Login | Register
Enrol now for our new online tutoring program. Learn from the best tutors. Get amazing results. Learn more.

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

December 05, 2021, 02:02:53 pm

Author Topic: 50 in English, available for queries :)  (Read 273102 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

literally lauren

  • Administrator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1689
  • Resident English/Lit Nerd
  • Respect: +1410
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #525 on: September 27, 2014, 09:24:25 am »
+4
Hi Lauren,
Do we receive extra marks for only analysing esoteric techniques in language analysis? For example, is it okay to omit techniques like inclusive language, adjectives and alliteration for less common ones like hendidays, juxtapositions, polysendeton and hyperbole?Are examiners generally more impressed by rare techniques?

Technically you don't recieve any marks for simply mentioning techniques. I did start looking into some of the more 'esoteric' techniques, but I found the VCAA past papers didn't really lend themselves to any in particular. (Prolepsis and hyperphora were the only ones I ever found, though I'd say juxtapositioning and hyperbole are pretty common, depending on the issue/delivery.)
But let's take polysyndeton for example: could you actually say anything about that in context?
eg. 'We cannot let the government take away our privacy, and our lives, and our freedom.' Sure, you might notice the word 'and' is there, but what is it actually doing? It's rarely sufficient to give a definition or just say it emphasises the contention. Looking at how readers/audiences are affected, and why the author might do this is where the real marks are. Very little is devoted to simply identifying techniques. Though the assessors might get sick of reading all the low-scoring analyses to the tune of 'there is rhetorical questions, inclusive language, emotive language, and loaded language,' that's only because they're not analysing. If you get an article (like the 2010 or 2013 paper) in which inclusivity is a major component of their argument, then no, you shouldn't ignore that for the sake of finding something left-of-field. But it is okay not to point out every single rhetorical question
Also, as Zezima rightly said, there are some grumpy assessors who will resent having to google the words you're using. This shouldn't be a deterrent to developing a sophisticated vocabulary, but try to avoid making the vocab the focus; it's perfectly possible to score well in English without needing those sorts of words.
I would add: try to mention at least two technique per body paragraph, rather than just one or two overall. This was my arbitrary goal, but if you've got longer/shorter paras then by all means change it to suit you. I had a bad habit last year of just ignoring the techniques altogether and jumping straight into the analysis, which I got away with sometimes, but some assessors like to see obvious instances of where they can give you credit.

Hi Lauren and anyone else who is willing to assist,

Do you recommend following the English Exam in chronological order (Text Response, Context, L. Analysis)?

I haven't really sorted out my preferences, so I am willing to listen to suggestions. At the moment, I am slightly favouring the chronological procedure.

Hell no. I do not understand why anyone would recommend L.A. last. English is not meant to be done in order.
Here's how reading time will go: You'll open to the T.R. prompts, flick through and find your text (they're alphabetical, and in the same position as the VATE/Insight practice papers, so it should be easy to find.) You'll read over both carefully, chose one if there's an obviously more suitable one for, otherwise just let them churn over in your head and make a decision later. =Max 1 minute.
Then you'll go to the Context prompts, for which you won't have a choice. Read yours, think about how you'll make your ideas fit (expository) how you can adapt a situation (imaginative) or just focus on a clear, definitive contention (persuasive) = Max 1 minute, and that's assuming you spend quite a bit of time here; for most people in my exam hall it was about 20 seconds.
Then you'll turn to the Language Analysis. Read the heading, look at the visuals, read the first few lines and see if you can get a sense of where the contention is going. Then go back and read the background information in the little box on the previous page. Pay close attention to where the piece appeared/was spoken, and who the author & audience are. Then you'll spend the remaining 12-13 minutes reading and rereading the article. I'd recommend once for clarity and identifying arguments and tone, then once more closely looking for opportunities for connotative analysis and language-based discussion.
Frustratingly, you won't be able to write anything down, so the ideas that you're having in the first 10 minutes might not come back to you until a week later  :P Try to quickly retrace your thinking if you can, but otherwise just move along and see how much you can get done. Having spent the bulk of reading time on the L.A. pieces, it seems counter-intuitive to leave that for last (ie. after 2 hours) when your mind would be so ready for it first up. For the people who find L.A. easy, great, get it our of the way and maybe give yourself a few extra minutes for Sections A and B. For those who find it hard, it's not going to get any easier 2 hours later, so get it out of the way, then you'll know how much time you have to cut out of Sections A or B if you need it. I can't think of any reason for leaving L.A. till later, but if anyone has any, let me know, I'm curious :)
As to which comes next, I'd always planned to do the CAB order since T.R. is more of a formal essay and usually requires a proper structure for a high score, whilst Context can be shorter and summed up quicker, so if I ran out of time I figured I could re-jig Section B and just end on a high note, even if it meant compromising the content. However, for anyone who's looked at the 2013 exam, you'll know the Conflict prompt was a little bit... weird. It could be broken into something more manageable, but it freaked me out when I saw it, so I ended up tackling that one first because it was more of a chore. About two paragraphs in I realised how simple the core of the prompt was, and from then on it became a fairly easy write, so I spent a lot of that time on autopilot whilst brainstorming for my T.R. essay.
Moral of the story: be flexible. It's good to go into the exam with a plan, but be prepared to rework it when you're in there. The point of unseen content is to test how you'll think on your feet, so a response that has made the effort to engage with the prompt will always score better than someone who's stuck to a rigid format and pre-learned content.
The practice exams you complete / your school makes you do will be a good time to work out which order and approach suits you best.

DJA

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 617
  • Literature is the question minus the answer.
  • Respect: +201
  • School Grad Year: 2014
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #526 on: September 27, 2014, 09:41:02 am »
+3
...However, for anyone who's looked at the 2013 exam, you'll know the Conflict prompt was a little bit... weird. It could be broken into something more manageable, but it freaked me out when I saw it, so I ended up tackling that one first because it was more of a chore. About two paragraphs in I realised how simple the core of the prompt was, and from then on it became a fairly easy write, so I spent a lot of that time on autopilot whilst brainstorming for my T.R. essay...

I've looked at that prompt - the 'conflict of conscience can be just as difficult as conflict between people' - how ON EARTH did you manage to write well on that let alone realise how simple the core of it is? It's not a nice prompt in the slightest...

I'm struggling to think how I would structure an expository response around it..
Also a few questions:
1. How do you suggest preparing for an expository response right now before the exam? Going through examples? Memorising?
2. Isn't the 2013 prompt essentially a false dichotomy - saying conscience conflict = conflict between people in difficulty. What if you didn't agree with this - how would you go about writing a response then?
3. How did you argue that prompt in the end?

Thank you in advance!
2014 - English (50, Premier's Award)| Music Performance (50, Premier's Award) | Literature (46~47) | Biology (47) | Chemistry (41) |  MUEP Chemistry (+4.5)  ATAR: 99.70

Griffith University Gold Coast Queensland
2015 - 2017 Bachelor of Medical Science (BMedSc)
2017 - 2021 Doctor of Medicine (MD)

DJA's Guide to Language Analysis (Section C)
DJA's guide on the topic of English Expression (Text response)

literally lauren

  • Administrator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1689
  • Resident English/Lit Nerd
  • Respect: +1410
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #527 on: September 27, 2014, 10:29:11 am »
+3
'Conflict of conscience can be just as difficult as conflict between people'

Conflict of conscience = inner conflict (though I'll add complexity to this later)
Conflict between people = external conflict
∴ inner conflict = as difficult as = external conflict
Q.E.D.  :)

This is what VCAA does; the prompts are rarely inherently difficult, they're just presented in a way that flusters you, especially with regards to the wording they chose.
There is some variation here, for instance 'conflict of conscience' implies a dimension of morality, which you can link to decision making and the choices conflict presents us with. I'll admit this is a tricky one because it doesn't fall neatly into one of those response-cause-consequence-resolution categories, so whilst it definitely wasn't 'nice,' it was manageable.

1. Have a few tried and tested ideas/examples to use. I'd be aiming for about 7 you can discuss in a lot of depth, and at least 15 you can use as supplementary evidence. Depending on how much you've done throughout the year, you might be able to aim higher, but concentrate on depth as well as breadth. Then it's a matter of adaptation; can you make your ideas fit the prompts. This shouldn't involve sheer regurgitation, as even if the exam prompt is similar to one of your practice pieces, there will still be some sort of disparity that calls for a reworking (eg. the difference between 'conflict of conscience' and 'inner conflict,' which are similar, but not synonymous.) Certain examples will work better with certain prompt types and focal points, but you can usually twist a good one to make it work.
Practice pieces help, but covering as many prompts as possible and testing your adaption skills can take awhile, so occasionally practice paragraphs or plans are sufficient.

2. It's not suggesting conflicts of conscience = conflict b/n people, just that their difficulty is equivalent. So the 'core' of the prompt is essentially dealing with subjectivity. I found it easier to agree with this in the end, but it's certainly worth challenging:
- do conflicts b/n people have more profound consequences since more people are involved
- how do these two sorts of conflict relate to one another; can a. cause b. or vice versa?
- what makes a conflict difficult, do we ever account for the difficulty we put others through, or do we have a tendency to get caught up in our own struggles?
- can conflicts of conscience ever exist in a vacuum/ without other people?

3. pfft, idk. Well, apparently. Though I could have sworn I contradicted myself on occasion. My examples ended up fitting quite well, and my conclusion was solid, but my contention could be boiled down to 'Yep! Because everyone's different! And that's okay!' - though with better vocab and fewer exclamation marks. Generally speaking, how you argue things is just as, if not more important than wha tyou're arguing, and since a fair chunk of the context marking scheme is based on writing ability and expression, if you're writing a coherent interesting response, you should be fine in the end.

Point of interest: many people (either w/o dictionaries, or were too stupid to use them) interpreted this as 'conflict of consciousness,' and proceeded to write an essay about dreaming and comas, much to the assessors' amusement.
READ PROMPTS CAREFULLY. VCAA ARE (mostly) HORRIBLE PEOPLE TRYING TO TRICK YOU. BE AS METICULOUS AS THEM; BEAT THEM AT THEIR OWN MIND GAMES

esinnnn

  • Victorian
  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: 0
  • School: whsc
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #528 on: September 27, 2014, 07:09:58 pm »
0
Hi guys (don't know if I'm posting on the right spot)
Is there anyone here who is/has done Stasiland or Paradise Road (for expository) and would like to share some of their works?

esinnnn

  • Victorian
  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: 0
  • School: whsc
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #529 on: October 03, 2014, 01:02:32 pm »
0
I'm terrible and language analysis.. and i'm keen for some advice? :s anyone? Here is something i wrote in an hour and a half (didn't finish conclusion) can someone please mark/grade it? would be much appreciated! thanks

With the prevalence of children becoming enclosed within their homes, fiddling with advancing technology, discussion resurfaced regarding whether more time should be spent outdoors. In response to this issue, Zan Smith has published an opinion piece “Beach lessons” in The Age. With a predominantly rational yet critical tone permeating throughout her piece, Smith contends to inspire and persuade readers, particularly parents, into taking the initiative to accompany and expose their children to the outdoors, instead of being caged in their homes and become susceptible to future health issues.
From the outset, Smith establishes that indoor entertainment -such as the “TV”- disables her children to a state of “inertia” where all “interaction” is lost. This sense of detachment from the real world is juxtaposed with a visual aid of a “screen” by which two young children are immersed in. With their body language in uniform –hands tucked into their laps- and their heads paralleled with one another, readers may feel alarmed for this is no ordinary “behaviour” of a child. Such a portrayal of lost interaction and activity may further serve as a reminder for readers -especially to parents- that their child could be in this state of “inertia” momentarily, eliciting a sense of guilt and discomfort within readers as they remain inaction. This feeling of guilt is further compounded by Smith’s alarming statics of the number of “hours” spent watching TV, and its association to “childhood obesity”. The word “obesity” may connect other thoughts of “implications” and diseases that could arise and be detrimental to the wellbeing of children, shifting reader’s prior feelings of guilt to one of distress. Consequently, as readers become more emotionally invested to this issue, they may also become more responsive to what the writer has to say and make an attempt to change their lifestyle for the greater good.
Smith continues to repudiate the validity of limiting “screen time” by listing activities that show to be “essential” to the children’s wellbeing. By contrasting the “senses” involved when fidgeting with a “glass screen” to one of building a sand castle on the beach, Smith endeavours for readers to recognise what is  “more important” for their children and hence become inspired to “engage” in outdoor activities. Similarly shifting to a less critical and more relaxed tone, the writer exemplifies the joyous and “reliev[ing]” experience with her “family” at the beach, with the diminishment of “arguments” and a transformation in her children’s behaviour. Such emphasis in the positive outcomes of outdoor activity may foster a sense of urgency amongst readers, to take their family out, as they may wish to experience this sensation themselves or simply break the vicious cycle their children is synced in.
The last visual serves to accentuate the writer’s claim of exciting new “senses” at the beach, for this time, the children’s body language is illustrated to be “active” and “content”; shown by their facial expressions, something we cannot see in the first image. The significant contrasts between the first and last image, may motivate readers to follow the footsteps of Smith. That is, readers may become enticed with the idea of children no longer “captivated by the screen” and ensnared in a state of “inertia” but stimulated by new senses of “touch” and “smell” whilst developing cognitive skills from digging and building. Additionally, these images may convey the notion that children who spending more time outdoors and less time indoors, will become more “content” and less “cranky”. Ultimately, this serves to engender acceptance from readers, towards the writer’s arguments, for it promotes a healthier and happier lifestyle, something in which all individuals strive to achieve.

24bauer12

  • Victorian
  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 40
  • Respect: +4
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #530 on: October 03, 2014, 09:12:32 pm »
0
Hi Lauren,
How do you turn historical examples which are commonplace into sophisticated discussion?Are rare examples more conducive to sophisticated discussions? Also my teacher says that all the four contexts may be examined in a single context essay;how can this be accomplished?

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
  • Respect: +2589
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #531 on: October 03, 2014, 09:32:00 pm »
+4
Hi Lauren,
How do you turn historical examples which are commonplace into sophisticated discussion?Are rare examples more conducive to sophisticated discussions? Also my teacher says that all the four contexts may be examined in a single context essay;how can this be accomplished?
Better questions would be:
a) Why would you want to fit all four contexts into one essay, and
b) How would this benefit you at all?

(Only half-playing)... Really though, think of what an essay is. A body of writing, intended to communicate, usually three paragraphs in VCE... Imagine trying to judge that essay as a whole when a student has tried cramming Imaginative Landscape, which they may not have ever thought about in any meaningful way (and who can blame them - what the hell is Imaginative Landscape?), and Identity and Belonging into the same essay. It will just look unnatural, mostly because it is.


I guess now that I've answered I'll give your original questions a shot.

Sophisticated discussion is sophisticated. Discuss something with sophistication, and you've got a sophisticated discussion - be in the Holocaust, the rate of dust gathering under your couch, or applied Japanese linguistics, if you're discussing it with sophistication you're in the clear. That being said, it would be hard to have an original, sophisticated critical analysis of some facet of the Holocaust in VCE (additional to the issues that Lauren has mentioned fifty times already). I guess the way to turn a commonplace example into sophisticated discussion is to be insightful. Say something meaningful. That's hard to do with commonplace things by definition of them being commonplace. In this way, I think 'rarer' examples probably are more conducive to sophisticated discussion. For one, you're probably more able to say something insifghtful about them, because if it's rare, it's probably original, and if it's original, you've probably made an insightful connection between that example and your discussion. Further, at least subconsciously, rarity will look more sophisticated. An examiner will be bored by the Holocaust, but if you mention like... state-sponsored terrorism in Nicaragua, which the examiner might not even know about, they're predisposed to be pleasantly surprised by the breath of fresh air that is your essay. Say something insightful about it. Bingo, we have a wiener.

So:

How do you turn historical examples which are commonplace into sophisticated discussion?
Say something insightful or meaningful.

Are rare examples more conducive to sophisticated discussions?
In my opinion, rare examples would tend towards that more than commonplace examples.

Also my teacher says that all the four contexts may be examined in a single context essay;how can this be accomplished?
With great confusion for your examiner.
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

literally lauren

  • Administrator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1689
  • Resident English/Lit Nerd
  • Respect: +1410
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #532 on: October 04, 2014, 12:08:23 am »
+4
esinnn:
Try posting on the English Work Submission and Marking board if you're looking to get feedback on your piece, this thread is more jsut for general questions.
Also, the English Work Examples Directory thread has some good examples of context pieces; they might not be on your specific texts, but they're good examples of structuring a piece. Otherwise, consulting your teacher/school might be the way to go.

Hi Lauren,
How do you turn historical examples which are commonplace into sophisticated discussion?Are rare examples more conducive to sophisticated discussions? Also my teacher says that all the four contexts may be examined in a single context essay;how can this be accomplished?

Rarer examples definitely lend themselves to more sophisticated discussion, though it's important to balance your mentioning of Nicaraguan terrorist funding with, say, Hitler. Where the first might be a welcome breath of fresh air, the second is a short cut to your assessor's mind; you don't need to clarify which Hitler, but you would need some background info on the fiscal policies of Nicaragua.
On top of what Brendan said often it's not about how 'impressive' you can make your examples sound (it is after all, a timed VCE essay; they don't expect you to revolutionize the way historians look at WWII) Being insightful is a much better goal than sounding sophisticated. A helpful question to ask yourself might be: why am I using this example? Beyond the fact that 'I memorised it and it fits' or 'my teacher told me to,' what does this example actually reveal about the context and the prompt?
Let's say you were looking at a prompt along the lines of 'The worst of humanity is revealed in conflict,' and you brought up the Boko Haram nutbags and all the people they've killed. Your reason for mentioning them (and your discussion in your paragraph) can't just be 'they did bad stuff, therefore sometimes conflict brings about bad things in people.' Not only does this lack sophistication, it lacks insight. A better analysis might examine the causes in more depth, or conduct some sort of analysis around the idea of a definitive 'worst' side of humanity.
This starts with your understanding of the prompt and its implications, so try and deconstruct it to find a more sophisticated contention than a standard 'yes' or 'no.'

Re: all four contexts, this is more of a weird quirk of the English curriculum than something you should be aiming to 'accomplish.' I suppose this can be seen in a couple of prompts, eg. 'Where we are defines who we are' (Id&b and IL) or 'Conflict occurs because people see the world differently' (C and WR)
But whilst the ideas may be linked, the way your discussion is conducted should be different, and you are in no way expected to tie in ideas from one to the other.
All this is likely to do is make your assessor think you didn't understand the task, so yeah there might be connections between the contexts, but that's just because they're all pretty vague, don't lose sleep over it :)

knightrider

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1842
  • Respect: 0
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #533 on: October 06, 2014, 04:08:32 pm »
0
How would you go about comparing more than one article,

For my coming sac we have to compare 3 articles.

How would you go about the structure of this? I am also told that one article is informative so how would i analyse this

yang_dong

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 74
  • Respect: 0
  • School: Mac.Robertson Girls' High School
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #534 on: October 06, 2014, 10:31:50 pm »
0
'by default' - quote from the book Ransom by David Malouf, is that suggesting the actions of chance? My teacher says something about how that relates to chance, but i don't see it, I thought that if something is default, sin't it predetermined and already set? How is that chance? I was hoping to find a different interpretation to the 'by default' quote. Can someone please explain?

Context of the quote: Priam was made king only by default?

thanks in advance!
« Last Edit: October 06, 2014, 10:33:40 pm by yang_dong »

walkec

  • Guest
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #535 on: October 07, 2014, 05:04:36 pm »
0
Hi Lauren,

We got back our practice exams that we completed during the term break today. They were marked by two teachers who taught English at our school previously and overall, I was very happy with my marks.
However, with the feedback for Section C it said I need to comment on tone shifts more. I felt like with the article I got, the tone didn't really change dramatically and I didn't really have anything all that significant to say about tone. I have been told this year that it is best to not mention tone (or any language device) simply for the sake of naming it, because obviously the analysis of it is where the marks lie. So I didn't really comment on it in the practice exam and then today the other teacher is saying I need to comment on it more?

I had the teacher who marked the papers last year and she was very formulaic in the way she would teach us to structure our writing. It was a more "tick the boxes" sort of approach instead of analysis of all aspects of language.

What is your opinion of her advice? Do I have to analyse tone to meet the criteria?

Thanks  :)

Rishi97

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1042
  • Respect: +40
  • School: The University of Melbourne
  • School Grad Year: 2014
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #536 on: October 07, 2014, 05:13:02 pm »
0
Hey Lauren :)

I went to an English lecture last week and the lecturer said that for our context pieces, we should write a statement of intention.
Is this allowed? Will the examiners even read it?
2014: VCE completed
2015-2017: BSc at Melb Uni

DREAM, BELIEVE, ACHIEVE!!!

literally lauren

  • Administrator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1689
  • Resident English/Lit Nerd
  • Respect: +1410
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #537 on: October 07, 2014, 05:32:14 pm »
+4
knightrider:
Refer to the original post in this thread, there are a bunch of recommendations there regarding structure. For informative articles, you can analyse the way they inform. Rarely will they give you something that is just a factual account of what happened, most schools pick articles that skew the issue somewhat, or at least present facts in a certain way. Also, consider how a rational, balanced tone affects readers; this is a technique in and of itself.
You'll probably have to contrast this with more 'opinionated' pieces anyway, but the key player method outlined in one of the earlier posts should assist with the grouping of paragraphs etc.

yang_dong:
'by default' does not necessarily mean 'by chance,' but it may introduce the idea of chance/freewill/fate into your discussion. You might want to consult your teacher for full clarification, but the fact that Priam was king 'by default' ie. automatically, means that not he, nor anyone else had a say in the matter. I suppose there is some element of chance or randomness in the idea of an autocracy; the leader is simply born, he does not achieve the position through merit. But that doesn't seem to be a primary concern here. The quote relates to chance, but isn't really an example of it.

walkec:
I had a bit of trouble with this too regarding 'ticking the boxes' and how necessary it was to state a technique, or point to the tone really obviously, so I'll repeat the advice given to me: 'Whilst teachers like her might not be right, they do exist, and you have to account for that.'
English is inherently subjective, and whilst they try to take this into consideration when marking, that doesn't eliminate the problem entirely. There are teachers out there who look for certain key words in your analysis, and even count up the amount of times you mention a device or comment on a tonal shift as a major criterion for the mark they give. They might be in the minority, but they do exist.
Tone is a tricky one, because for 5 years the Assessor's Reports reminded people to comment on the tone more often, then in 2013 we were told
Quote
It was clear that many teachers emphasise tone. While understanding the tone of a piece and the potential for it shifting as a piece unfolds shows insight into the piece, it is still only one small aspect of analysis. Students should be thoughtful about how they describe the tone, and should not simply pluck words from a memorised list.
I would say your approach of not commenting on tone unless it's relevant is a much more appropriate one; however, it's still important to give those picky assessors opportunity to give you marks, so if you fine the piece isn't overly emphatic or vitriolic, just comment on a few instances here and there in order to make the (arbitrary) quota.
Also, the VCAA articles* tend to have clearly delineated tonal shifts twice or three times a piece, so you should be able to pick out the points where they want you to comment on it.

*Except 2011, which had 100 tonal shifts and was an exercise in sadism  :D

Rish97:
Hmm, haven't heard that one before. Short answer: no. Long answer: Hell no, this is a waste of your time, the assessors won't read it, and it'll probably piss them off more because they'll think you haven't understood the task. I have no idea why they would say this. It's required for the SACs, but the examiners just skip it in the exam, even if you're writing creatively and wanted to clarify your ideas. The challenge of the exam piece, at least for imaginative/hybrid writers, is to make your ideas clear whilst still maintaining a solid storyline and writerly voice.
So I guess it's "allowed" in the same way that you're "allowed" to write a statement of intention for your Language Analysis too, but you won't get any credit for it :)

Cort

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 206
  • A tragedy of two interpretations.
  • Respect: +5
  • School Grad Year: 2014
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #538 on: October 07, 2014, 10:08:22 pm »
0
Hi Lauren,

One of my biggest problems with Context right now is that I struggle to give my expository writing substance/hard evidence. I can write out abstract ideas and relate to why individuals might react that way, but everytime I try to think of what evidence to ground it in reality, I'm braindead. I realise that this is a very late question, but I've only noticed this problem right now -- and this feeling as been happening to me throughout all my context sac. is there any last minute suggestions you can get my out of my predicament?

Thanks.
I actually have no idea what I'm saying or talking about.

Bestie

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 130
  • Respect: 0
  • School: Random
Re: 50 in English, available for queries :)
« Reply #539 on: October 08, 2014, 12:13:20 pm »
0
hi lauren,

We did a practice exam over the holidays and we got our results back. I got 7, 8 and 7.5, where do you think I would be sitting study score wise? and I hope you dont mind me asking, but what do you get to get 50? (if you dont have to answer that bit!)

thank you