VCE English Question Thread

[Yakooza123]

Need help with this prompt for No Sugar
"How does Jack Davies use dramatic elements to explore racism, dispossession and identity in No Sugar?

I understand the elements of racism, dispossession and identity in the play, however, I can't quite get my head around what 'dramatic elements' mean? Any help would be appreciated

[HopefulLawStudent]

I know the GAT doesn't matter; hell, I've been that person who in the weeks leading up to tomorrow who's been telling all my friends AN users and practically anyone who cared that it didn't matter but I'm curious (okay, I lied, I'm actually just asking for a friend who's just a little stressed but is too gun-shy to post this herself):

For writing task 1:

Do we need to have an intro and/or a conclusion for the GAT? The friend who I'm asking for just does has this subargument approach and clusters them so that it's essentially like three separate pieces of writing so like she did a practice for the 2014 chess writing task 1 and basically had 3 paragraphs that went something like this:

1. How chess has changed over time
2. The popularity of chess
3. The advantages of chess

Does she need something to tie all three of these paragraphs into one?

[literally lauren]

Need help with this prompt for No Sugar
"How does Jack Davies use dramatic elements to explore racism, dispossession and identity in No Sugar?

I understand the elements of racism, dispossession and identity in the play, however, I can't quite get my head around what 'dramatic elements' mean? Any help would be appreciated

'Dramatic elements' would just be the kinds of structural things that Davis employs in the play (e.g. stage directions, language, dramatic irony, symbolism, etc.) Most of your essay will still be focusing on those three key themes, but when you're dealing with textual evidence, just make sure you're highlighting some of these 'elements' using metalanguage

I know the GAT doesn't matter; hell, I've been that person who in the weeks leading up to tomorrow who's been telling all my friends AN users and practically anyone who cared that it didn't matter but I'm curious (okay, I lied, I'm actually just asking for a friend who's just a little stressed but is too gun-shy to post this herself):

For writing task 1:

Do we need to have an intro and/or a conclusion for the GAT? The friend who I'm asking for just does has this subargument approach and clusters them so that it's essentially like three separate pieces of writing so like she did a practice for the 2014 chess writing task 1 and basically had 3 paragraphs that went something like this:

1. How chess has changed over time
2. The popularity of chess
3. The advantages of chess

Does she need something to tie all three of these paragraphs into one?

Both approaches would probably be fine. I'd try and write an intro + concl. just for the sake of having a nice structure, but (like a Lit essay) if the start of your first paragraph is a bit introduction-y and the end of your last is a bit conclusion-y, that'd probably suffice too. So long as you're not actually making arguments or extrapolating from/analysing the material and are just summarising the information that's been provided, you and your friend should be fine

[Apink!]

Could someone please help me with identifying the contention in this writing piece?

Gone in 60 Minutes... Doug's Blog posted on April 14, 2016

Gosh, what can you say about the sorry saga of Sally Faulkner, Tara Brown, the 60 Minutes crew and those boneheads who claim to be “experts” in returning children that have allegedly been abducted across international borders? (If you’ve missed it, here’s the latest summary.)

I know nothing about the law in Lebanon, but I hope it is gracious and forgiving. These are not serious criminals who need to be locked away for a very long time. Not even the boneheads.

It seems likely that they have almost certainly broken some laws. Significant laws too, not the trivial kind that normally get a rap on the knuckles. But perhaps the mother’s love for her children will mitigate the outrage and perhaps the father will be prepared at least to reduce whatever charges he brings against anyone. Perhaps.

But even if the law is lenient, the consequences ought to be far reaching:

It’s difficult to see how any court in Australia or Lebanon can now support full custody rights for the mother. If she comes out of this with generous visitation rights, she should be grateful to her ex-husband and the law.

For the 60 Minutes crew, only time will tell where the truth really lies but on the surface of it, it looks like this has been a classic case of a TV documentary team trying to make the news, or at least to be part of it, to be a player rather than a reporter. If there is any truth to that, then many more people than just the crew who are currently in jail ought to be sacked.

And for the boneheads, one would hope that their business model (and any others like it) will now be completely discredited and they never again get the chance to take advantage of a distraught and vulnerable mother.

Rev Douglas R. Robertson is the Senior Minister, The Scots' Church Melbourne, Australia

[HopefulLawStudent]

Could someone please help me with identifying the contention in this writing piece?

Gone in 60 Minutes... Doug's Blog posted on April 14, 2016

Gosh, what can you say about the sorry saga of Sally Faulkner, Tara Brown, the 60 Minutes crew and those boneheads who claim to be “experts” in returning children that have allegedly been abducted across international borders? (If you’ve missed it, here’s the latest summary.)

I know nothing about the law in Lebanon, but I hope it is gracious and forgiving. These are not serious criminals who need to be locked away for a very long time. Not even the boneheads.

It seems likely that they have almost certainly broken some laws. Significant laws too, not the trivial kind that normally get a rap on the knuckles. But perhaps the mother’s love for her children will mitigate the outrage and perhaps the father will be prepared at least to reduce whatever charges he brings against anyone. Perhaps.

But even if the law is lenient, the consequences ought to be far reaching:

It’s difficult to see how any court in Australia or Lebanon can now support full custody rights for the mother. If she comes out of this with generous visitation rights, she should be grateful to her ex-husband and the law.

For the 60 Minutes crew, only time will tell where the truth really lies but on the surface of it, it looks like this has been a classic case of a TV documentary team trying to make the news, or at least to be part of it, to be a player rather than a reporter. If there is any truth to that, then many more people than just the crew who are currently in jail ought to be sacked.

And for the boneheads, one would hope that their business model (and any others like it) will now be completely discredited and they never again get the chance to take advantage of a distraught and vulnerable mother.

Rev Douglas R. Robertson is the Senior Minister, The Scots' Church Melbourne, Australia

While those responsible for the failed kidnapping attempt may have erred and broken international law - an act that would normally bring with it serious ramifications - their cases must be dealt with in a lenient and compassionate manner because the backlash from this failed attempt have been punishment enough.

[oooo]

Hello! A few questions:

- In orals, how much sub-arguments should I have? I've been told by some teachers to just include 2 (to get to the point quickly) and some 3. Can someone please confirm which is the best approach to take?
- In Arguement analysis essays (new L.A), does the introduction need an audience and tone? Or can I just include context, contention, piece details (author, title, publication) and images?

[fonetik]

Hi there oooo(d)

1) I always found my orals to be me just talking like John Green (WELCOMETOCRASHCOURSEHISTORY) as I tried to emphisise all my points.  If you're anything like me, and your orals have a tendency to run overtime rather than under - I would suggest you trim the argumentative fat.  This would also help keep your central message clear, but keep in mind that your oral should be a singular pathway towards your proposed solution/contention, and if your sub-arguments don't *build* to your point, then there isn't any point in having them.  Flesh out your oral with events, stories and information that keep the momentum of your speech going.

2) This is just hearsay, but Argument analysis essays are apparently directed (and marked) with respect to author intent as opposed to affect on audience.  It had always been the common practice at my school to consider tone its own paragraph, but really, authors will adopt various tones that support a point made, and a well structured essay is knowing when to link these tones to other specific examples of language and/or constructed depictions of the subjects in a piece.  I would argue tonality is usually better utilized in your body paragraphs, and your introduction should be the preamble beforehand.  It should be good preamble, but it's still preamble, and less rewardable than devoting more time to your body paragraphs.  I think setting up the audience is a good idea however, but don't jam it in if it's not fitting. 

If its sounding like there's no concrete rules for this stuff, then congratulations!  All the structure taught is a rubric for success,
but really, its about writing the best piece linguistically and analytically.  Hooray for ambiguity!

[HopefulLawStudent]

Hello! A few questions:

- In orals, how much sub-arguments should I have? I've been told by some teachers to just include 2 (to get to the point quickly) and some 3. Can someone please confirm which is the best approach to take?
- In Arguement analysis essays (new L.A), does the introduction need an audience and tone? Or can I just include context, contention, piece details (author, title, publication) and images?

As orals are internal assessments, I would personally advise you do whatever your teacher slash whoever's marking your oral tells you to do.

[Apink!]

Can someone tell me a list of possible audiences for LA?
For example, what if the piece is just aimed at the general public? Could I say, progressive readers within the general public? What else is there?

Also, could someone please mark my LA in the essay marking thread. 

[Apink!]

If you're doing a comparative LA, and the one article turns out to be a lot smaller than the other one, how can I structure the comparative analysis?

[HopefulLawStudent]

Don't mention the general public... ever. It's like a big no-go.

It's a bit hard to list possible audiences for LA because they tend to vary so much; you sorta have to just deal with them on a article to article basis imo.

Focus more heavily on the longer article. The spread of your analysis should match the spread of the articles. So like (someone correct me if I'm wrong) if one article takes up 30% of the page(s) you have to analyse, it should take up about 30% of your essay.

[vor0005]

Can someone tell me a list of possible audiences for LA?
For example, what if the piece is just aimed at the general public? Could I say, progressive readers within the general public? What else is there?

Also, could someone please mark my LA in the essay marking thread. 

Audiences/readers/citizens/society

And then if it's talking about a particular topic such as: The proliferation of e-books in society and their benefits

Audience could be:
Those with a vested interested in new technology are positioned to....
Those who starkly oppose the uprise of e-books are positioned to..

So you can kind of turn the argument/idea into an audience.

Hope that makes sense

[wingsofadragon]

Hmm not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I got an average of A for unit 3 in English, do I still have a chance of getting 40 at the end of the year if I do really well on the exam?
My cohort is quite small but our top ranked are very strong (I think I'm ranked within the top 1/3rd atm)

Thankssss

[Sine]

Hmm not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I got an average of A for unit 3 in English, do I still have a chance of getting 40 at the end of the year if I do really well on the exam?
My cohort is quite small but our top ranked are very strong (I think I'm ranked within the top 1/3rd atm)

Thankssss

Definitely still possible to get 40+ 

I know that this will vary from between every student but what are the "general" things that differ between a 8/10 essay and a 9-10/10 essay?

[Apink!]

Just a quick question.

For comparative LA, let's say I get 1 long article and 1 short article (let's say a comment) wouldn't it be more  reasonable to do a block analysis? (I want to do integrated whenever I can, but is that possible)

If I get 2 similar length pieces, I can defs do integrated.

Can someone clarify that for me?
Much thanks