The pros and cons of VCE English

[Defiler]

Well, one of the 'best' English students that was in my year level had terrible spelling, grammar and punctuation. Not enough of the English course (read: basically none) is weighted towards the construction of clear, concise and fluent sentences... and I think if it was more like 50% analysis + 50% actual writing skills, then there would be a large shift in the scores obtain by students.

[Daniel15]

English filters out the people who are dumbasses, if u suck at english u will suck at uni then life

Nuh uh. I got 36 in English, which affected my ENTER score quite a bit, but in subjects that require expression, like microeconomics, my assignment marks were above 95%. Your argument is also invalid for people who plan to study things like Engineering and Medicine, because they don't require a fluent and sophisticated knowledge of the English language, they only need to use concise and succinct language.

Text responses are a major flaw in VCE English, because the weighting on the importance of text responses largely affects your study score, and hence your aggregate and ENTER. The ability to respond to a text response question is irrelevant to English skills or overall ability.

Yeah, I disagree with droodles as well. VCE English is majorly flawed and doesn't "filter out the people who are dumbasses". My English is alright, but I'm going to get a really bad study score (mainly because I was really bad at text responses, and way too much emphasis is placed on them in VCE English).

And droodles, using "u" instead of "you" when making a statement about English is slightly ironic...  :roll:

Well, one of the 'best' English students that was in my year level had terrible spelling, grammar and punctuation. Not enough of the English course (read: basically none) is weighted towards the construction of clear, concise and fluent sentences... and I think if it was more like 50% analysis + 50% actual writing skills, then there would be a large shift in the scores obtain by students.

Indeed, if it was more focused on actual writing skills, my marks (as well as many other people's) would be heaps better.

[Collin Li]

Defiler, you're right.

English has shifted towards an emphasis on sophistry, and pretentious ideas such as teaching "critical thinking." These ideas are not necessary (and I also doubt that they work). A proper course for VCE English that is compulsory ought to focus on clear and concise writing skills.

There should be other streams of English for people who want to do text responses, or other specialisations of English. If there must be a compulsory English subject, there should be one that teaches the more basic and fundamental essential skills of English.

[Galelleo]

text responses imo should b allocated solely to Lit

[principe]

text responses imo should b allocated solely to Lit

I agree, it seems like such a waste having to analyze a book that you'll never ever read again (with exceptions of those who actually want to read the books again).

[brendan]

Queensland might be a nice place ...

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22677061-13881,00.html

"GRAMMAR will return to Queensland classrooms in Years 11 and 12 under a revised English syllabus requiring that students be taught grammar, spelling and punctuation.

The Queensland Studies Authority, which is responsible for school curriculums, says a new senior English syllabus to be taught from 2009 will remove the "over-emphasis on critical literacy" used to analyse literature.

Critical literacy is a theory used to analyse texts which holds that language is never neutral and should be dissected to reveal how the writer is manipulating the reader. "

[principe]

I get told that english is left as RAW and then I hear others saying it gets downscaled. Which one is true?

It gets scaled down if your English Study Score is below 40. It stays the same if it's 40 or above.

[Ahmad]

I get told that english is left as RAW and then I hear others saying it gets downscaled. Which one is true?

It gets scaled down if your English Study Score is below 40. It stays the same if it's 40 or above.

No, it's pretty much always scaled down, unless you get a 50. However, the scaling down is rather negligible up the top end.  :wink:

[brendan]

Queensland might be a nice place ...

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22677061-13881,00.html

"GRAMMAR will return to Queensland classrooms in Years 11 and 12 under a revised English syllabus requiring that students be taught grammar, spelling and punctuation.

The Queensland Studies Authority, which is responsible for school curriculums, says a new senior English syllabus to be taught from 2009 will remove the "over-emphasis on critical literacy" used to analyse literature.

Critical literacy is a theory used to analyse texts which holds that language is never neutral and should be dissected to reveal how the writer is manipulating the reader. "

More good news: "Grammar tests return to classroom"

[Odette]

Mmm sounds good =)

[Kopite]

VCE ENGLISH IS THE BEST IN THE WORLD. I LOVE IT.

I'm a bit biased though, getting a 46 sure helps you warm to it

[munto]

I get told that english is left as RAW and then I hear others saying it gets downscaled. Which one is true?

It gets scaled down if your English Study Score is below 40. It stays the same if it's 40 or above.

No, it's pretty much always scaled down, unless you get a 50. However, the scaling down is rather negligible up the top end.  :wink:

well my english score got scaled up, and it was above 40, not by much .2, but still...

[Eriny]

I actually like English, but I don't think that making people strain their wrists for 3 hours on end accurately assesses their ability. I still think it should be compulsory, just better. I'm not actually sure how I would make it better. I wouldn't want to do a subject where I'd have to learn about grammar and spelling though, that would be as boring as anything and I think the best way to improve those things is to develop it naturally through reading and writing.

For what it's worth, I really don't want to sound arrogant or anything, but I don't think my English score reflected my English ability. I got a 38, yet in the next year I got H1 in uni English Lit. I've also won a number of essay competitions. I find that insane time limits are far too restricting and I don't have enough time to reflect deeply on the topic to write something to the best of my ability. That's why I preferred Literature, I was able to think about what I was going to write before hand on the texts and was able to think about the author's intentions and so on and develop my own considered stance over time, as opposed to English issues and article analysis where you have 15 minutes reading time to come up with something brilliant. That might be just me though.

[costargh]

I actually like English, but I don't think that making people strain their wrists for 3 hours on end accurately assesses their ability. I still think it should be compulsory, just better. I'm not actually sure how I would make it better. I wouldn't want to do a subject where I'd have to learn about grammar and spelling though, that would be as boring as anything and I think the best way to improve those things is to develop it naturally through reading and writing.

For what it's worth, I really don't want to sound arrogant or anything, but I don't think my English score reflected my English ability. I got a 38, yet in the next year I got H1 in uni English Lit. I've also won a number of essay competitions. I find that insane time limits are far too restricting and I don't have enough time to reflect deeply on the topic to write something to the best of my ability. That's why I preferred Literature, I was able to think about what I was going to write before hand on the texts and was able to think about the author's intentions and so on and develop my own considered stance over time, as opposed to English issues and article analysis where you have 15 minutes reading time to come up with something brilliant. That might be just me though.

I know what you're saying and I think they have tried to accommodate that in the new study design. 3 essays instead of 4.