2013 Exam Prep Questions Thread - Mod Assistance. Post questions in here.

[Romaboy]

Hey guys, I'm thinking of ideas for my context piece and what I am going to write on the exam and have a few questions that I'll need a little bit of help.

Firstly, is it okay to just agree or disagree or could you do both in relation to the prompt?

Also, I'm having trouble deciding what form I'm going to write it in as I was thinking of doing an Obituary (Expository piece) but that only limits me to discussing one character and I was wondering if there was a form that I could use that would allow me to discuss different characters in the movie as I am doing Paradise Road.

Lastly, is an Obituary actually a good form to do as I feel like sometimes I am retelling to story in some parts and if I was to do an Obituary, how would I avoid this?

Thanks, any help would be appreciated

[silverpixeli]

Random idea: how about a eulogy rather than an obituary? Maybe not the actual presentation of the eulogy, but the writing of one? Allows you to adopt the voice or a character, discuss ideas as the character struggles to find the right words to say at the funeral, and is a similar setting to the obituary thing. I haven't studies paradise road, so I don't know if this fits at all, just an idea.

[Romaboy]

Interesting, I'll definitely keep it in mind, thanks!

[lala1911]

Hi.
Your take on using newspaper articles for expository in the exam? My teacher said it's not accepted.

[Bad Student]

Hi.
Your take on using newspaper articles for expository in the exam? My teacher said it's not accepted.

I've been given newspaper articles from my teacher as external material for my expository essays.

[Bad Student]

Firstly, is it okay to just agree or disagree or could you do both in relation to the prompt?

I think you should be fine agreeing and disagreeing to the prompt if you write an expository essay.

[Smiley_]

I need some help on this topic
Others only see our true identity when we are confident with ourselves.

[shooterblitz]

Hey guys, had a question regarding Identity and Belonging/Text Response

I'm planning to go down the Imaginative line, possibly a short story or letter in the exam.

Now because we aren't meant to write a written explanation, is it then more appropriate to base my short story or letter on a character's story form my text (GUAIA, if that makes sense), or can I still create a made-up character with somewhat similar circumstances/experiences as the said character?

Also, in terms of text response, I'm coming to hear that its best NOT to memorise long lengths of quotes, and rather make use of, consistently, short quotes, and even terms in fact as part of your sentences. Is that always true?

Cheers

[Limista]

I need some help on this topic
Others only see our true identity when we are confident with ourselves.

I'm actually doing Whose Reality? as my context, but I'll give you some ideas:
* who is to determine, when we are 'confident'? This trait is so subjective, that it is not quantitatively measurable. Naturally, when someone is confident, they are thought of as extrovert, carefree, loud, assertive, secure personalities. But that does not mean that the 'introvert' - someone who is stereotyped as being quiet and solemn - is not confident. What then, is confidence? It is the ability to feel happy, proud and satisfied with oneself. Thus, others can see our true identity when we accept ourselves.
* what actually is our true identity? Sometimes we might insist that who we truly are is demonstrated by how we act and what we believe in. We believe, so strongly, that this is our absolute charisma and personality. How do we know, however, that we have not brainwashed ourselves? As opposed to being influenced by the media and other external sources, we have accessorized ourselves into something that is foreign; we are responsible for our own undoing. External sources, like peers and parents, may be influential in determining who we are, but we are the ones who actively change ourselves so that we match up to society's expectations. Because we are conforming, society is then eager to accept that this is our true identity. Those who are different are usually shunned (take Michael Leunig the cartoonist as an example here).
* sometimes we subconsciously change our true identity - it's not always a conscious process. People with anorexia or bulimia are not aware of the true state of their bodies; they see something else when they look in the mirror. So, they worry, and this worry then results in them being unaware that they are not consuming as much food as the normal person. Their body shape is not their 'true' body shape, with curves, fat and muscle. Instead, it is a fake body: all bones. Their low self-esteem and regard for their body means that others cannot see their true appearance.

[HossRyams]

How do you make your context expository essay stand out? My teacher claims it's fine to simply unpack the prompt and address its complexities, but others advise you have some "hook" that separates yours from others. I don't really want to open with an anecdote (anything I write that is remotely creative always turns out cringe-worthy) and teachers seem to be against opening with quotes and rhetorical questions. Even if my essay is "boring", but does the job, can it still get full marks? (I'm doing the Imaginative Landscape if it helps.)

Moreover, is it possible to improve my expression between now and the exam? My teacher says the one thing stopping me from getting full marks in Context and TR is my poor expression (yet for some reason it's fine in LA). Should I just look at model pieces and incorporate similar phrasing, or just keep practice writing ...or both? Any suggestions? >_<

Good luck everyone

[neonperson]

Hi!

I'm not sure if this is the right place, but I'm having big trouble with the Language Analysis on the VCAA 2011 paper (about tattoos). I don't think it's persuasive at all! It just looks like a big informative piece to me, so I'm having a really difficult time attempting to analyze it.

Would you be able to help me with the main points / topic sentences?

Here's a link to the actual paper (off another one of the threads here)
http://imgur.com/a/xT1Yh#FVSJl

Thanks a bunch!

[HossRyams]

Hi!

I'm not sure if this is the right place, but I'm having big trouble with the Language Analysis on the VCAA 2011 paper (about tattoos). I don't think it's persuasive at all! It just looks like a big informative piece to me, so I'm having a really difficult time attempting to analyze it.

Would you be able to help me with the main points / topic sentences?

Here's a link to the actual paper (off another one of the threads here)
http://imgur.com/a/xT1Yh#FVSJl

Thanks a bunch!

What I think (I'm just another year 12 student though):

Well if you didn't find it persuasive, perhaps you should look at aspects of the piece that undermined their argument for you. Anyway, having read this before, I'm pretty sure the writer contends that tattoos, once meaningful and significant, have degraded to mere fashion statements.

All the 'information' the author uses is essentially used as evidence to demonstrate her thorough knowledge of tattoos, used in conjunction with the fact that she actually has one. She wants to seem like she knows what she's talking about. So in turn, she (attempts to) validate her points by enhancing her credibility in this way.

Try and think how it MAY be persuasive, and then say it may/perhaps lead the readership to think/feel/do whatever.

Another tip - if you find an article mostly unpersuasive and rather informative, it's likely that the writer is taking an even-handed approach. They don't want to sound overly emotional because it often takes away from their argument. By seeming neutral about the topic but subtly slipping in their contention, it appears as if they had thought out their argument thoroughly.

But I don't think that's the case in this particular piece. Just by looking at some of her phrasing, I think she has some strong opinions on the matter.

Also - don't forget to look at the comment and analyse them too.

Hope that helps >_<

[Patches]

Hi!

I'm not sure if this is the right place, but I'm having big trouble with the Language Analysis on the VCAA 2011 paper (about tattoos). I don't think it's persuasive at all! It just looks like a big informative piece to me, so I'm having a really difficult time attempting to analyze it.

Would you be able to help me with the main points / topic sentences?

Here's a link to the actual paper (off another one of the threads here)
http://imgur.com/a/xT1Yh#FVSJl

Thanks a bunch!

I found that one hard too - my attempt is in the spoiler if you'd like to read it.

The historical part in the first half isn't necessarily persuasive in the sense of 'agree with me', but there's plenty to talk about in her use of stereotypes, both about historical tattoo wearers and their use today.
The second part of the main article is surely more conventionally 'persuasive'.
You can get quite a lot out the comments too.

Spoiler

Tattoos; once a sign of defiance and even criminality, today a debate still rages about over their troubling heritage and their modern appropriation as a fashion statement. In this piece, blogger Helen Day recounts the changing social acceptability of the tattoo, lamenting that these former signs of rebellion have been rendered meaningless by their near ubiquity. 

Day opens with a declaration that ‘everyone has tattoos: even me’ to establish the ubiquity of the tattoo among an audience as conventional as ‘newsreaders’, ‘sitcom stars’ and ‘even’ suburbanite part time bloggers. By directing the audience to regard her as a historically unlikely wearer of a tattoo, Day emphasizes the speed with which such stereotypes have been redefined, to the extent that ‘suburban housewives’ are now as likely to be ‘inked’ as prisoners. Day compounds this shattering of stereotypes, narrating the history of the tattoo in order to demonstrate just how at odds their modern function is with their historical role, on the way prompting the reader to both consider the unsavoury origins of the tattoo and question the reappropriation of such a culturally charged symbol in the name of fashion. Historically, the tattoo was a symbol of the ‘ownership’ of ‘unconsenting slaves’ and prisoners of concentration camps, upon who tattoos were ‘brutally… imposed.’ So, Day suggests, for some the tattoo is almost a sacred object, which if imitated by suburbanites could be easily be interpreted as insensitive if not offensive to those whose tattoos have real and significant meaning. Of course Day does not stretch to suggesting ‘sitcom stars’ are having choosing to imitate prison tattoos, instead including an image and description of Maori Ta Moko tattoos as an example of a culturally significant tattoo which can be found etched onto the arms of oblivious bogans across the country. Thus Day warns the audience to be aware of the sensitive cultural value of some tattoos, and to consider the unique meaning of art forms which are easily diluted in the ‘mega shopping centres’ within which they are increasingly found.

The suggestion that ‘the development of satire’ was the historical response to the imposition of tattoos, then, prompts the audience to consider how the meaning of the tattoo has never been static and is in fact continuously evolving. The ‘mocking’ tattoos of British convicts, Day continues, were the first step in the erosion of the tattoo as a tool of control into the one of ‘defiance’ she ‘defiled’ herself with. Here again, Day asks her audience to consider whether a ‘rose, skull or Latin phrase’ is still ‘defiant’ once they are available in ‘every Australian shopping strip. The modern appropriation of the ‘defiant’ tattoos may not be offensive, but through her personal experience Day insists that any ‘indelible’ statement can certainly be regrettable when one ceases to be ‘an angry young thing’ committed to ‘defiance’. This is mirrored in the second image, prompting readers to consider how a ‘defiant’ tattoo will age over a lifetime.

The piece provoked a significant response to Day’s real or perceived judgement of the tattoos reappropriation as a fashionable ‘commodity’. ‘Tash’ seems to inadvertently confirm Day’s view that the tattoo has been stripped of its meaningful heritage, rejoicing that the association with ‘low lifes’ and ‘alternatives’ has been sanitised and ‘sleazy places’ have given way to the ubiquitous suburban parlour. Dr AB offers a visceral description of the ‘potentially significant pain’ of the tattooing process, implying that in the rush to acquire the ‘latest cosmetic quirk’ many people are blind to warnings of medical professionals, complementing Day’s warnings about the social ramifications of tattoos. The pseudonymous ‘Cleanskin’ supports Day’s diagnosis of the increasingly ‘ordinary’ nature of the tattoo, and by asserting ‘I’m a rebel and an individualist – I have no tattoos’ suggests the debate has come full circle, the tattoo now a symbol of conformity rather than defiance. However, the very fact that the absence of a tattoo is a notable form of self-expression confirms its persistently charged cultural impact. Finally, ‘Kiwi’ expands on Day’s example of the symbolic importance of Ta Moko, joining with the author in lamenting the ‘imitation’ of cultural designs snapped up by those unaware of their real meaning. Such seizure of a ‘sacred form of family and personal identification’ is, Kiwi insists, offensive, ending by asking the audience to consider whether this ersatz personal statement amounts to a form of identity theft.
Without directly criticising tattoos or their wearers, Day’s narrative builds into a strong implication that the ‘power of ink’ is fading as it becomes ubiquitous. While she certainly relishes the memory of the ‘reckless abandoning’ of her own tattoo, she ultimately warns the audience to consider the lifelong social and cultural implications of getting ‘inked.’

[09Ti08]

Hi guys, when writing the name of the text in section 1 of the exam, should I underline it or put it in quotation marks? I'm not sure about the convention. Thank you. 

[Limista]

Hi guys, when writing the name of the text in section 1 of the exam, should I underline it or put it in quotation marks? I'm not sure about the convention. Thank you. 

You can do either. I prefer to underline it.

Whenever I quote from the text, I use quotation marks. Easier to distinguish the title, from quotes, this way.