VCE English Question Thread

[kimmytaaa]

I would probably say that it doesn't. My reasoning would be that, if you take away the introduction, the "hello, ladies and gentlemen", what you're really left with is just an essay that you're reading out.

If you're looking to transform it into a speech, I would suggest that you start by establishing a sense of context. Why are you giving this speech? Who are these ladies and gentlemen? Make it clear why this speech is relevant to this particular audience, whoever they are.

Besides that, you might want to consider some stylistic changes in shifting from a written essay to a spoken piece. Have you thought of using a little bit of signposting at the outset? Or perhaps think of rewriting it while considering some rhetorical devices. Vary your sentence length. Add in some punchy language. Even if it's to be submitted as a written piece, you want to show that you've considered how it sounds.

Thanks for your opinion

[kimmytaaa]

I'd have to agree 100% with your tutor here. Your teacher's analysis essay lacks any recognisable structure, and in turn, serves to confuse students.

For your intro, all you need is:
1) Generic/Broad sentence which contextualises the problem being discussed or its trigger event
2) Introduce writer, article name & type (is it an opinion piece, editorial, letter to the editor, speech etc.) & sources
3) What is the qualified contention?
4) Introduce images and their respective contentions

THAT IS IT.

Body paragraphs:
1) Topic sentence that exposes one of the writer's arguments/ideas
2) Highlight a Technique --> Quote it --> Discuss specific intended effect (relating back to the specific technique and the argument (1)
3) Repeat 2) as many times as is necessary until paragraph looks decent
4) Concluding sentence which highlights the overall effect of the techniques on the audiences (i.e. what actions/feelings/beliefs do they encourage?)

It only just hit me, but your teacher tends to use the passive voice rather than the active voice. Avoid, avoid, avoid!!!
This is a huge difference between high scoring pieces and mid-low range pieces. You won't see the passive voice in high scoring essays...

For example:
Metalanguage driven by Bolt (passive) --> Bolt's metalanguage (active)
An atmosphere of inclusion (passive) --> An inclusive atmosphere (active)

Additionally:
"readership aligns this masterful and sharp use of the English language" --> is he/she taking the piss? This is language analysis - not some sort of patronising commentary regarding the writer's ability to use English.

Hi
What do you mean by "taking the piss"? Should I go and confront my teacher that this isn't a language analysis piece or just leave it? Also are you able to explain again about passive and active because I still don't understand that.

[TheLlama]

What do you mean by "taking the piss"? Should I go and confront my teacher that this isn't a language analysis piece or just leave it? Also are you able to explain again about passive and active because I still don't understand that.

Confronting your English teacher isn't likely going to lead to a good outcome. If anything, you might want to actually just approach your teach calmly and thoughtfully, explaining that you're a little bit unsure about what's required.
The thing about language analysis: there isn't actually a "correct" structure that you need, so long as you're analysing how and why the text's creator is making specific choices about language in order to persuade the reader. That being said...

This metalanguage driven by Bolt is thwarted with casual undertones included the contraction ‘you’d’

It feels as if your teacher doesn't have the best sense of what's required of this task - there are some weird things included, and their word choice doesn't actually make... um... sense. It's the type of response you sometimes see in Year 12 writing where the student wants to sound fancy, but is really disconnected from the task. It's going to mislead students, even the very able ones. You might want to consider talking to other students to get a feel for what's going on? Seems a little odd.

The difference between active/passive:
Active: Bolt adopts a more casual tone in order to...
Passive: A more casual tone is adopted by Bolt

Typically in English, we order sentences subject-verb-object; a passive sentence flips this around.

[literally lauren]

Hi everyone!

What psychology areas would be suitable for Identity and Belonging?
Such as social psychology and within that conformity.

Thanks!~

See: here. Anything can be made suitable or relevant; it all depends on the quality of your discussion, but I'd recommend perusing some of the theories in the link above as a starting point.

Heyyyy.

Quick question.

If someone refers to someone by the wrong name (like calling someone "Joan" instead of "Jane"), is that a misnomer? Like does that count? I get what misnomers are in general but I'm just iffy as to whether this would be an example of a misnomer...

Misnomers tend to apply to more established definitions/names rather than just people. Best example of this was in the Lemony Snicket books where The Incredibly Deadly Viper was actually a sweet and cuddly snake who wouldn't hurt a fly. Or, like, The Great Northern Hotel being on the southmost part of an island, or a big rock being called The Smiling Rock when it actually looks like it has an angry frown.

Basically, a misnomer will have some kind of contradiction between the name of a thing, and the thing itself. There's nothing about the name 'Joan' that would contradict 'Jane,' but there is something in 'The Great Northern Hotel' which would contradict it being in the south.

Hope that makes sense!

My teacher's analysis of Andrew Bolt's
The issue on of decriminalising recreational drug use, motivated by social and international trends, has been recently debated in media circles just a filler statement. One piece, Andrew Bolt’s IT’S A SMOKESCREEN (Herald Sun, April 5th, 2012), contends that if drugs are legalised, ‘more people are likely to use them.’ it'd be better to actually explain the contention rather than stick a quote in and have that do all the work in this context. The editor persuades in an enthusiastic style clunky expression that adopts foremost this word doesn't belong here sarcasm, ridicule and patronising flavour umm? Bolt’s craft appeals to both individuals with insight towards current government policies and initiatives towards drug use as well as possible users of drugs specifying the audience isn't really necessary here. Titles opening contraction ‘IT’S’, an atmosphere of conversation is established Firstly, a single contraction doesn't create a conversational tone, and secondly, analysis doesn't belong in the intro!. This, passed ?? with the smokescreen pun, offers an absolution how? I'm not following the logic here -  how is the pun giving us an 'absolution?' that aligns with his contention on drug decriminalisation waaaay too general. If you're going to analyse, you want to be specific about what the effect/intention is. The title collectively this word doesn't belong engages the reader and invites them to consult this doesn't work either his text it'd be more accurate to call it an opinion piece or article with its central and symbolic how is it symbolic? What is it a symbol of? marijuana leaf.

Bolt’s piece mocks the “eminent Australians” by sarcastically aligning them with recreational drug use. Okay, this topic sentence is actually pretty decent. He maintains this voice of bemusement what voice of bemusement? This doesn't flow on from the previous sentence at all? through the repeated ‘experts’, thereby decreeing either this word doesn't belong, or this sentence is incomplete the Australia21 group. The reader’s trust in this ‘think tank’ is challenged and further by I'm guessing there are words missing here? connotative ‘absurdly’, ‘simplistic’ and 'backpedaling.’ Awful lot of quotes so far with very little actual analysis. The effect is fundamentally cemented this is another generic filler statement that could easily be cut as the reader is presented with a cyclical piece that opens with an attack and ends with similar concern with ‘dangerous’. This metalanguage driven more weird word choices by Bolt is thwarted ditto; this is actually a bit evaluative since it seems like this piece is criticising Bolt for 'thwarting' his own arguments with casual undertones included the contraction ‘you’d’ An atmosphere of inclusion is therefore how? You can't just say 'therefore' and have that be the explanation of how we got from A to B established and, when paired with the writer’s sharp wit really no need to flatter him -.-, enhances his position on drug. When considering the iconic marijuana leaf central to the editorial the readership aligns this masterful and sharp use of the English language again, pandering to the author and talking about how smart and wonderful he is just comes across as a waste of time and words with the razor edges of the leaf. huh??

I'm with TheLlama - this is nonsense There are parts that aren't too bad, but on the whole, the underlying analysis and the expression here really aren't good examples of the requirements of Language Analysis.

Don't "confront" your teacher in a very aggressive "hey sir/miss, you're wrong!" kind of way, but it might be worth sitting down with your teacher and working out what they expect of you. We can help you when it comes to the exam criteria (and vor's breakdown of the intro + body paragraph requirements is definitely a great framework to use) but ultimately, you want to be catering to your teacher for your SAC.

After that SAC is done, though, you can concentrate on writing pieces from an exam standpoint, which is where we and your tutor can be of more use to you

[HopefulLawStudent]

Misnomers tend to apply to more established definitions/names rather than just people. Best example of this was in the Lemony Snicket books where The Incredibly Deadly Viper was actually a sweet and cuddly snake who wouldn't hurt a fly. Or, like, The Great Northern Hotel being on the southmost part of an island, or a big rock being called The Smiling Rock when it actually looks like it has an angry frown.

Basically, a misnomer will have some kind of contradiction between the name of a thing, and the thing itself. There's nothing about the name 'Joan' that would contradict 'Jane,' but there is something in 'The Great Northern Hotel' which would contradict it being in the south.

Thanks Lauren!

[kimmytaaa]

Hope that makes sense!
I'm with TheLlama - this is nonsense There are parts that aren't too bad, but on the whole, the underlying analysis and the expression here really aren't good examples of the requirements of Language Analysis.

Don't "confront" your teacher in a very aggressive "hey sir/miss, you're wrong!" kind of way, but it might be worth sitting down with your teacher and working out what they expect of you. We can help you when it comes to the exam criteria (and vor's breakdown of the intro + body paragraph requirements is definitely a great framework to use) but ultimately, you want to be catering to your teacher for your SAC.

After that SAC is done, though, you can concentrate on writing pieces from an exam standpoint, which is where we and your tutor can be of more use to you

Yeah I made one or two spelling errors, but when it comes with the sac, do I have to carter it similar with what the teacher expects (like what he has there) or can I write it the way I am comfortable with?

[vor0005]

Yeah I made one or two spelling errors, but when it comes with the sac, do I have to carter it similar with what the teacher expects (like what he has there) or can I write it the way I am comfortable with?

To determine what your teacher expects of you, it's best to just hand in practice paragraphs or practice essays - this is the only way you can truly receive feedback that will help you in your SAC.

Experiment with the advice we have given you and see what he/she says. Then, incorporate her feedback into the drafts that follow. I know it's a very back and forth process, but this is probably the best way to improve in English.

Hope that helps.

[Swagadaktal]

Hey guys, I'm seeking help on context - I'm pretty lost

We're studying encountering conflict (the lieutenant),

I want to write an expository piece - I was thinking about something along the lines of a speech but tbh I need more ideas of which forms I can write in.

And can anyone recommend me some good books/documentaries/movies where I can gain some ideas from?

I was thinking about just spewing out an essay but that wouldn't be very good in terms of form and language choice - because I don't have anything in mind.

Any ideas on how to approach this? Sorry for the vague questions I just don't have any specific questions in mind at the moment.

[vor0005]

Hey guys, I'm seeking help on context - I'm pretty lost

We're studying encountering conflict (the lieutenant),

I want to write an expository piece - I was thinking about something along the lines of a speech but tbh I need more ideas of which forms I can write in.

And can anyone recommend me some good books/documentaries/movies where I can gain some ideas from?

I was thinking about just spewing out an essay but that wouldn't be very good in terms of form and language choice - because I don't have anything in mind.

Any ideas on how to approach this? Sorry for the vague questions I just don't have any specific questions in mind at the moment.

First and foremost, you must use the ideas from your assigned text for Encountering Conflict. Hence, a good place to start would be by reading/watching those texts and jotting down the ideas that emanate from them.

Secondly, once you have all of these ideas written down somewhere: try to think of a focus or particular topic that you are passionate about which encompasses ideas from those texts, but also, is relevant to Encountering Conflict.

Once you have picked a topic or something that you are passionate about - and they both are relevant to the Context (Encountering Conflict) and the ideas from your assigned text - then take some sort of a stance on that topic.

I understand that you'd like to do an expository pieces but the best pieces tend to incorporate features of different modes of writing (persuasive and personal); a hybrid. This allows you to use your own voice throughout your piece which provides it with that extra bit of authenticity. Remember: the worst thing you can do in context is write a boring text-responsy type of essay.

Oh and lastly: before you begin writing, take a look at the Encountering Conflict prompts from the past 8 years. Whilst writing your context piece draft, try to ensure your piece encompasses as many ideas from those prompts as possible so that you can easily mould your piece to a prompt on the actual day. (most of the prompts are very very very similar so your piece is likely to fit many of them - just make sure that your topic isn't TOO specific so that you don't restrict yourself with prompts)

Hope that makes sense.

[Swagadaktal]

First and foremost, you must use the ideas from your assigned text for Encountering Conflict. Hence, a good place to start would be by reading/watching those texts and jotting down the ideas that emanate from them.

Secondly, once you have all of these ideas written down somewhere: try to think of a focus or particular topic that you are passionate about which encompasses ideas from those texts, but also, is relevant to Encountering Conflict.

Once you have picked a topic or something that you are passionate about - and they both are relevant to the Context (Encountering Conflict) and the ideas from your assigned text - then take some sort of a stance on that topic.

I understand that you'd like to do an expository pieces but the best pieces tend to incorporate features of different modes of writing (persuasive and personal); a hybrid. This allows you to use your own voice throughout your piece which provides it with that extra bit of authenticity. Remember: the worst thing you can do in context is write a boring text-responsy type of essay.

Oh and lastly: before you begin writing, take a look at the Encountering Conflict prompts from the past 8 years. Whilst writing your context piece draft, try to ensure your piece encompasses as many ideas from those prompts as possible so that you can easily mould your piece to a prompt on the actual day. (most of the prompts are very very very similar so your piece is likely to fit many of them - just make sure that your topic isn't TOO specific so that you don't restrict yourself with prompts)

Hope that makes sense.

Thanks for the advice. Have a few questions though.

What do you mean by writing a piece that can be moulded to different prompts? A personal/persuasive hybrid - wouldn't you have different arguments throughout? And when you say personal do you mean using stuff like "I" or do you go as far as writing a creative personal essay?
If I manage to get the structure of a speech down tight I think I might be able to write different pieces, but I don't see how I'll be able to write a general piece which encompasses the ideas in so many prompts where if I change a paragraph it'll suddenly fit.

[oooo]

question: with topic sentences, can i have topic sentences? as in multiple sentences to serve as a 'topic sentence'. i remember being told that i can by one of my teachers, but only if cramming everything into one sentence makes it confusing. can someone confirm this for me? thanks 

[vor0005]

Thanks for the advice. Have a few questions though.

What do you mean by writing a piece that can be moulded to different prompts? A personal/persuasive hybrid - wouldn't you have different arguments throughout? And when you say personal do you mean using stuff like "I" or do you go as far as writing a creative personal essay?
If I manage to get the structure of a speech down tight I think I might be able to write different pieces, but I don't see how I'll be able to write a general piece which encompasses the ideas in so many prompts where if I change a paragraph it'll suddenly fit.

Essentially, avoid writing a piece that homes in on a really specific and restrictive issue. Instead, write a piece with a broad contention and then use a variety of evidence/specific arguments to prove that broad contention.

Yes, you would have different arguments - but they should all ultimately lead to the one conclusion. And yes, when I say 'personal', using the first person 'I' would be a good way to go about it (but do so scarcely!)

Lastly, with the prompts: they are all very similar - they have to be! Notice how they're all so broad and adaptable. Indeed, some may be more difficult than others and may require some more moulding (i.e. changing a few sentences or altering your word choices). However, some of them you won't have to change anything at all...

Either way: it is completely unreasonable for a student to produce a high quality piece on the day under timed conditions without having a pre-prepared response (to a large extent). That being said, though: don't take the prompt for granted - make sure that it is addressed. But keep in mind, the prompt is more of a 'moral of the story' rather than a text response prompt, so treat it accordingly.

[literally lauren]

Yeah I made one or two spelling errors, but when it comes with the sac, do I have to carter it similar with what the teacher expects (like what he has there) or can I write it the way I am comfortable with?

Cater to your teacher for SACs; cater to the examiners in the exam.

If your teacher is open to different approaches and is willing to be flexible, then you might be okay. Otherwise, it's best that you learn to modify your writing style and focus so you can get decent SAC marks.

E.g. if your teacher wants you to discuss whether or not techniques are persuasive in L.A. (which you're not meant to do,) just do it for your SAC anyway. Then, when you get to the exam, you can just fulfil the task criteria and ditch the evaluation.

question: with topic sentences, can i have topic sentences? as in multiple sentences to serve as a 'topic sentence'. i remember being told that i can by one of my teachers, but only if cramming everything into one sentence makes it confusing. can someone confirm this for me? thanks 

You can have multiple sentences, especially if you're unpacking an idea that's especially complex. However, if you find yourself always needing 2-4 sentences at the start of your paragraphs, perhaps consider making your expression a bit more concise. It's possible your writing is just a little convoluted, but you're absolutely allowed to spend a little longer explaining your points before you start delving into your examples.

Either way: it is completely unreasonable for a student to produce a high quality piece on the day under timed conditions without having a pre-prepared response (to a large extent). That being said, though: don't take the prompt for granted - make sure that it is addressed. But keep in mind, the prompt is more of a 'moral of the story' rather than a text response prompt, so treat it accordingly.

One thing I'd challenge here: it's a much safer idea to have various responses (or even better, bits and pieces of responses) which is then adapted and reassembled based on the prompt vs. having a 'swiss cheese' piece that tries to cater to every possible prompt by switching a few words or examples around. I definitely agree with your point that students can't be expected to come into the exam with their brains as blank slates and just have all these spontaneous epiphanies about the nature of conflict, but I think those who have multiple options up their sleeve are in a better position than those who invest all their hopes in one "malleable" piece. There are students who get lucky are able to make this work, but they're few and far between.

Yes, you could conceivably pick out ~10 prompts at random and have them touch on a similar thematic concern (e.g. 'the way people respond to conflict tells us something about our values' is a very common one) and maybe you'll end up with an exam prompt that relates to this same idea. But if you want to feel prepared for Context, you're going to need to actually prepare for a whole host of potential prompts.

No one expected that hideous 'conflicts of conscience' prompt in my year level, and if all you'd been preparing for were the ideas from past years' exams and practice prompts that were available at the time...
(i.e. 2008: extraordinary responses from ordinary people
2009: victims show us what's important
2010: remaining a bystander is difficult
2011: compromise is important
2012: conflict changes our priorities)
...then you'd be left high and dry trying to cobble together a response to the core of the 2013 prompt.

I tend to be an advocate for what I call 'frameworks' that you can mould and reconfigure to suit material, as opposed to memorised responses. I know a lot of teachers/ tutors/ students who'd disagree with me here (and tbh, I'm eagerly awaiting 2017 when we don't have to worry about this awful AOS anymore ) but if you are wanting to commit to a memorised piece, just be aware of the risks.

[Swagadaktal]

Cater to your teacher for SACs; cater to the examiners in the exam.

If your teacher is open to different approaches and is willing to be flexible, then you might be okay. Otherwise, it's best that you learn to modify your writing style and focus so you can get decent SAC marks.

E.g. if your teacher wants you to discuss whether or not techniques are persuasive in L.A. (which you're not meant to do,) just do it for your SAC anyway. Then, when you get to the exam, you can just fulfil the task criteria and ditch the evaluation.

You can have multiple sentences, especially if you're unpacking an idea that's especially complex. However, if you find yourself always needing 2-4 sentences at the start of your paragraphs, perhaps consider making your expression a bit more concise. It's possible your writing is just a little convoluted, but you're absolutely allowed to spend a little longer explaining your points before you start delving into your examples.

One thing I'd challenge here: it's a much safer idea to have various responses (or even better, bits and pieces of responses) which is then adapted and reassembled based on the prompt vs. having a 'swiss cheese' piece that tries to cater to every possible prompt by switching a few words or examples around. I definitely agree with your point that students can't be expected to come into the exam with their brains as blank slates and just have all these spontaneous epiphanies about the nature of conflict, but I think those who have multiple options up their sleeve are in a better position than those who invest all their hopes in one "malleable" piece. There are students who get lucky are able to make this work, but they're few and far between.

Yes, you could conceivably pick out ~10 prompts at random and have them touch on a similar thematic concern (e.g. 'the way people respond to conflict tells us something about our values' is a very common one) and maybe you'll end up with an exam prompt that relates to this same idea. But if you want to feel prepared for Context, you're going to need to actually prepare for a whole host of potential prompts.

No one expected that hideous 'conflicts of conscience' prompt in my year level, and if all you'd been preparing for were the ideas from past years' exams and practice prompts that were available at the time...
(i.e. 2008: extraordinary responses from ordinary people
2009: victims show us what's important
2010: remaining a bystander is difficult
2011: compromise is important
2012: conflict changes our priorities)
...then you'd be left high and dry trying to cobble together a response to the core of the 2013 prompt.

I tend to be an advocate for what I call 'frameworks' that you can mould and reconfigure to suit material, as opposed to memorised responses. I know a lot of teachers/ tutors/ students who'd disagree with me here (and tbh, I'm eagerly awaiting 2017 when we don't have to worry about this awful AOS anymore ) but if you are wanting to commit to a memorised piece, just be aware of the risks.

Given that we have 2 different context sacs and I'm planning on writing up 2 different malleable pieces - would I be lulled into a false sense of security into believing that at least 1 of my pieces would be able to apply to the prompt?

And I'm thinking about writing up an editorial which covers indigenous disadvantage - I've done plenty of research on this topic.
I'd be able to transform my piece by focusing on different issues within indigenous disadvantage - and since there are like 4 issues i'd cover under the 1 umbrella term "indigenous disadvantage" i'd have plenty of different views to look from.

However, my concern is that I won't be able to right a high marking essay because an editorial is kinda eh. - But I hope I'm wrong. What is your experience with editorials?

[TheLlama]

Given that we have 2 different context sacs and I'm planning on writing up 2 different malleable pieces - would I be lulled into a false sense of security into believing that at least 1 of my pieces would be able to apply to the prompt?

And I'm thinking about writing up an editorial which covers indigenous disadvantage - I've done plenty of research on this topic.
I'd be able to transform my piece by focusing on different issues within indigenous disadvantage - and since there are like 4 issues i'd cover under the 1 umbrella term "indigenous disadvantage" i'd have plenty of different views to look from.

However, my concern is that I won't be able to right a high marking essay because an editorial is kinda eh. - But I hope I'm wrong. What is your experience with editorials?

One of the constant warnings is to avoid coming in with a prepared piece. It depends how malleable they are, but you really need to be able to show that you've considered the prompt. Far better, as Lauren suggested, to think in terms of frameworks or elements. Even though the prompts tend to be quite broad (for the exam, they have to allow access to all students, and have to fit in with four different texts), they tend to be relatively focused on a central idea.

It's all about the quality of the individual piece rather than the particular form it takes. It's ultimately up to what you're able to do with one. I would suggest that you think about where your strengths are as a writer, the particular approach that allows you to show off! If you're going down the editorial path, you might want to look at some international newspapers (The Guardian, NYTimes) that tend to have especially strong editorials. Though an op-ed/opinion piece might give you a little bit more flexibility as it will allow you to step into the first person, weave in anecdotes and play around a little bit more.

I would encourage you to try a few different approaches; until you've written a few and compared them, you won't know what suits you and where your strengths are!