VCE English Question Thread

[literally lauren]

Hey guys, planning my oral response with the criteria sheet in mind and I seem to be confused by one of the requirements in the 17-20 mark area. What does it mean by: "In an oral response, the skillful use of highly appropriate oral language conventions to engage an audience"

The main thing to worry about here is your use of "oral language conventions," which could be interpreted in two ways. On the one hand you have general language conventions (eg. points that flow into one another logically, good grammar, varied vocabulary (+ rhetorical devices, since this is a persuasive piece) and so on) but you also have features that are specific to oral presentations (eg. tone of voice/inflection, stress/emphasis, volume, posture, eye contact, hand gestures etc.)

My guess is that your teacher wants you to consider both of these sub-categories, but I'd recommend paying particular attention to the latter if you're looking to engage your audience

[One Step at a Time]

Hi everyone!

Topic for Text Response essay: It is individual acts of defiance that makes Stasiland so engaging. Discuss.

My brain's completely stuck on how to form a contention and topic sentences for this 

Any ideas would be greatly appreciate. Thanks 

[One Step at a Time]

*appreciated. Sorry about the typo! 

[literally lauren]

It is individual acts of defiance that makes Stasiland so engaging. Discuss.

For starters, what does 'defiance' look like in Stasiland? It takes a couple of different forms, so think about the most prominent types/examples of this. Now think about the effect this defiance has on the audience, or, if that's too much of a leap, think about what Funder is saying about these acts of defiance and then think about what she's conveying to readers.

Also, since there's an emphasis on 'individual acts,' you'll need to flesh out specific examples of single characters doing something defiant (which shouldn't be too hard to find since the majority of the text is made up of Funder recounting those individuals' stories). From there you can think about what ties this sort of defiance together; eg. is it always directed at the same ideology? Is it always beneficial/harmful? Is it always admirable/unexpected?

Avoid having a character-by-character breakdown where each paragraph just focusses on one individual's resistance, if possible, since that's a surefire way to make your analysis really superficial. It'd be way better to concentrate on one thematic concern per paragraph, and then substantiate your argument that way.

Hopefully that'll open up your discussion a bit; let me know if you're still having trouble with topic sentences and I'll see if I can help

[One Step at a Time]

Thank you so much Lauren, you always appear with your advice when I'm struggling hehe 

I tried to come up with 4 topic sentences and I'd love to hear your opinion on what I have written 
1. The play shows how the individual vignettes of defiance against authority have profound and lingering effects on the perpetrators.
2. Throughout the text, individuals have to come to terms with the consequences of their acts of resistance against society's morals.
3. Ultimately, the characters who follow through with their acts of defiance and harness it to fuel their aspirations are rewarded despite the struggles faced.
4. However, this topic neglects the myriad of sources that permeate the narrative which make it engaging.

Some worries below hahah...
I'm not sure if I'm challenging the prompt correctly though?
Do I need to mention the "engaging" part of the prompt? (Tried to do this for the 4th topic sentence but would I be going off topic by doing so?)
Is it clear that the first two topic sentences are basically the same but differentiate between the acts of defiance against different groups?

Can't thank you enough Lauren 

[One Step at a Time]

Just wanted to add that if anyone has any ideas or advice, I'd love it if you could add to this post!! Please help a struggling student out 

[literally lauren]

Thank you so much Lauren, you always appear with your advice when I'm struggling hehe 

I am indeed the Beetlejuice of ATAR Notes. Say 'essay' three times and my spectral essence will be summoned.

I tried to come up with 4 topic sentences and I'd love to hear your opinion on what I have written 
1. The play shows how the individual vignettes of defiance against authority have profound and lingering effects on the perpetrators.
2. Throughout the text, individuals have to come to terms with the consequences of their acts of resistance against society's morals.
3. Ultimately, the characters who follow through with their acts of defiance and harness it to fuel their aspirations are rewarded despite the struggles faced.
4. However, this topic neglects the myriad of sources that permeate the narrative which make it engaging.

1. That these vignettes affect the perpetrators doesn't seem wholly relevant, but if you swap out the end of that sentence with something more audience-based, you should be fine. eg. 'The text (not play, btw) shows how the individual vignettes of defiance against authority can be both inspiring, and harrowing.' (<-- this will let you look at the effect on the perpetrators/ other characters (including Anna, if you want, though that might make this paragraph a bit too long) as well as the audience.)
2. Good, and just make sure that by the end of that para, you've touched on how the audience responds to this depiction of coming to terms with things.
3. Ditto^
4. I'd probably advise against having a challenge paragraph that, broadly speaking, says 'yeah, but also here's some other stuff.' It'd be more effective if you could look at how the acts of defiance also make the text somewhat challenging in that it forces the audience to confront the greyness of morality, or how the defiance humanises the characters and exposes readers to their darker, more selfish sides. Ultimately, this still makes the text 'engaging,' but it is engaging in different ways, and for different reasons. <-- that's a safer challenge, imo.

Hopefully that addresses your worries, but let me know if any of that was unclear

[Syndicate]

Hey,

Are there any certain factors assessors look for while marking creative pieces (like the use of metaphorical language)?

Thanks

[HopefulLawStudent]

I think they look at pieces hollistically. Instead of just going "oooh you didn't have metaphorical language. -10 points."

[literally lauren]

Are there any certain factors assessors look for while marking creative pieces (like the use of metaphorical language)?

It's all relative. Some pieces would be strengthened by the use of metaphors or language devices, but it's by no means a requirement.

The overall factor they'd be looking for (for Context pieces and the Year 12s of 2016) is your ability to construct a creative piece that responds to the prompt, relates to the text, and expresses interesting ideas about the Context. How you do that is up to you.
(And for the Creative Response to Texts on the new SD for 2017 Year 12s, they'll be looking for the ways in which you can extrapolate ideas and structural devices from one text and implement them yourself in your own creative piece - so a slightly different focus there.)

On the whole, it's not going to hinder you if you chose to employ metaphors and the like, but you shouldn't do so for the sake of raking up extra marks because they're more concerned with what your piece sets out to accomplish instead of the little decisions you make along the way.

[One Step at a Time]

Sorry to interrupt all the context discussion but I just wanted to quickly follow up with what we were talking about above 

Seriously a legend Lauren, thank you so much for helping me out with all my questions! I'll definitely keep that in mind- have to say "essay, essay, essay..." to catch your attention hahah 

I'm a bit confused about how you would challenge throughout the essay instead of having a challenge paragraph. Would this plan work instead? I've listed what could be explored in each para.

Para 1: How individual acts of defiance are engaging
Para 2: How the greyness of morality is engaging
Para 3: How defiance humanises the characters and exposes readers to their darker, more selfish sides which makes it more engaging

Some new worries...
Does having all challenge paragraphs but 1 work? So in this case, 2 challenge paragraphs. (I've tried to base them on how the text can be engaging for different reasons)
I'm scared I'm going off topic with 3 challenge paragraphs! 

[HopefulLawStudent]

Think of it this way.

When you answer a question, you can't exactly go:
Yes I agree. (contention)
And here are 3 reasons/paragraphs on why I don't agree and 1 paragraph on why I do agree.

So what we do instead is (from my understanding) have 3 paragraphs why you do agree, for example but within these paragraphs have like little bits where you acknowledge the other side has some good points.

Does that make sense? I tried to make it sound simple and understandable but idk... What sounds simple to me often sounds convoluted and difficult to others.

[melissaromeo]

can anyone suggest any topics that I can do my oral presentation on? I wanted to do something that would interest my class therefore I'm trying to avoid the common topics that come up every year like lowering the driving age, vaccinations etc.
Thanks!

[One Step at a Time]

Hi HLS   

Thanks for your reply! I don't quite understand where you're coming from though- and it's definitely me, not you! English is not my forte

Actually, I didn't want my contention to simply be "Yes I agree." I wanted to be something along the lines of this : "Although individual acts of defiance make the text engaging, ultimately there are also other factors which render the text engaging in different ways."

I've tried to have the 1 paragraph agreeing and the others disagreeing to stick with the contention, but as you said, I don't think it's the right approach... 

What ideas could the paragraphs be based on instead of what I listed in my last post? 

[HopefulLawStudent]

Sorry... I didn't realise this was like a follow up question to a previous one. I think I've screwed up. Ignore me...