VCE English Question Thread

[littlemouse397]

Thankyou soo much for replying! will you be able to write an introduction for this article? so i can learn and compare the differences? DM if you havent read the article

[clarke54321]

Thankyou soo much for replying! will you be able to write an introduction for this article? so i can learn and compare the differences? DM if you havent read the article

Do you have a copy of the article that I can look at?

[zhen]

Hi! I am in a language analysis crisis now  like my teacher keeps saying my body paragraph is too long- its like 286 words- she did'nt even read my work and she told me to rewrite it because its too long  could any of you guys help?

Bantick claims that the homeless are mocking Melbourne by ruining the aesthetic of Melbourne. The expression is unusual because of the repitition of the word Melbourne. Starting off with a tired and disgusted tone, Bantick states that he is “over with the homelessness in Melbourne”, and questions about why he needs to “show special understanding to the homelessness who trash the city pavements” Good integration of quotes, but you should try to condense the quotes and pick out the important bits. implying that the homeless are disrespecting Melbourne and that they do not deserve any sympathy for their behaviour. This is a good place to talk about the intended effect on readers. The author employs emotive language such as “over” and “trash” Good attempt at unpacking quotes, but it's a bit repetitive using the same quote twice. So, try to cut that out. Also, be more picky about the quotes you choose to use. I think that "trash" is a good quote but the word "over" isn't really the best word to analyse. to antagonise the homeless and positions the audience to feel disgusted about the actions of the homeless and address the issue of the homeless disrespecting Melbourne. Further to this Weird expression, Bantick also highlights the fact that homeless are littering around Melbourne, causing Melbourne to appear as unsanitary by using descriptive language You can cut out all this, since it's just retelling stuff, without providing evidence. such as “fast food containers, alcohol bottles, urination” to emphasise how the homeless are trashing Melbourne. This prompts the readers to be appalled by the immoral actions of the homeless and support his argument of how the homeless are mocking Repitition of the word mocking Melbourne. In contrary Not too sure about this, but it sounds weird , Rizvi acknowledges how the makeshift camps of the homeless is a “collective shame”, however, she argues that the public is just ashamed about the makeshift camps ruining Melbourne’s aesthetic because the famous landmarks are not “shiny and perfect” but covered with makeshift camps. Her acknowledgement of the makeshift camps improves the reader’s opinion on the author. In addition, her use of emotive language such as “collective shame” and “shiny and perfect” encourages the readers to reflect upon their opinion about homelessness. This can be shortened down so much. Be more concise with your analysis and more selective on what you analyse. Also try to avoid generic stuff like makes the reader reflect on...  Thus, Bantick’s article highlights that people do not need to sympathise with the homelessness who are trashing Melbourne’s aesthetic, and Rizvi argues that the wellbeing of the homeless are more important that the aesthetic of Melbourne. I feel like this last sentence can be made more concise, since it's so long.

+++ I don't know how to start second paragraphs ;-; help?

I've pointed out areas where you can cut down above. Take my advice with a grain of salt, since I'm in year 12 this year. Also, I realised my comments seem a bit negative, since I just pointed out flaws and places where you need to cut down, but I'd say that you have a good grasp of how language positions the reader and the main arguments of each piece. So, good job and keep up the good work. 

[ImmaculateJeff]

If you don't agree with a mark your teacher gives you for a SAC, how can you take action?

[deStudent]

If you don't agree with a mark your teacher gives you for a SAC, how can you take action?

Lawsuit?

Or approach her.

[zhen]

If you don't agree with a mark your teacher gives you for a SAC, how can you take action?

I'd say consult with another teacher (preferably the coordinator of the subject) and ask them to see whether they think your SAC deserves a higher mark. If they agree that you deserved a higher mark then you could ask them to consult with your teacher and maybe change the mark.

[bravado]

Hey Lauren!

This year, I am tutoring VCE English and I wanted to get your opinion on how the study design has changed for Section C (Language Analysis). Some teachers of my students are saying it is now argument-focused and more centred on how the contention is supported by the arguments. I've read the study design and, indeed, it does seem more focused on how argument is developed by logic and reason. Do you have any tips to tackle this new task or perhaps a sample essay/resources? How would you update your previous LA guides to suit this?

Thanks.

[Ashjames]

can someone tell me what they got on their individual SAC marks and exam scores for English?
Also was your school a strong or weak cohort when it comes to English?

[clarke54321]

Hi all,

Since our essays at the end of the year are marked out of 10, is there a grade equivalent to the number? Eg. does a 9-10 equal an A+?
Is it even calculated in this way?

Thanks!

[zhen]

Hi all,

Since our essays at the end of the year are marked out of 10, is there a grade equivalent to the number? Eg. does a 9-10 equal an A+?
Is it even calculated in this way?

Thanks!

Here are the grade distributions for English. An A+ is 47/60, which is about an 8/10.

[pmmenotes]

Hey guys I have the Medea SAC on thursday and my teacher told us it would be a combination or something similar to the two out of three practice papers we've done. First one was; "What is difficult to understand about Medea is not her desire  for revenge but her means of achieving it" and the second was "Jason's decisions are based on reason and careful judgement while Medea's decisions are based on passion and reason' Anyone done any sacs which are similar to these two like a 'combo' or can guess what it would be? sorry know this is vague/confusing just trying to work out the question for the SAC ahah

[clarke54321]

Hey guys I have the Medea SAC on thursday and my teacher told us it would be a combination or something similar to the two out of three practice papers we've done. First one was; "What is difficult to understand about Medea is not her desire  for revenge but her means of achieving it" and the second was "Jason's decisions are based on reason and careful judgement while Medea's decisions are based on passion and reason' Anyone done any sacs which are similar to these two like a 'combo' or can guess what it would be? sorry know this is vague/confusing just trying to work out the question for the SAC ahah

Hey!

So if we break it down:

Question (1):

-Medea is complex because we cannot understand her thinking (consequently her means. For example killing her children).
-We can't understand her thinking because she often blurs the concepts of passion and reason.
-Her desire for justice is also a key to this question. Her desire also blurs these concepts.

Question (2):

-Medea's decisions based on passion and reason

You can therefore see how the questions relate. At their core, they are ultimately trying to decipher what kind of character Medea is. It is dealing with the extremes of human emotions. Does she think and act with only passion or reason? Does she combine both?

So questions to ask are:

Are Medea's acts motivated by pure reason or pure passion?
Is she ever able to embrace the quality of sophrosyne and possess moderation?
Does passion coerce her to commit murderous acts?
Is Medea complex because her self-control fluctuates throughout the play?

I hope this helps you. Good luck on Thursday! 

EDIT: Sorry I didn't make reference to Jason. Given that the first question was exclusive to Medea, I thought I wouldn't bother mentioning him. It would broaden the possibility of potential questions.

[pmmenotes]

Hey!

So if we break it down:

Question (1):

-Medea is complex because we cannot understand her thinking (consequently her means. For example killing her children).
-We can't understand her thinking because she often blurs the concepts of passion and reason.
-Her desire for justice is also a key to this question. Her desire also blurs these concepts.

Question (2):

-Medea's decisions based on passion and reason

You can therefore see how the questions relate. At their core, they are ultimately trying to decipher what kind of character Medea is. It is dealing with the extremes of human emotions. Does she think and act with only passion or reason? Does she combine both?

So questions to ask are:

Are Medea's acts motivated by pure reason or pure passion?
Is she ever able to embrace the quality of sophrosyne and possess moderation?
Does passion coerce her to commit murderous acts?
Is Medea complex because her self-control fluctuates throughout the play?

I hope this helps you. Good luck on Thursday! 

EDIT: Sorry I didn't make reference to Jason. Given that the first question was exclusive to Medea, I thought I wouldn't bother mentioning him. It would broaden the possibility of potential questions.

Thanks so much! really helpful btw do you have any tips to prepare for my SAC? I've already done practice pieces and have had them marked but I don't know what to memorise? I'm just compiling a list currently with lines throughout my pieces my teacher has liked and I can try reuse. As well as looking at the quote sheet we got given and trying to memorise those. Other than that idk what else to do? Any advice would be appreciated

[clarke54321]

Thanks so much! really helpful btw do you have any tips to prepare for my SAC? I've already done practice pieces and have had them marked but I don't know what to memorise? I'm just compiling a list currently with lines throughout my pieces my teacher has liked and I can try reuse. As well as looking at the quote sheet we got given and trying to memorise those. Other than that idk what else to do? Any advice would be appreciated

Well at my school, we were given 10 possible prompts. Therefore, I planned each of those and found that I could use similar arguments for quite a few of them.

But I think that going through past essays is the best idea. This is especially good if you have written essays, which have covered multiple themes. This will make it easier to develop arguments and incorporate relevant quotes. Perhaps re-work some paragraphs that weren't as great as you had hoped. It may also be worth compiling a list of 'Medea' prompts and determining a contention and sub-arguments for each. This may help you work faster in the SAC, as you will already have opinions on certain topics and would have thought through your own understanding.

[scanz_]

Hey guys.
I have a desperate question. What kind of SAC scores should I be aiming for to get 35 in mainstream english?
I'm in year 11 right now and im averaging at a B for each of my SACs (I know right.) I want to start preparing now, but I need to know how much time I should dedicate towards writing practise essays etc.

Thanks!