VCE English Question Thread

[heids]

^ Please post essays requiring feedback in the English Work Submission and Marking board so the questions thread doesn't get cluttered; I'll try to get to it there, if someone else more qualified doesn't mark it first

EDIT: Eek, sorry, just realised you did put it there ...

[JackSonSmith]

Ways to "spice" up context essays

My English teacher has told me that assessors do not like "straight" essays and that they are pushing more more creative/imaginative pieces.

I was wondering, are there any good ways to integrate some "salt and pepper" into a plain essay, as these are what I am comfortable writing?

[literally lauren]

Ways to "spice" up context essays

My English teacher has told me that assessors do not like "straight" essays and that they are pushing more more creative/imaginative pieces.

I was wondering, are there any good ways to integrate some "salt and pepper" into a plain essay, as these are what I am comfortable writing?

I believe the assessors are pushing creativity, but this doesn't necessarily mean they want people to write in a completely imaginative style.

It depends how radically you want to change what you're doing at the moment; if your expository skills are bang on, then it would just be 'salt and pepper' seasoning, as you put it, that could help you stand out. But if your pieces are lacking development or complexity, then these creative elements would require more careful thought and might be trickier to implement straight away.

Some options: (mainly focusing on what to do structurally; let me know if you need clarification with content as well)

• bookend
  For those who aren't familiar with what a 'bookend' is:
  
  They're basically devices for keeping a stack of books together on a shelf, with or without stylised designs like above. In essay terms, this translates to doing something at the start and at the end of your piece that 'holds it all together,' so to speak. It could be just a brief quote or idea, or it could be an entire paragraph, but the aim is to have something that frames your piece by being on either end of your essay.
• 'thread'/weaving
  This is similar to bookending, only it will occur constantly. In essence you have a 'thread' that is continually woven back and forth throughout your piece (which also serves to 'hold things together' and provide cohesion.) For instance, you might maintain a focus on a certain culture, eg. Malaysia, so that all of your examples revolve around this idea.
   --> P1: Dutch colonisation and how their culture changed; P2: military culture (compulsory army service at age ~17 I think); P3: globalisation and its impact on more remote lifestyles ... obvs haven't lined to the context here, and you could use supplementary points where needed, eg. juxtapose their colonisation with more/less brutal ones in other nations.
• reincorporation
  Kind of the halfway point between a bookend and a thread; this is where you bring up a similar idea/quote/point/metaphor/thing a couple of times, but give it a different meaning each time. It shouldn't be as in-depth as a properly woven 'thread,' but it also doesn't have to occur just at the start and the end like a bookend does.
• interpolation
  Also known as 'interruption' or 'criss-crossing' where you are essentially writing two pieces (eg. a normal expository essay + a creative POV short story) but you alternate between paragraphs. If done properly, this should result in a dual piece that explores similar concepts in two different ways, ie. the expository sections takes care of the necessary theorisation and links to context, and the creative parts show these ideas in practice.
• blend
  This one's really open ended, but it essentially just means turning a purely expository piece into more of a hybrid (which is gradable; there are different levels of 'hybridisation' so you don't have to go all in.) Often this is where news feature articles or creative background contexts (as in, pretending you're a war correspondent or a major world leader) come into play.

If any of these pique your interest and you want more info or some examples of how they work, let me know and I'll try and hunt down some of my old pieces or other links

[JackSonSmith]

I believe the assessors are pushing creativity, but this doesn't necessarily mean they want people to write in a completely imaginative style.

It depends how radically you want to change what you're doing at the moment; if your expository skills are bang on, then it would just be 'salt and pepper' seasoning, as you put it, that could help you stand out. But if your pieces are lacking development or complexity, then these creative elements would require more careful thought and might be trickier to implement straight away.

Some options: (mainly focusing on what to do structurally; let me know if you need clarification with content as well)

• bookend
  For those who aren't familiar with what a 'bookend' is:
  
  They're basically devices for keeping a stack of books together on a shelf, with or without stylised designs like above. In essay terms, this translates to doing something at the start and at the end of your piece that 'holds it all together,' so to speak. It could be just a brief quote or idea, or it could be an entire paragraph, but the aim is to have something that frames your piece by being on either end of your essay.
• 'thread'/weaving
  This is similar to bookending, only it will occur constantly. In essence you have a 'thread' that is continually woven back and forth throughout your piece (which also serves to 'hold things together' and provide cohesion.) For instance, you might maintain a focus on a certain culture, eg. Malaysia, so that all of your examples revolve around this idea.
   --> P1: Dutch colonisation and how their culture changed; P2: military culture (compulsory army service at age ~17 I think); P3: globalisation and its impact on more remote lifestyles ... obvs haven't lined to the context here, and you could use supplementary points where needed, eg. juxtapose their colonisation with more/less brutal ones in other nations.
• reincorporation
  Kind of the halfway point between a bookend and a thread; this is where you bring up a similar idea/quote/point/metaphor/thing a couple of times, but give it a different meaning each time. It shouldn't be as in-depth as a properly woven 'thread,' but it also doesn't have to occur just at the start and the end like a bookend does.
• interpolation
  Also known as 'interruption' or 'criss-crossing' where you are essentially writing two pieces (eg. a normal expository essay + a creative POV short story) but you alternate between paragraphs. If done properly, this should result in a dual piece that explores similar concepts in two different ways, ie. the expository sections takes care of the necessary theorisation and links to context, and the creative parts show these ideas in practice.
• blend
  This one's really open ended, but it essentially just means turning a purely expository piece into more of a hybrid (which is gradable; there are different levels of 'hybridisation' so you don't have to go all in.) Often this is where news feature articles or creative background contexts (as in, pretending you're a war correspondent or a major world leader) come into play.

If any of these pique your interest and you want more info or some examples of how they work, let me know and I'll try and hunt down some of my old pieces or other links

Thank-you for your very helpful reply.

Are there any examples of interpolation and blend? They sound interesting but seem somewhat difficult to implement.

[lisax3]

Is it possible to over analyse in language analysis? Such as over analysing what the effect of a particular technique has on the audience?

[HighTide]

Is it possible to over analyse in language analysis? Such as over analysing what the effect of a particular technique has on the audience?

I was also wondering the same. My language analysis doesn't really have a grouped structure but instead from top to bottom  to build up the intended effect which positions the readers to do something overall... My teacher said that it depends on the significance of the effect and suggested I pick out the predominant persuasive techniques.

[literally lauren]

Is it possible to over analyse in language analysis? Such as over analysing what the effect of a particular technique has on the audience?

Yes, definitely. Though there's a distinction to be drawn between over analysis and wrong analysis.

If you start delving into the audience's psyche and talking about complex mind manipulation techniques - that's over analysis.

But more likely this problem will arise when you're trying to assert something that can't be justified, eg. the author's use of the word 'sad' is likely to make the audience spiral into a state of eternal melancholy from which they will never recover - which would be wrong.

It really depends on the context, and I don't want to say 'steer clear entirely' because getting into an overly analytical mindset is actually really helpful for English as a whole. The trick is to know when to reign it in.
If you post an example of what you mean (or of what your teacher pointed out in your work, as I'm assuming is the case?) I might be able to clarify further.

I was also wondering the same. My language analysis doesn't really have a grouped structure but instead from top to bottom  to build up the intended effect which positions the readers to do something overall... My teacher said that it depends on the significance of the effect and suggested I pick out the predominant persuasive techniques.

If you're looking for a means of structuring things, I can recommend the key player method (check the first post in this thread for links to explanations - then you can get back to me if anything doesn't make sense.)

Structuring by techniques isn't the worst way of doing things, but it sounds like your current approach would be more conducive to building up an overall analytical piece rather than writing something that reads like it's a bullet point list of separate analyses all crammed together in an arbitrary paragraph.

But as usual, listen to your teacher for SACs. Be the system, beat the system 

[thaaanyan]

Hey Lauren,
I really like the idea of interpolation and blend, but i'm not sure how to go about analysing a prompt with the format. like with interpolation, does the story have to be connected to the expository? or it completely a different piece? are they any examples? i've been hunting through the resource thread and i can't seem to find any!
thank you

[literally lauren]

Okay turns out the examples I had from Year 12 aren't as great as I remembered :p looking through them now there's so much stuff that looks clunky and out of place, so I might just write up a new one over the weekend so I can demonstrate the different ways of doing things. I'll post it in the Resource & samples thread when I'm done

[chansena]

Okay turns out the examples I had from Year 12 aren't as great as I remembered :p looking through them now there's so much stuff that looks clunky and out of place, so I might just write up a new one over the weekend so I can demonstrate the different ways of doing things. I'll post it in the Resource & samples thread when I'm done

Hi,

Did you by any chance have a hybrid essay or a feature article? I'm looking at doing one for context 

If you could upload one or PM me one that would be great

[HighTide]

Okay turns out the examples I had from Year 12 aren't as great as I remembered :p looking through them now there's so much stuff that looks clunky and out of place, so I might just write up a new one over the weekend so I can demonstrate the different ways of doing things. I'll post it in the Resource & samples thread when I'm done

Hello, so I take it from "Be the system to beat the system" that you adhered to the structure (assumption) set by your school or was not far off? If so, was your ability to do a comparative analysis much simpler when you followed the normal structure?
The thing is, with my structure of language analysis, there's no comparison of the techniques or key arguments but more a comparison of the approach, intended effect and positioning... Would I be better off trying the standard structure?
Thanks.

[literally lauren]

Hi,

Did you by any chance have a hybrid essay or a feature article? I'm looking at doing one for context 

If you could upload one or PM me one that would be great

Will upload on Saturday with the other bits and pieces
#still writing year 12 essays to procrastinate from writing uni essays.....

Hello, so I take it from "Be the system to beat the system" that you adhered to the structure (assumption) set by your school or was not far off? If so, was your ability to do a comparative analysis much simpler when you followed the normal structure?
The thing is, with my structure of language analysis, there's no comparison of the techniques or key arguments but more a comparison of the approach, intended effect and positioning... Would I be better off trying the standard structure?
Thanks.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'normal structure,' but yes, I caved to the recommendations my school provided (though admittedly I got lucky with my teacher and he was pretty chill about our individual approaches) and the way I wrote in the exam was slightly different, but not by much.

In terms of comparison, it really isn't a big deal. There aren't any marks assigned to it, and you should never compare at the expense of analysis. In fact many of the exams in previous years (5/7 in the current study design, actually) haven't involved any comparison between different articles at all - it's just been one core text and then one or two visuals. The only exceptions were 2011 _*spits* and 2014 which is probably a better one to practice

When you do need to compare articles, you can either do it by transitioning between them by commenting on their overall contention (ie. Author A argues ____, whereas Author B disagrees and instead suggests ____) or you can find a connection on the language/technique level and say 'Author A uses _____ in order to... However, Author B uses a different technique to the same effect//or// uses the same technique to a different effect.'
There's no inherent advantage in doing it one way or the other, and so long as your piece shows an awareness of both levels (ie 1. the broad, big picture contentions and sub-arguments and 2. the close features and language employed by the author(s)) then you should be fine.

Hope that answers your question, though I don't know what 'standard structure' you're referring to. If it's the key player method I mentioned, that's not technically 'standard;' it's just what I wholeheartedly recommend as being the most efficient way to order your essay, whether you need to do comparative analysis or not

[HighTide]

Will upload on Saturday with the other bits and pieces
#still writing year 12 essays to procrastinate from writing uni essays.....
I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'normal structure,' but yes, I caved to the recommendations my school provided (though admittedly I got lucky with my teacher and he was pretty chill about our individual approaches) and the way I wrote in the exam was slightly different, but not by much.

In terms of comparison, it really isn't a big deal. There aren't any marks assigned to it, and you should never compare at the expense of analysis. In fact many of the exams in previous years (5/7 in the current study design, actually) haven't involved any comparison between different articles at all - it's just been one core text and then one or two visuals. The only exceptions were 2011 _*spits* and 2014 which is probably a better one to practice

When you do need to compare articles, you can either do it by transitioning between them by commenting on their overall contention (ie. Author A argues ____, whereas Author B disagrees and instead suggests ____) or you can find a connection on the language/technique level and say 'Author A uses _____ in order to... However, Author B uses a different technique to the same effect//or// uses the same technique to a different effect.'
There's no inherent advantage in doing it one way or the other, and so long as your piece shows an awareness of both levels (ie 1. the broad, big picture contentions and sub-arguments and 2. the close features and language employed by the author(s)) then you should be fine.

Hope that answers your question, though I don't know what 'standard structure' you're referring to. If it's the key player method I mentioned, that's not technically 'standard;' it's just what I wholeheartedly recommend as being the most efficient way to order your essay, whether you need to do comparative analysis or not

Sorry, my bad. "Standard" structure was referring to the key argument-based analysis' or technique-based analysis'. I've never heard of one based on key players... Would you be mixing up the arguments and the techniques to show their intended effect on the audience? So like a build up?

[RazzMeTazz]

How important is a sophisticated vocabulary, in order to do well on the English exam?

If you had a normal vocabulary but well-written pieces with good ideas etc, would the fact that you aren't the most sophisticated of writers, be a major issue?
Because often teachers tell me I am too verbose, and that I would be better off and clearer if I used simpler words, but  when I read  high-scoring sample responses, or even examples from teachers - the wording does tend to be quite sophisticated?

Thanks!

[DJA]

How important is a sophisticated vocabulary, in order to do well on the English exam?

If you had a normal vocabulary but well-written pieces with good ideas etc, would the fact that you aren't the most sophisticated of writers, be a major issue?
Because often teachers tell me I am too verbose, and that I would be better off and clearer if I used simpler words, but  when I read  high-scoring sample responses, or even examples from teachers - the wording does tend to be quite sophisticated?

Thanks!

My take on this - from my guide to expression - yes shameless self-promotion
Vocabulary is definitely important to good expression. If you’re using words such as ‘like’, ‘good’, ‘bad’ and ‘shows’ all the time it’s not going to make a good impression on an examiner. You should definitely have synonyms in your mind. Again reading helps a ton as when you read, you unconsciously expand your vocabulary. However, what also helps is actually writing down useful vocabulary. For English, I compiled interesting vocabulary at the back of my writing/note book whenever I read study guides, model essays or critical readings. If I didn’t know what a word meant, I would google it. Then when I wrote essays, I would open to my vocab and challenge myself to use some of the words I had learnt in my writing. Give it a shot!

Remember however that there IS a difference between sophisticated language and excessive and pretentious language. Use words that are appropriate, that you could even use in conversation but that aren’t so hard to understand that you sound like a wanker.
Everyday language: Good
Sophisticated: Magnificent
Pretentious: Splendiferous

Basically a sophisticated vocabulary is good to have but not the be it end all to score well on the English Exam. Honestly if you're using less complex words but convey your ideas and argument with clarity, you're going to do better than that guy or gal who throws around huge words and ties their ideas into knots or worse loops (don't you hate those essays which go round and round and don't actually make a point?)

So yes if you had a normal vocabulary but well-written pieces with good ideas etc - you're going to do well. That being said, it's good to have a few words that are appropriate to the text, the author or the time of the text you are studying that are more 'sophisticated' and that you can use to 'show off' a bit in exams. Lauren has said it already in the past and it's so true - Examiners are ONLY HUMAN - they can be unfortunately swayed by writing that 'sounds' sophisticated.

And yes the highest scoring responses will often have quite sophisticated vocabulary - BUT note that when you read these top scoring pieces, you will see (hopefully) how clear the writing is, how good the ideas are etc.

tl;dr: Know appropriate sophisticated words to the text you are studying and use them in your writing but do not throw in big words for the sake of it - prioritise structure and clarity of ideas and argument over trying to sound sophisticated.

ALSO it's 1 am so forgive me if this is a ramble because it is. DJA out