2019 AA Club - Week 4

[MissSmiley]

Happy long weekend everyone!

TITLE: We're awarding the Order of Australia to the wrong people
DATE: 25th January 2019
WEBSITE :  https://theconversation.com/were-awarding-the-order-of-australia-to-the-wrong-people-110487   -   The Conversation Australia
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background: The Order of Australia award is an honour established on 14 February 1975 by Elizabeth II, Queen of Australia, to recognise Australian citizens and other persons for achievement. Before the establishment of the order, Australian citizens received British honours.

It’s almost Australia Day and hundreds of us are in line for an award.

Sadly, as unpublished research by my firm Lateral Economics reveals, many will get it for little more than doing their job. And the higher the job’s status, the higher the award.

Governors General, High Court Justices and Vice Chancellors of major universities would hope for the highest Companion of the Order (AC). Professors, public service departmental heads and senior business people should hope for the next one down – an Officer of the Order (AO). School Principals would generally slot in next for Members of the Order (AM).

If you’re lucky, or you’ve done your job extraordinarily well, you’ll be promoted one rank, but that’s pretty much it.

We reward most the already rewarded
Meanwhile, those who succeed in some achievement principally in and for their community usually qualify for the lowest award, if that; the Medal of the Order (OAM). And usually only if they’ve become conspicuous.

The level of gratitude among recipients seems to follow an equal and opposite arc. Those at the bottom seem the most thrilled for being recognised the least.

Distinction in putting others first gets short shrift. As Anne Summers lamented in 2013:

Seven years ago I nominated a woman I admire for an Australian honour. It took two years but it came through and she was awarded a Medal of the Order of Australia (OAM) for a lifetime of work with victims of domestic violence. I was disappointed she had not been given a higher award – I had hoped for an AM (Member of the Order of Australia) at the very least – but she was thrilled and so was her family.

Money, fame and status are nothing to be sneezed at if they are honestly earned. But they are their own reward. Why should they beget other rewards?

We could be putting awards to use
Here’s an idea. Why don’t we award honours to encourage people to do more than their job? In a world that is lavishing increasing rewards on the “haves”, the worldly rewards for doing your job need little bolstering.

Knowing awards are reserved for people who do more than their jobs might encourage us to choose more selfless and socially committed lives at the outset of our careers.

There’s a hunger among the young to do just that – to combine good, privately rewarding careers with serving their community and tackling social ills.

If honours are “the principal means by which the nation officially recognises the merit of its citizens” as the 2011 Government House review put it, I’d like to use it to encourage those people the most.

Wouldn’t it be more consistent with Australian values?

It’d make them more Australian
Government House provides online biographies of all those awarded honours. Lateral Economics sampled about half of them back to 2013 looking specifically at the gender division of honours and the extent to which those biographies included descriptions of work done without personal gain.

Barely more than a quarter of Order of Australia recipients recorded voluntary work in their biographies.

And those that did were more likely to be near the bottom of the awards ladder.

More than a third of those receiving the very bottom award, the OAM, were engaged in obviously selfless work, compared with a fifth at the top (just two out of ten ACs).

Still we may be making a little progress. Perhaps spurred by sentiments such as those expressed by Anne Summers, last year saw a higher percentage of women than in any previous year. Unusually, six women got the top honour, the AC, compared with four men, and the proportion with voluntary service broke through the 30% barrier for the first time.

I wonder what Australia Day will bring. I’m thinking that, whatever it is, we can do a lot better, for our community, and our country.

by Nicholas Gruen
Adjunct Professor, Business School, University of Technology Sydney


Image: https://imgur.com/a/5ePNsfq

[peachxmh]

The issue surrounding the suitability of the criteria behind the Order of Australia award is addressed in an opinion piece titled "We're awarding the Order of Australia to the wrong people" (The Conversation Australia, 25/01/19) by Nicholas Gruen. Using a measured tone, Gruen contends tha tthe higher levels of the prestigious award should be reserved for those who help their communities outside their jobs in order to encourage Australians to lead more selfless lives. He directs his piece specifically towards hopeful and past Order of Australia recipients, those in charge of deciding the recipients as well as determining the criteria, and the Australian public in general.

Gruen commences his piece by arguing that the higher levels of the Order of Australia award should not only be accessible to those in high job positions. He criticizes how selfless work is not rewarded with a higher award, and questions why even then, they must be "conspicuous" to be acknowledged. Thus, he causes readers to feel outraged at the lengths that those trying to help others are forced to go through in order to be merely recognized as his use of the adjective portrays them as having to be literally famous to achieve recognition. He then appeals to justice and incites pity in readers by claiming that even so, these people are excited at even receiving an award at all. Hence, his readers feel a need to help overcome this injustice. Through his inclusion of an anecdote about one such recipient, he personalises the issue by putting a face and life story behind these recipients. As such, his readers are able to increasingly empathise with them as the victims of the issue, making them more likely to act to resolve the issue. By including an image of the Order of Australia medal, Gruen emphasizes the prestige of this award, as in the visual, the medal is very much the focal point, and along with its bright colour, gives a sense of importance and exclusivity. Therefore, Gruen expresses the injustice that the more selfless members of our community face in being recognized and rewarded for their work, in comparison to their contenders.

Gruen then argues that the award could be better utilised to serve as an encouragement towards the Australian public to be more committed towards their community and society in general. His employment of the inclusive pronoun "we" when suggesting this alternative solution causes readers to feel in control of the issue and thus, capable of resolving it. He links the separate issue of the privileges the wealthy and powerful in the world receive compared to others to the issue at hand, therefore causing readers to apply their outrage towards that issue to this one. It also causes the issue behind the order of Australia award to appear as a manifestation of classism, inciting readers to feel indignation at the fact that the right to be acknowledged is being taken away from those that deserve it, due to their social status. His appeal to his readers' patriotism through his statement that his solution would ensure that recipients embody Australian values utilises their pride in Australia as a country to encourage them to strive to help Australia's reputation through endorsing his solution. Gruen uses logos in the form of statistical evidence such as his statement that "just two out of ten ACs" are involved in volunteering,  to clearly allow readers to understand the severity of the issue through simple facts. Consequently, he suggests that the issue needs to be solved to uphold our values as a country, and proposes his solution as a viable way to do so.

Gruen concludes his piece on a hopeful note by asserting that change is plausible. His affirmation that progress towards resolving the issue is being made through his description of milestones that have been achieved, such as "six women" receiving the highest level of the award, and over "30%" of recipients having completed voluntary service suggests to readers that change is definitely possible if they strive to make it happen. His reflection upon the future of the award implies his confidence that change will occur, confidence which in turn translates to his readers. This, coupled with his call to arms for readers to try to serve their country through helping resolve the issue not only makes them feel obligated to make a difference, but also appeals to our pride as a nation by suggesting it will be a step towards bettering Australia as a country.

[Anonymous]

The issue surrounding the suitability of the criteria behind the Order of Australia award is addressed in an opinion piece titled "We're awarding the Order of Australia to the wrong people" (The Conversation Australia, 25/01/19) by Nicholas Gruen. Just to let you know, you don't really need to write the title of the piece in your intro, VCAA generally isn't too harsh on this. So just 'Nicholas Gruen's opinion piece' would do! Using a measured tone, Gruen contends that the higher levels of the prestigious award should be reserved for those who help their communities outside their jobs in order to encourage Australians to lead more selfless lives. He directs his piece specifically towards hopeful and past Order of Australia recipients, those in charge of deciding the recipients as well as determining the criteria, and the Australian public in general. Excellent job at outlining the target audience!! Great job on implementing what I said earlier about being comprehensive about the target audience! If you do this every time, assessors are really going to be impressed! Great work! 

Gruen commences his piece much smoother start! well done!  by arguing that the higher levels of the Order of Australia award should not only be accessible to those in high job positions. He criticizes how selfless work is not rewarded with a higher award, and questions why even then, they must be "conspicuous" to be acknowledged. Be careful here, this just seems a bit like you're summarising rather than analysing. Thus, he causes readers to feel outraged at the lengths that those trying to help others are forced to go through in order to be merely recognized as his use of the adjective portrays them as having to be literally famous to achieve recognition. This is a bit unclear and a bit colloquial as well. How about for the effect you could say that even volunteers in the readership are tempted to feel outraged when knowing that their work is not recognised and acknowledged like it should be. He then appeals to justice and incites pity in readers by claiming that even so, these people are excited at even receiving an award at all. awkward phrasing, so for reader effect, could you say that 'Aiming to incite pity but also anger in the Australian readership, Gruen insinuates how volunteering for the country is undermined by the award criteria.' or something like that? Hence, his readers feel be specific with 'readers.' Also, you can't be so confident about this. So say 'may feel.' In this case, the general public wouldn't possibly be able to overcome this injustice, so be specific - it's the Governor General on a larger scale who is coaxed to set a different criteria. a need to help overcome this injustice. Through his inclusion of an anecdote about one such recipient, he personalises the issue by putting a face and life story behind these recipients. As such, his readers are able to increasingly empathise with them as the victims of the issue Yes this is good! but make sure you are very specific about the target audience. Also, this last bit is repetitive, that's why I've deleted it making them more likely to act to resolve the issue. By including an image of the Order of Australia medal, Gruen emphasizes the prestige of this award, as in the visual, the medal is very much the focal point, and along with its bright colour, gives a sense of importance and exclusivity. Perhaps to make a clearer link between the image and the injustice, you could say how 'There is only one medal captured, which may suggest many are left out  or not being rewarded this prestigious medal ; that the criteria of the medal is overly selective to the extent that it doesn't cater for all volunteers.' Just my interpretation of the image Therefore, Gruen expresses attempts to arouse the general Australian public's sympathy for the injustice that the more selfless members of our community face in being recognized and rewarded for their work, in comparison to their contenders.

Gruen then proceeds to argue that the award could be better utilised to serve as an encouragement towards for the Australian public to be more committed towards their community and society in general. His employment of the inclusive pronoun "we" this is really broad piece of evidence. when suggesting this alternative solution it's his interpretation rather than solution causes readers to feel in control of the issue and thus, capable of resolving it. Make sure to vary your sentence structures as well. Start with a gerund sometimes. 'Linking the separate issue...Gruen seeks to..." He links the rather than link, try 'juxtaposes' separate issue of the privileges the wealthy and powerful in the world receive compared to others to the issue at hand, therefore causing readers to apply their outrage towards that issue to this one. this is unclear. Do you want to say that readers may feel a sense of inequity? the wealthier may feel guilty? It also causes the issue behind the order of Australia award to appear as a manifestation of classism, inciting readers to feel indignation at the fact that the right to be acknowledged is being taken away from those that deserve it, due to their social status.Great analysis! However, you do need to include more evidence from the text His appeal to his readers' patriotism through his statement that his solution too many 'his' in this one sentence, vary your sentence structure. Aiming to appeal to his readers' patriotism through highlighting how an improved criteria would embody Australian values of fairness, Gruen endeavours to further encourage Government officials to revise the medal criteria. would ensure that recipients embody Australian values utilises their pride in Australia as a country to encourage them to strive to help Australia's reputation through endorsing his solution. Gruen uses logos good! in the form of statistical evidence such as his statement that "just two out of ten ACs" are involved in volunteering,  to clearly allow readers to understand the severity of how volunteers are not rewarded for their work. the issue through simple facts. Consequently, he suggests that the issue needs to be solved to uphold our values as a country, and proposes his solution as a viable way to do so. Great linking sentence!

Gruen concludes his piece on a hopeful note by asserting that change is plausible. This is a great opportunity to talk about tonal shift. So you could say how his tone has changed to a more hopeful one. Make sure you literally write 'tonal shift' and talk about it somewhere in your analysis for every SAC and exam you do! Great way to stand out!  His affirmation that progress towards resolving the issue is being made through his description of milestones that have been achieved, such as "six women" receiving the highest level of the award, and over "30%" of recipients having completed voluntary service suggests to readers that change is definitely possible if they strive to make it happen. This is a long sentence! Break it up into parts. Perhaps one part could be how Gruen seeks to portray himself as well-informed to write about such an important and respected national issue. Then the second sentence could be about how this can reassure the general Australian public that change is definitely possible. His reflection upon the future of the award implies his confidence that change will occur, confidence which in turn translates to his readers. This is a bit repetitive This, coupled with his call to arms for readers to try to serve their country through helping resolve the issue not only is likely to make them feel makes them feel obligated to make a difference, but also appeals to our pride as a nation by suggesting it will be a step towards bettering Australia as a country. Great!
[/quote]
Hi peachxmh!

Great job, once again, I can really see fantastic improvements every week!! If you improve every week like you currently are, you'll be in a great position for October!! 
This time though, I was thinking how you could have incorporated more evidence from the text! Remember, for each para, aim to quote 3-4 pieces of solid evidence. It could be analysing the connotations behind a particular word or phrase, or analysing appeals. Also, make sure it's quality evidence. So for example many many students have written and will write about inclusive pronouns and exclusive pronouns and their effects, and that's why assessors know this inside out now! So try and have unique pieces of evidence, like you did with the logos! Make sure you have some longer phrases too as evidence! In short, start quoting more from the text and then analysing it as succinctly as you can with varied sentence structure like I've given examples above.

Excellent work! 

[MissSmiley]

Hi peachxmh!
Sorry, the above feedback post was mine!
Silly me, I forgot to tick the box!
Hope that helped!