry undertones of fear and a lack of mental health balance (clumsy wording, perhaps: a deterioration of the mental health balance). In turn, teachers are likely to feel apprehensive about their students sitting Naplan( … your point here is unclear). Referencing reputable governing authorities such as “Nesa, Acara and the NSW Department of Education” but then claiming that their methods “leave teachers and students in the dark - the idiom implying uncertainty in our education system (I think this is unnecessary) – the writer seeks to make teachers and parents of students feel despaired (clumsy wording perhaps: feel despondent). This is because the writer questions whether high credentialed organisations such as the ones aforementioned can actually be trusted to control student’s education, for their “extremely limited and highly reductive” Naplan grading systems which are “crude” – the adjective carrying connotations of unprofessionalism and dryness that lacks consideration of students’ mental wellbeing and worldly knowledge. This sardonicism seeks to galvanise (great specific word) Hogan’s readership to protest against Naplan testing, contributing (not the right word here it implies this has already happened perhaps: intending to lead to or something similar) to the testing’s upheaval and hence (perhaps unnecessary) eventual disappearance in our education curricula.

Mirroring Les Perelman’s sense of authority – a leading US education academic – Hogan sympathises with school teachers by using the agentless passive “are pressured into” (good pick up, but how does the agentless passive affect the writing) - with its connotations of entrapment and coercion – to depict Naplan’s “capricious data and standardised testing” as a burden for teachers who must “analyse results, enter data” and use “copious amounts of time” at the expense of critically reviewing whether Naplan testing is fulfilling contextual relevance for students’ academic development. Hogan’s providing of solidarity (clumsy wording perhaps: gesture of solidarity?) is likely to help teachers realise that their efforts are being exploited in return for supporting a system that has been “built in a vacuum,” reflecting its “absurd” lack of conviction for helping students who need to “communicate ideas” in the 21st century. The accompanying (to be clear that this isn’t a literary image) image also intends to magnify Hogan’s argument that Naplan testing is not in the best interests of students. The young students with papers on benches and their backs towards the camera, symbolise hopelessness and apathy towards education; they seem unwilling to participate in this type of education and perhaps fear of it. This is likely to encourage teachers to refute (reject?) Naplan testing in their schools and instead remodel their focus on a different type of testing which is practical to real life (clumsy wording).

The shift to an earnest tone is intended to prompt action to investigate the implied unreliability of the expert claim “ideas is given only five marks, while spelling is given six.” Teachers are likely to empathise with Hogan’s critiquing and hence are likely to advocate for banning Naplan, taking side with Hogan. I think this is a very good analysis! Well done, you have a great vocabulary.

[MissSmiley]

In response to the impending Naplan testing and Les Perelman’s Naplan writing guide, The Guardian’s Dan Hogan fervently (great word) contends in his opinion piece that Naplan testing is not always standardised or relevant to real life context; it is merely a pressure on schools and students (this is a very long contention, could it be summed up more concisely?). His sardonic tone later shifts to an earnest one as he portrays to teachers, parents of students and the Government’s education department of Naplan’s lack of consideration for real life implication. An image of students sitting in a classroom seeks to aggrandise the writer’s argument. (target audience? style?)

With the intent of casting Naplan testing as rudimentary and an absurd method of education, Hogan begins his piece with an appeal to teaching and education values and the logic associated with these values. The antithetical juxtaposition “anxieties high and results down” carry undertones of fear and a lack of mental health balance (clumsy wording, perhaps: a deterioration of the mental health balance). In turn, teachers are likely to feel apprehensive about their students sitting Naplan( … your point here is unclear). Referencing reputable governing authorities such as “Nesa, Acara and the NSW Department of Education” but then claiming that their methods “leave teachers and students in the dark - the idiom implying uncertainty in our education system (I think this is unnecessary) – the writer seeks to make teachers and parents of students feel despaired (clumsy wording perhaps: feel despondent). This is because the writer questions whether high credentialed organisations such as the ones aforementioned can actually be trusted to control student’s education, for their “extremely limited and highly reductive” Naplan grading systems which are “crude” – the adjective carrying connotations of unprofessionalism and dryness that lacks consideration of students’ mental wellbeing and worldly knowledge. This sardonicism seeks to galvanise (great specific word) Hogan’s readership to protest against Naplan testing, contributing (not the right word here it implies this has already happened perhaps: intending to lead to or something similar) to the testing’s upheaval and hence (perhaps unnecessary) eventual disappearance in our education curricula.

Mirroring Les Perelman’s sense of authority – a leading US education academic – Hogan sympathises with school teachers by using the agentless passive “are pressured into” (good pick up, but how does the agentless passive affect the writing) - with its connotations of entrapment and coercion – to depict Naplan’s “capricious data and standardised testing” as a burden for teachers who must “analyse results, enter data” and use “copious amounts of time” at the expense of critically reviewing whether Naplan testing is fulfilling contextual relevance for students’ academic development. Hogan’s providing of solidarity (clumsy wording perhaps: gesture of solidarity?) is likely to help teachers realise that their efforts are being exploited in return for supporting a system that has been “built in a vacuum,” reflecting its “absurd” lack of conviction for helping students who need to “communicate ideas” in the 21st century. The accompanying (to be clear that this isn’t a literary image) image also intends to magnify Hogan’s argument that Naplan testing is not in the best interests of students. The young students with papers on benches and their backs towards the camera, symbolise hopelessness and apathy towards education; they seem unwilling to participate in this type of education and perhaps fear of it. This is likely to encourage teachers to refute (reject?) Naplan testing in their schools and instead remodel their focus on a different type of testing which is practical to real life (clumsy wording).

The shift to an earnest tone is intended to prompt action to investigate the implied unreliability of the expert claim “ideas is given only five marks, while spelling is given six.” Teachers are likely to empathise with Hogan’s critiquing and hence are likely to advocate for banning Naplan, taking side with Hogan. I think this is a very good analysis! Well done, you have a great vocabulary.

Hello!
Thanks a lot for checking this, and especially, for giving me suggestions for my word choices! I really like the specific words that you told me, so I'll make sure to really consider the meaning of the words that I use.

Yeah, thanks for pointing out style! I guess I should practice writing about it more, since I never write style in my intro! 
Aw and the audience was here just to let you know:
His sardonic tone later shifts to an earnest one as he portrays to teachers, parents of students and the Government’s education department

Thank you once again!

[clarke54321]

** Oops, I didn't realise that someone had already corrected your work. Well, I suppose you'll benefit from an extra correction 

Thanks to Clarke for starting the AA club again!

In response to the impending Naplan testing and Les Perelman’s Naplan writing guide, The Guardian’s Dan Hogan fervently contends in his opinion piece that Naplan testing is not always standardised or relevant to real life context; it is merely a pressure on schools and students. His sardonic tone later shifts to an earnest one as he portrays toawkward use of the verb, portray. Revise the expression of this sentence. teachers, parents of students and the Government’s education department of Naplan’s lack of consideration for real life implication. An image of students sitting in a classroom seeks to aggrandise the writer’s argument. Great. Nice and succinct. If this were to be a comparison AA, I don't think it would be necessary to include discussion of the visual. That should really be kept to the bulk of the piece.

With the intent of casting Naplan testing as rudimentary and an absurd method of education, Hogan begins his piece with an appeal to teaching and education values and the logic associated with these values. The antithetical juxtaposition “anxieties high and results down” carry undertones of fear and a lack of mental health balance. In turn,hmm..you could probably do with some more explanation of the previous quote before concluding. teachers are likely to feel apprehensive about their students sitting Naplan. Referencing reputable governing authorities such as “Nesa, Acara and the NSW Department of Education” but then claiming that their methods “leave teachers and students in the dark - the idiom implying uncertainty in our education system how so? You must make these things explicit.– the writer seeks to make teachers and parents of students feel despaired. This is because the writer questions whether high credentialed organisations such as the ones aforementioned can actually be trusted to control student’s education, for their “extremely limited and highly reductive” Naplan grading systems which are “crude” – be careful with this type of transitioning. It isn't entirely coherent. the adjective carrying connotations of unprofessionalism and dryness that lacks consideration of students’ mental wellbeing and worldly knowledge. This sardonicismI didn't get much of a feel for this in your paragraph. Remember that clarity > verbose language. Keep it simple and relevant. seeks to galvanise Hogan’s readership to protest against Naplan testing, contributing to the testing’s upheaval and hence eventual disappearance in our education curricula.

Mirroring Les Perelman’s sense of authority – a leading US education academic – I think this is becoming a bit of a habit. Try and minimise this tendency and stick to conventional grammar. Commas will do the trick. Hogan sympathises with school teachers by using the agentless passiveif you want to include this knowledge, you need to elaborate on its contextual significance. “are pressured into” - with itswhat specifically? The verb "pressured?" Make this clear. connotations of entrapment and coercion – to depict Naplan’s “capricious data and standardised testing” as a burden for teachers who must “analyse results, enter data” and use “copious amounts of time” at the expense of critically reviewing whether Naplan testing is fulfilling contextual relevance for students’ academic development. Hogan’s providing of solidarity? is likely to help teachers realise that their efforts are being exploited in return for supporting a system that has been “built in a vacuum,” reflecting its “absurd” lack of conviction for helping students who need to “communicate ideas” in the 21st century nice zoom out to reader effect. I'd like to see more of this in your writing.. The image also intends to magnify Hogan’s argument that Naplan testing is not in the best interests of students. The young students with papers on benches and their backs towards the camera, symbolise hopelessness and apathy towards education; they seem unwilling to participate in this type of education and perhaps fear of it. This is likely to encourage teachers to refute Naplan testing in their schools and instead remodel their focus on a different type of testing which is practical to real life. Excellent

The shift to an earnest tone is intended to prompt action to investigate the implied unreliability of the expert claim “ideas is given only five marks, while spelling is given six.” <-- you need to elaborate on this if you want to include it.Teachers are likely to empathise with Hogan’s critiquing and hence are likely to advocate for banning Naplan, taking side with Hogan.

Thank you very much!

Very nice effort, MissSmiley. There is a noticeable improvement from your earlier pieces. Topic sentences were strong, introduction was concise, a seamless integration of the visual was included, and a nice acknowledgement of tone was made. To improve, try not to depend too heavily on connotations, substitute hyphens for commas and elaborate on all quotes included. Also, I think you arranged your analysis under the assumption that this was a comparative? If so, you may have made more work for yourself 

[MissSmiley]

** Oops, I didn't realise that someone had already corrected your work. Well, I suppose you'll benefit from an extra correction 

Very nice effort, MissSmiley. There is a noticeable improvement from your earlier pieces. Topic sentences were strong, introduction was concise, a seamless integration of the visual was included, and a nice acknowledgement of tone was made. To improve, try not to depend too heavily on connotations, substitute hyphens for commas and elaborate on all quotes included. Also, I think you arranged your analysis under the assumption that this was a comparative? If so, you may have made more work for yourself 

Thanks a lot for taking out time to check this Clarke!
I'm a HUGE HUGE fan of your feedback, so I love this extra correction!!
I'll definitely work on the things you've mentioned!
Thank you very much!

[Anonymous]

Sorry for the late post. I could have sworn I'd posted it last week. Someone please take pity on me.

As NAPLAN testing draws closer, Hogan has written an opinion piece in which he criticises in a measured tone that this "standardised testing" system as being not only "crude and arbitrary" but also affected a student's learning within the classroom. To this end, he targets primarily teachers and students alike, but also concerned parents and the governing authorities that overlook NAPLAN to not settle for such a system.

By first listing the governing authorities who've endorsed the non-release of NAPLAN's marking system, Hogan intends for the "teachers and students in the dark," who are taken advantage of by this, to predispose them as the opposition, and thereby sets them up to receive his succeeding arguments more favourably. In claiming that they've "refused to release the methods in which NAPLAN exams are marked", readers are inadvertently lead to assume that there may something not quite right about the marking schemes, to have led the governing authorities to withhold such information. Then through the use of Perelman's forensic analysis as the basis for his argument that the limited objectives of NAPLAN has resulted in loopholes that could be abused, the use of an expert opinion, accompanied by his credentials, alleviate readers' concerns of the validity of his points.

Hogan then goes on to assert that the NAPLAN examination system is quite fallible, through the "tried and tested" "cheat sheet" provided by Perelman in an attempt to prompt doubt within the reader's mind of its effectiveness. When describing the "poor pedagogical practices", which has the alliterative effect of being memorable, the use of the words "inflict" and "pressure" to describe the practices connotes a painful experience that students are to undertake against their will, and thereby motivates readers to view NAPLAN and the resultant teaching methods as being an unnecessary evil. This effect is further enhanced with the image of students staring numbly towards to front of the room, as it symbolises the moulds that they've been forced into as a result of teachers and parents alike "teaching to the tests" rather than the content, which has "left both teachers and students at a loss".

In contending that NAPLAN testing isn't conducive to an "effective teaching and learning" environment, in part due to its inaccuracy, Hogan's use of the idiom "music to educator's ears" encourages readers to take on board the positive views that teachers have in response to Perelman's proclamations, while simultaneously alluding to the notion that more abstract teaching methods are more effective. By then starkly contrasting the two methods, in which one provides "rich exposure" which has a positive connotation that it's beneficial for students, while the "time-heavy" "training" portrays a "[shadier]" and more forceful approach, which would sway readers into advocating for the former method. This effect is further elucidated when he states that NAPLAN was established "without any known consultation" which would lead readers to view the testing as inaccurate. By then juxtaposing the intention of writing with a marking scheme that doesn't reflect the components of writing in accurate ratios based on importance, readers are forced to accept that "NAPLAN's writing tasks are crude and arbitrary".

In maintaining a controlled tone, Hogan relies heavily on Perelman's report in order to justify his assertion that NAPLAN's an inaccurate measure of student performance that also promotes ineffective teaching methods.

[clarke54321]

Sorry for the late post. I could have sworn I'd posted it last week. Someone please take pity on me.

As NAPLAN testing draws closer, Hogan has written an opinion piece in which he criticises in a measured tone that this "standardised testing" system as being not only "crude and arbitrary" but also affected a student's learning within the classroom nice contextual info. However, for coherency purposes, perhaps split this longer sentence into two.. To this end, he targetstry and refrain from using definitive language. Instead, stick to a more neutral phrase like, "Hogan seeks/endeavours to target...." or "Given the context, Hogan most likely targets..." primarily teachers and students alike, but also concerned parents and the governing authorities that overlook NAPLAN to not settle for such a system. While it could do with some minor polishing, this is a good introduction 

By first listing the governing authorities who've endorsed the non-release of NAPLAN's marking system, Hogan intends for the "teachers and students in the dark," who are taken advantage of by this, to predispose them as the opposition, and thereby sets them up to receive his succeeding arguments more favourably read this through again and think, would this be clear to the reasonable person? Simplicity is your highest priority in an argument analysis. Hence, have a topic sentence central to the argument in question, and then introduce evidence. To have argument, evidence, analysis and effect in the one sentence is too excessive.. In claiming that they've "refused to release the methods in which NAPLAN exams are marked", readers are inadvertently lead to assume that there may something not quite right about the marking schemes, to have led the governing authorities to withhold such information yes, excellent evaluation of reader effect. However, because you've employed the passive here, ensure that your subject is the writer (Hogan), not the readers.. Then through the use of Perelman's forensic analysis <--- you must provide evidence for this.as the basis for his argument that the limited objectives of NAPLAN has resulted in loopholes that could be abused, the use of an expert opinion, accompanied by his credentials, alleviate readers' concerns of the validity of his points.

Hogan then goes on to assert that the NAPLAN examination system is quite fallible, through the "tried and tested" "cheat sheet" provided by Perelman in an attempt to prompt doubt within the reader's mind of its effectiveness see my previous comment regarding topic sentences. When describing the "poor pedagogical practices", which has the alliterative effect of being memorable <--- how do we know this? You need to spell these things out to the reader. Say, "Through the use of alliteration, evidenced in the repeated "p" sound of, "poor pedagogical practices," Hogan endeavours to......., the use of the words "inflict" and "pressure" to describe the practices attempts/strives/seeks (be tentative) connotes a painful experience that students are to undertake against their will, and thereby motivates readers excellentto view NAPLAN and the resultant teaching methods as being an unnecessary evil. This effect is further enhanced  <--- lovely compounding phrase  with the image of students staring numbly towards to front of the room, as it possibly/most likely (stay tentative!)symbolises the moulds that they've been forced into as a result of teachers and parents alike "teaching to the tests" rather than the content, which has "left both teachers and students at a loss". <--- you could tease this out to a greater extent

In contending that NAPLAN testing isn't conducive to an "effective teaching and learning" environment, in part due to its inaccuracy, Hogan's use of the idiom "music to educator's ears" encourages readers to take on board the positive views that teachers have in response to Perelman's proclamations, while simultaneously alluding to the notion that more abstract teaching methods are more effective again, refer to my previous comment regarding topic sentences. By then starkly contrasting the two methods, in which one provides "rich exposure" which has a positive connotation that it's beneficial for students, a bit awkward and general. Also, when relying on connotations for analysis, you must extract the specific word you are addressing. And so, in this case,"rich." while the "time-heavy" "training" portrays a "[shadier]" and more forceful approach, which would attempts to...sway readers into advocating for the former method. This effect is further elucidated when he states that NAPLAN was established "without any known consultation" which would lead readers to view the testing as inaccurate how did you ge to this point? Provide more analysis.. By then juxtaposing the intention of writing with a marking scheme that doesn't reflect the components of writing in accurate ratios based on importance, readers are forced to accept that "NAPLAN's writing tasks are crude and arbitrary".

In maintaining a controlled tone, Hogan relies heavily on Perelman's report why would this be significant? Due to Perelman's authority? Credibility? Does this compliment Hogan's controlled tone? in order to justify his assertion that NAPLAN's an inaccurate measure of student performance that also promotes ineffective teaching methods.

Nice job on the analysis. You are generally incorporating all key aspects of an analysis into your writing (what, how and why), which is an excellent plus. I was also particularly impressed by your use of compounding phrases. However, I would encourage you to revise your approach to topic sentences, and how you express ideas relating to reader effect. Keep up the wonderful AA effort