ATAR Notes: Forum
VCE Stuff => VCE English Studies => VCE Subjects + Help => VCE English & EAL => Topic started by: Collin Li on October 21, 2007, 02:42:38 am
-
It's a stupid indicator of actual performance for English. I'll elaborate later, or others can start me off.
-
English is VCAA's response to an overwhelming number of asians pwning their own system. RAARRRR!!! :evil:
11 days, and it's all over. :D
-
i like having english as compulsory, good communication and analytical skills are valuable in every line of work.
-
My thoughts are that there should be multiple streams of English - one for business-related communication skills, etc., another for those who enjoy literature/are looking at taking a literature tertiary study, much like the current english course - text analysis, essays, etc.
-
I say make English compulsory but take it out of the top 4. Then let universities judge if they need 35 or whatever for english as a requirement.
-
i like having english as compulsory, good communication and analytical skills are valuable in every line of work.
I'd argue that VCE English does nothing like that.
What do you think my English is worth? I got 36. I know someone else who is clever and writes articulately: 39. He got 50 in every other subject. I think we are two cases of the extreme disparity of English skills vs English scores.
I mean, if they're going to mark unfairly, I'm fine with that, but don't put it in the top 4. The 39 cost that guy CSP Medicine @ Melbourne, which he definitely deserved.
-
That's the thing, it's not just about writing expressively and fluently. There's a whole load of other stuff in VCE English, such as structure and ideas regarding the text..
-
I say make English compulsory but take it out of the top 4. Then let universities judge if they need 35 or whatever for english as a requirement.
I agree :) english shouldn't be in your top 4.... a little bit off topic but i also think they should definately get rid of religion as being compulsory for catholic schools ...
-
I say make English compulsory but take it out of the top 4. Then let universities judge if they need 35 or whatever for english as a requirement.
I agree :) english shouldn't be in your top 4.... a little bit off topic but i also think they should definately get rid of religion as being compulsory for catholic schools ...
Haha, yeah that's ridiculous, but that's the school's decision, not VCAA, so you'll have to take that up with your school (re: religion)
-
I say make English compulsory but take it out of the top 4. Then let universities judge if they need 35 or whatever for english as a requirement.
I agree :) english shouldn't be in your top 4.... a little bit off topic but i also think they should definately get rid of religion as being compulsory for catholic schools ...
Haha, yeah that's ridiculous, but that's the school's decision, not VCAA, so you'll have to take that up with your school (re: religion)
You mean to tell me that its the schools decision not the CEO's[Catholic Education Office]decision?? lol (my school told us that the CEO makes studying religion in vce compulsory)
-
school's choice to be religious, and anyway, isnt only 1 unit compulsory?
-
I say make English compulsory but take it out of the top 4. Then let universities judge if they need 35 or whatever for english as a requirement.
I agree :) english shouldn't be in your top 4.... a little bit off topic but i also think they should definately get rid of religion as being compulsory for catholic schools ...
Haha, yeah that's ridiculous, but that's the school's decision, not VCAA, so you'll have to take that up with your school (re: religion)
You mean to tell me that its the schools decision not the CEO's[Catholic Education Office]decision?? lol (my school told us that the CEO makes studying religion in vce compulsory)
Oh, I wouldn't know... but the thing is: at least you have a choice to go to a catholic school or not. If I could goto a school where I didn't have to do VCE English, then I'd definitely go there! Haha
-
Yeah i guess you do have a choice.. well i never had a choice tbh my parents made it for me, so i was forced to go to a catholic school, but yeah i know one things for sure religion wont be in my top 4 lol ..
-
at my old school the rule was you only had to do one unit, so everyone did it for half of year 11
-
Stupid policy. English should be moderated better somehow. Too many flaws in the system. It does well to moderate harsh sac markers and easy sac markers. BUT TI DOESN'T HELP AGAINST RETARDS. MY TEACHER GAVE A GIRL A HIGH A+ AND HER ESSAYS HAS THE WORD "I". I BELIEVE ETCE ETC ETC ETC. GOD DAM IT MAKES ME ANGRY THAT I HAVE A RETARDED TEACHER. IN ONE INSTANCE I WROTE A PRE WRITTEN ESSAY WHICH MY TUTOR SAID WAS AWESOME. MY TEACHER ACCUSED ME OF MAKING EVENTS UP IN THE NOVEL. YET WHEN WE HAVE CLASS DISCUSSION I MAKE THINGS UP IN THE BOOK ALL THE TIME AND HE SAYS "GOOD INSIGHT", YET WHEN IM NOT BEING RETARDED HE STARTS ACTING MORE IDIOTIC DEN USUAL. I DOUBT HE EVEN READS THE TEXT WE STUDY, ALL HE DOES IS STUDY GUIDES. FFS I HAVE TO INCLUDE PAGE NUMBERS OF QUOTES FOR MY ESSAY AND IF I DON'T HAVE THEM I GET A BAD GRADE. WHEN MY WORK GETS CROSS MARKED I GET AN A+, OR AT WORST A (I KNOW BECAUSE OTHER TEACHERS TELL MY SISTER MY MARKS WHILE THEY ARE CROSS MAKING). IF THE SYSTEM WAS SO GOOD WHY AM I IN THIS SITUATION ( ON THE VERGE OF FAILING ENGLISH). Well thats my rant.
-
Stupid policy. English should be moderated better somehow. Too many flaws in the system. It does well to moderate harsh sac markers and easy sac markers. BUT TI DOESN'T HELP AGAINST RETARDS. MY TEACHER GAVE A GIRL A HIGH A+ AND HER ESSAYS HAS THE WORD "I". I BELIEVE ETCE ETC ETC ETC. GOD DAM IT MAKES ME ANGRY THAT I HAVE A RETARDED TEACHER. IN ONE INSTANCE I WROTE A PRE WRITTEN ESSAY WHICH MY TUTOR SAID WAS AWESOME. MY TEACHER ACCUSED ME OF MAKING EVENTS UP IN THE NOVEL. YET WHEN WE HAVE CLASS DISCUSSION I MAKE THINGS UP IN THE BOOK ALL THE TIME AND HE SAYS "GOOD INSIGHT", YET WHEN IM NOT BEING RETARDED HE STARTS ACTING MORE IDIOTIC DEN USUAL. I DOUBT HE EVEN READS THE TEXT WE STUDY, ALL HE DOES IS STUDY GUIDES. FFS I HAVE TO INCLUDE PAGE NUMBERS OF QUOTES FOR MY ESSAY AND IF I DON'T HAVE THEM I GET A BAD GRADE. WHEN MY WORK GETS CROSS MARKED I GET AN A+, OR AT WORST A (I KNOW BECAUSE OTHER TEACHERS TELL MY SISTER MY MARKS WHILE THEY ARE CROSS MAKING). IF THE SYSTEM WAS SO GOOD WHY AM I IN THIS SITUATION ( ON THE VERGE OF FAILING ENGLISH). Well thats my rant.
Lol relax mate, take a deep breath... I hate my english teacher too, she practically does nothing, and expects us to prepare SACs and the exam on our own, we had no SAC preparation this year. Well anyways all i wanted to say is that my teacher is one lazy cow, all she does is apply her make up and read magazines in our classes... Ahh i feel so much better saying that lol
-
Stupid policy. English should be moderated better somehow. Too many flaws in the system. It does well to moderate harsh sac markers and easy sac markers. BUT TI DOESN'T HELP AGAINST RETARDS. MY TEACHER GAVE A GIRL A HIGH A+ AND HER ESSAYS HAS THE WORD "I". I BELIEVE ETCE ETC ETC ETC. GOD DAM IT MAKES ME ANGRY THAT I HAVE A RETARDED TEACHER. IN ONE INSTANCE I WROTE A PRE WRITTEN ESSAY WHICH MY TUTOR SAID WAS AWESOME. MY TEACHER ACCUSED ME OF MAKING EVENTS UP IN THE NOVEL. YET WHEN WE HAVE CLASS DISCUSSION I MAKE THINGS UP IN THE BOOK ALL THE TIME AND HE SAYS "GOOD INSIGHT", YET WHEN IM NOT BEING RETARDED HE STARTS ACTING MORE IDIOTIC DEN USUAL. I DOUBT HE EVEN READS THE TEXT WE STUDY, ALL HE DOES IS STUDY GUIDES. FFS I HAVE TO INCLUDE PAGE NUMBERS OF QUOTES FOR MY ESSAY AND IF I DON'T HAVE THEM I GET A BAD GRADE. WHEN MY WORK GETS CROSS MARKED I GET AN A+, OR AT WORST A (I KNOW BECAUSE OTHER TEACHERS TELL MY SISTER MY MARKS WHILE THEY ARE CROSS MAKING). IF THE SYSTEM WAS SO GOOD WHY AM I IN THIS SITUATION ( ON THE VERGE OF FAILING ENGLISH). Well thats my rant.
Maybe you're not as good at english as you think.
If you are, you'll get a good exam mark, and your sac marks will count for shit anyway. Problem solved.
-
But dude... When hhe gave me a sample essay of what was, in his opinion an a+ i basically lost it and yelled out WTF. The ""I Believes" all over the essay was the last straw. I got into trouble cause a teacher caught me cussing after englsih class. XD
-
But dude... When hhe gave me a sample essay of what was, in his opinion an a+ i basically lost it and yelled out WTF. The ""I Believes" all over the essay was the last straw. I got into trouble cause a teacher caught me cussing after englsih class. XD
Lol haha funny
-
Maybe you're not as good at english as you think.
If you are, you'll get a good exam mark, and your sac marks will count for shit anyway. Problem solved.
DUDE. WHO THE ^%@#$*&@#$ GIVES A A+ to an essay with the statement "I Believe" all over it? You tell me that first.
-
Why am I the only one whose quote function never works!!
-
I have been investigating this mystery, and I cannot find an answer. But don't worry, I will be upgrading the forums after VCE. I will most likely buy a professional software package which will be utterly spiffing. Hang tight until then. :)
-
BTW does the sacs really count for 50% of your study? Are the rumors true that if you don't get an a average in your sacs you get a low 30?
-
DUDE. WHO THE ^%@#$*&@#$ GIVES A A+ to an essay with the statement "I Believe" all over it? You tell me that first.
Well I didn't read this essay, for all I know it could have been very good. There isn't actually a VCAA rule that says you can't say 'I believe'.
Like I said, the exam will even it out, if you really are being treated unfairly. if.
-
BTW does the sacs really count for 50% of your study? Are the rumors true that if you don't get an a average in your sacs you get a low 30?
I know that SACs make up 50% of your study score. As for the rumors im not sure lol, my friend didnt have a SAC score of A, and she got 34 :P hehe
-
I know that SACs make up 50% of your study score.
Which will be adjusted according to your exam score.
-
I know that SACs make up 50% of your study score.
Which will be adjusted according to your exam score.
Yep :)
-
BTW does the sacs really count for 50% of your study? Are the rumors true that if you don't get an a average in your sacs you get a low 30?
I know that SACs make up 50% of your study score. As for the rumors im not sure lol, my friend didnt have a SAC score of A, and she got 34 :P hehe
thats what im afraid off. I want a 36-38 at least XD
-
That quote bug is really freaking annoying. :( Stupid phpBB. I wonder why it doesn't work.
-
Doesn't matter. Site is still better then BoS anyway.
-
Doesn't matter. Site is still better then BoS anyway.
Well yeah, there's that :P
-
http://www.simplemachines.org/
-
Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm going to be buying a fully integrated CMS with forum, chatrooms etc. and hopefully a place that already has upload functionality that I can modify to make our notes engine. :)
-
/me likes vBulletin. Also, it's very easy to migrate from phpBB to vBulletin - I've done it in the past ;)
-
mmm but vBulletin doesn't have other integrated functions like I'm going to need. Trust me, I'll find us something awesome. :)
-
LOL, fingers crossed it's not Joomla/Mambo - whilst it has integrated CMS/Forum, the forum component doesn't rival phpBB, vBulletin, punBB, etc.
-
I said I'm BUYING it, I.E. it will be top of the range. BETTER than phpBB. :P
-
My teacher has a boner over Ahmad. He is biased in his moderating. Ahmad beat me in the first sac of the year by one mark. I wrote a ripper of a Hamlet essay and received a 30/30. Ahmad got 28 which went to 29 which went to 30. He beat me semester one.
This semester we were on equal ground until the last sac. He got full marks and I was jibbed once again by one mark. I mean wtf. Ahmad acknowledges that I'm better than him. The school keeps hating on me. I needed to be ranked first in something. Why did I have to do all the same subjects at that SOB :P
-
My teacher has a boner over Ahmad. He is biased in his moderating. Ahmad beat me in the first sac of the year by one mark. I wrote a ripper of a Hamlet essay and received a 30/30. Ahmad got 28 which went to 29 which went to 30. He beat me semester one.
This semester we were on equal ground until the last sac. He got full marks and I was jibbed once again by one mark. I mean wtf. Ahmad acknowledges that I'm better than him. The school keeps hating on me. I needed to be ranked first in something. Why did I have to do all the same subjects at that SOB :P
Lol funny ...
Im in a similar position in bus.man, but thanks to unit 4 SACs I was able to beat the guy i was in competition with haha... but the teacher just loves him :( never pleased with me :cry:
She thinks that I think bus.man is an insult to my intelligence and sometimes i get a little cocky with my answers... im like whatever miss lol
-
My teacher has a boner over Ahmad. He is biased in his moderating. Ahmad beat me in the first sac of the year by one mark. I wrote a ripper of a Hamlet essay and received a 30/30. Ahmad got 28 which went to 29 which went to 30. He beat me semester one.
This semester we were on equal ground until the last sac. He got full marks and I was jibbed once again by one mark. I mean wtf. Ahmad acknowledges that I'm better than him. The school keeps hating on me. I needed to be ranked first in something. Why did I have to do all the same subjects at that SOB :P
Lol funny ...
Im in a similar position in bus.man, but thanks to unit 4 SACs I was able to beat the guy i was in competition with haha... but the teacher just loves him :( never pleased with me :cry:
She thinks that I think bus.man is an insult to my intelligence and sometimes i get a little cocky with my answers... im like whatever miss lol
Rofl Happens 2 me too after i got my midyear results. Teachers thought i got more cocky and disrespectful. Thing is i was ALWAYS disrespectful at the lazy teachers who think they are good and look down on thier dodgy marking and stupid policies :P.
-
My teacher has a boner over Ahmad. He is biased in his moderating. Ahmad beat me in the first sac of the year by one mark. I wrote a ripper of a Hamlet essay and received a 30/30. Ahmad got 28 which went to 29 which went to 30. He beat me semester one.
This semester we were on equal ground until the last sac. He got full marks and I was jibbed once again by one mark. I mean wtf. Ahmad acknowledges that I'm better than him. The school keeps hating on me. I needed to be ranked first in something. Why did I have to do all the same subjects at that SOB :P
Lol funny ...
Im in a similar position in bus.man, but thanks to unit 4 SACs I was able to beat the guy i was in competition with haha... but the teacher just loves him :( never pleased with me :cry:
She thinks that I think bus.man is an insult to my intelligence and sometimes i get a little cocky with my answers... im like whatever miss lol
Rofl Happens 2 me too after i got my midyear results. Teachers thought i got more cocky and disrespectful. Thing is i was ALWAYS disrespectful at the lazy teachers who think they are good and look down on thier dodgy marking and stupid policies :P.
Thats why my english teacher hates me, im always telling her off about how lazy she is and im always questioning her marks and comments lol ...
-
My teacher has a boner over Ahmad. He is biased in his moderating. Ahmad beat me in the first sac of the year by one mark. I wrote a ripper of a Hamlet essay and received a 30/30. Ahmad got 28 which went to 29 which went to 30. He beat me semester one.
This semester we were on equal ground until the last sac. He got full marks and I was jibbed once again by one mark. I mean wtf. Ahmad acknowledges that I'm better than him. The school keeps hating on me. I needed to be ranked first in something. Why did I have to do all the same subjects at that SOB :P
err... OKAY..
-
err... OKAY..
haha i lol'd
-
Good God =O
-
It's ok, I concede you're better than me at English :cry:
-
i hate english! lol
-
It's ok, I concede you're better than me at English :cry:
Cry. Cry more. Your tears give me strength :twisted:
-
I'll have you know I've never cried in my life.
-
There was that one time...*mischief*
-
When?
-
i like having english as compulsory, good communication and analytical skills are valuable in every line of work.
+1
With this argument, you could similarly argue that some sort of microeconomics course should be compulsory. The microeconomic ideas are critical for rational thinking and apply to individual self-responsibility and self-accountability for your own actions.
-
Optimally nothing should be compulsory. Everyone should have the right to make their own decision as to what is (not) "essential" or "valuable".
-
With this argument, you could similarly argue that some sort of microeconomics course should be compulsory. The microeconomic ideas are critical for rational thinking and apply to individual self-responsibility and self-accountability for your own actions.
C'mon . . coblin, i know english is a bit if a kick in the crotch if it's not your thing, but it has a good place in the VCE, it is the only subject that allows a general assessment of people's spoken, written and language comprehension skills in the primary language of this country. English has and will always have a place as a compulsory subject. The people who want that changed are a small minority. If you say you know people who agree with you . . . fine. But that rural students need english, it's their primary method of competing with the superior resources of metropolitan schools
-
Optimally nothing should be compulsory. Everyone should have the right to make their own decision as to what is (not) "essential" or "valuable".
I agree!
BA22, I am not disagreeing with those motives that rustic_metal believes in as good reasons for VCE English, I think it's a good idea. Unfortunately, it only remains an idea, and not a practice. Ultimately, I agree with what Ahmad said though, nothing should be compulsory in VCE.
If something must be compulsory, then it should be a broad subject which is a package of English, basic logical principles extracted from economics, and rudimentary mathematical skills. This is the only fair system. This exam should replace the GAT :)
-
Making English language compulsory would ahve been more practical. Right now im reading a book about a retarded british journalist who tells me what i want, and regards everything the american says as a poor assessment.
-
why english language?
-
why english language?
because everyone has their bias, which is why this thread exists
-
i do english language and cant see any reason why it could be made compulsory.
-
Right now im reading a book about a retarded british journalist who tells me what i want, and regards everything the american says as a poor assessment.
I don't see the connection here (to this topic), but my two cents is that he's probably a socialist, haha.
-
His name is Thomas FOwler. See how retarded the text is. Its so gayyyyyyyyyyyy. English language would have been more preferrable
-
why English language?
-
i heard its more analysis.
-
yeah but thats like learning to read but not write.
-
I learn to write by reading :D
-
His name is Thomas FOwler. See how retarded the text is. Its so gayyyyyyyyyyyy. English language would have been more preferrable
HAHAHA. The Quiet American!
So I was right, he's a darn socialist alright. Nah, I dunno about Graham Greene actually. I'll take that back, but he sounds like one.
-
His name is Thomas FOwler. See how retarded the text is. Its so gayyyyyyyyyyyy. English language would have been more preferrable
HAHAHA. The Quiet American!
So I was right, he's a darn socialist alright.
more like a retard who thinks he knows what all the refugees of the Vietnam war wants
-
His name is Thomas FOwler. See how retarded the text is. Its so gayyyyyyyyyyyy. English language would have been more preferrable
HAHAHA. The Quiet American!
So I was right, he's a darn socialist alright.
more like a retard who thinks he knows what all the refugees of the Vietnam war wants
Isn't Pyle the one who thinks that? The one fighting for the "greater good."
-
IF you look @ it historically i would prefer Pyle. He did kill many yes, every other party was also doing considerable damage. Fowler after said that we "only want enough rice"
-
IF you look @ it historically i would prefer Pyle. He did kill many yes, every other party was also doing considerable damage. Fowler after said that we "only want enough rice"
I'd have to disagree with you. Look at the outcome of the Vietnam War. We retreated, we conceded. Now they are doing alright. After the end of the Cold War, more and more countries realise they need to welcome this idea of "competition" and "capitalism" and now Vietnam is doing pretty good.
-
wow, thats pretty darn bad. Hope all goes well. Ridiculous English, ruins lives :p
-
IF you look @ it historically i would prefer Pyle. He did kill many yes, every other party was also doing considerable damage. Fowler after said that we "only want enough rice"
I'd have to disagree with you. Look at the outcome of the Vietnam War. We retreated, we conceded. Now they are doing alright. After the end of the Cold War, more and more countries realise they need to welcome this idea of "competition" and "capitalism" and now Vietnam is doing pretty good.
We are retarded because the communism. When America retreated the communist had re education camps, they chased after soldiers who were left behind, they made concentration camps where people had to betray each other for "points" or else they would be beaten up. There were many incidents of fathers betraying sons and vice cersa. You also had to sleep next to dead bodies at night because people just couldn't take it anymore in the concetration camps and died, and you didn't even need to be a soldier to be detained. And they just coem to your house and take whatever they wanted, "thinking for the vietnamese people" my ass. They even sacked some villages taking ALL the food bringing it up north. If you ask any Vietnamese refugee, you will most likely find a strong hatred of communism. Everyone i asked preferred the corruption of America and the french over the Vietminh. They are currently brainwashing thier students( My friends cousin recently came here and denied the fact that "Bac Ho" had like 5000kids, he thought "bac ho" was a virgin). If you don't believe that most of the Vietnamese community hate Communism, try to remember that recent SBS incident.
And whats to say we wouldn't ahve been better off with the Americans? Look at HOng Kong, they did pretty good under british rule.
Back to the text. Fowler was also doing exactly what Pyle was doing. He was killing Pyle to save the many lives that Pyle would have killed. He used violence to further his ideas, jsut like PYle. He beleived he was doing it for the greater good, just like Pyle. Remember that this si war, both sides had blood on thier hands. Pyle however fought in the interest of the Vietname people, people liek Mr Heng only wanted power. A common critique of the novel is we never have any vietnamese people playing a major role. All we have in that book is that slut of bitch, Phuong. When ever Pyle says we want education FOwler just says the people of Indochina only wanted rice. It seems like he was looking down at Indochina people, thinking we all idiots or soemthing. I do agree with Fowler view that textbook ideas such as Pyle won't work in every situation, but i strongly disagree with his assessment of Vietnam.
-
Only the citizens of Vietnam can overrun their government, not the force of foreign nations. It is this arrogant foreign policy ("democracy, even if it kills") of the neo-conservative wing of Republicans in the United States which has incited terrorist attacks.
The United States should concentrate on getting their own democracy right before they attempt to export it anywhere else.
It is the Pyles of the US society which are giving reason for terrorist networks like Al-Quaeda to grow so rapidly, because they are united in hatred against the interventionist "global-police" empire of the United States. Fowler may be looking down on the Vietnamnese, but Pyle's ideas are much more dangerous than Fowler's ("unengage", or something).
-
i knew this would end up a politics thread.
-
Only the citizens of Vietnam can overrun their government, not the force of foreign nations. It is this arrogant foreign policy ("democracy, even if it kills") of the neo-conservative wing of Republicans in the United States which has incited terrorist attacks.
The United States should concentrate on getting their own democracy right before they attempt to export it anywhere else.
It is the Pyles of the US society which are giving reason for terrorist networks like Al-Quaeda to grow so rapidly, because they are united in hatred against the interventionist "global-police" empire of the United States. Fowler may be looking down on the Vietnamnese, but Pyle's ideas are much more dangerous than Fowler's ("unengage", or something).
The Vietnamese people CANNOT overrun thier government. The communist are too smart, they brainwash citizens and stop rebelions before it can do anything. The difference between the vietminh and Pyle was thier intentions. I am not justifying Pyle, I am merely saying that he was the lesser of the two evils,a better option.
The point of the text is as long as the citizens of that country is happy its fine. That is what Fowler always wanted, people to be happy and safe. This can clearly be seen when he backed the foreign intervention in Burma. It did not unfairly dismiss everything colonial powers and the U.S did., thats why I like it; even though I don't like the Fowler looking down on vietnamese people and all but thats a small part.
The bombings and Al-Quaeda are all jsut religious fanatics . All they talk about is how God wants them to do it, they are as disagraceful as the Vietminh, hiding behind citizens and using them as human shields. Iraq is pretty much gone, the people who make up a sound society, such as doctors, lawyers, teachers have all left. Only thing thats left in Iraq are fanatics and people who cannot escape.
EDITS: acknowledges and respects Coblin's opinion. Decides not to spam this thread anymore :D
-
I say make English compulsory but take it out of the top 4./quote]
This.
-
I'm studying law and you would think that the skills you learn in VCE English would be useful, but think again. The stuff that you need, they don't teach you, and the stuff that they do teach, you don't really need. I think one of the most important English skills needed in a career in law (and probably just about any other profession) is a good grounding in grammar. Yet, the kind of teaching i received in grammar through my whole 13 years in schooling have been inadequate or non-existent. Another thing, that VCE English claims to teach students is "critical thinking skills". Yet, I think VCE English fails in that goal as well. Take for example, "language analysis". What good is being able to pick out persuasive techniques and their intended effect, if you can't assess their logical validity? If you look at "appeal to history" or "appeal to tradition", you would probably be taught examples of it being used, and its intended effect, but I doubt very much that you would have been taught that in many cases it is used in a logically fallacious manner - i.e. it is logically invalid.
-
That's a good point.
-
I'm studying law and you would think that the skills you learn in VCE English would be useful, but think again. The stuff that you need, they don't teach you, and the stuff that they do teach, you don't really need. I think one of the most important English skills needed in a career in law (and probably just about any other profession) is a good grounding in grammar. Yet, the kind of teaching i received in grammar through my whole 13 years in schooling have been inadequate or non-existent. Another thing, that VCE English claims to teach students is "critical thinking skills". Yet, I think VCE English fails in that goal as well. Take for example, "language analysis". What good is being able to pick out persuasive techniques and their intended effect, if you can't assess their logical validity? If you look at "appeal to history" or "appeal to tradition", you would probably be taught examples of it being used, and its intended effect, but I doubt very much that you would have been taught that in many cases it is used in a logically fallacious manner - i.e. it is logically invalid.
Your experience applies to those who simply wish to pass the subject by memorization and formulaic responses. People who truly extend themselves in the subject and enjoy their texts can expand their vocabulary and analytic skills exponentially, and since when has grammar even been a VCE responsibility, and not that of middle school. VCE english is not intended as a be-all-end-all education on logical reasoning, and nor is that why it holds a compulsory place in the top 4. Why would media analysis constitute a fallacy of logic? The aim of the task is to make logical assertions of the intended impact of language. It is based upon - granted - predominantly memorized concepts of language use, but imply that the task is overall logically invalid is simply wrong
-
Your experience applies to those who simply wish to pass the subject by memorization and formulaic responses. People who truly extend themselves in the subject and enjoy their texts can expand their vocabulary and analytic skills exponentially, and since when has grammar even been a VCE responsibility, and not that of middle school. VCE english is not intended as a be-all-end-all education on logical reasoning, and nor is that why it holds a compulsory place in the top 4. Why would media analysis constitute a fallacy of logic? The aim of the task is to make logical assertions of the intended impact of language. It is based upon - granted - predominantly memorized concepts of language use, but imply that the task is overall logically invalid is simply wrong
I think this not a very good reply, because you begin by dismissing his argument as one that sides with the "rote-learners." I see nothing in brendan's post that applies to rote-learners.
Fundamentally, it is wrong to make compulsory a subject that you must enjoy, to do well. I enjoy mathematics and science, and that is why I chose to take those subjects in VCE, but to have VCE English forced into my hands as a compulsory subject that makes up almost a quarter of your ENTER aggregate does not create a fair-process. (Why not make a general knowledge test -- with maths, science, IT, etc. -- as the standard instead?)
Even if we agree that some sort of English has to be compulsory, I would argue strongly against the analysis of texts, and would propose a much more simple line of English, one that teaches fundamental concepts like grammar and making logical arguments. However, my ultimate stance is that no English should be compulsory, leave that to the pre-year 11 curriculum.
-
Why would media analysis constitute a fallacy of logic? The aim of the task is to make logical assertions of the intended impact of language. It is based upon - granted - predominantly memorized concepts of language use, but imply that the task is overall logically invalid is simply wrong
I did not make that claim that the task of language analysis is logically invalid. I said that making assertions or conjectures as to the intended or even actual effect of language is of little use of itself. What use is being able to identify and make assertions as to the intended effect of "appeals to tradition" in pieces of writing, if one is not also able to assess its logical validity?
VCE english is not intended as a be-all-end-all education on logical reasoning,
Of course not, and nor is it my position. I did not say that VCE English was intended to be the "be-all-end-all" of logical reasoning. To suggest that i did would be (ironically) to set up a straw-man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
What i did assert was that VCE English aims to to teach students "critical thinking skills" as evidenced by it's study design published by the VCAA http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/studies/english/englisheslsd.pdf :
"evaluate critically points of view expressed by others;"
"characteristics of sound argument, logical sequencing of information, and appropriate ways of presenting supporting evidence;"
"In the presentation of points of view students will need to focus on: ... a logical and coherent sequence of information and ideas"
"read accurately to locate, understand, analyse and synthesise ideas and information;"
"techniques for critically discussing and evaluating issues and arguments presented in texts."
"techniques for critical analysis and evaluation of ideas, issues and arguments presented in texts."
"comment critically on the way ideas and issues are presented in texts."
"The ability to analyse the use of language for informative and persuasive purposes, along with the capacity to think critically, logically and creatively about a range of socially important issues,"
"Students will benefit from explicit teaching related to these skills, which are relevant to the ability to read sensitively and critically, to make language choices for maximum audience effect when writing, to listen with discrimination and detachment, and to present ideas and information effectively when speaking to an audience."
"The study of media texts assists in developing students? abilities to think critically, logically and creatively about a wide variety of issues and to present personal points of view in an effective manner."
"develop listening strategies to enhance critical thinking and assist in processing complex information;"
However, I do not think that VCE English actually achieves these aims, particularly that of:
"characteristics of sound argument, logical sequencing of information, and appropriate ways of presenting supporting evidence;"
"In the presentation of points of view students will need to focus on: ... a logical and coherent sequence of information and ideas"
-
The entire English system falls down in its sheer inability to teach even the basic rudiments. We are sending out many people into the workforce who are functionally illiterate without Microsoft Word and Spellcheck. Just look around at MySpace sites and Facebook etc. It's utter drivel! Nobody uses proper English anymore, and further to that point, not many people know how. Grammar is pushed aside as if it is nothing. Spelling is barely looked at past the 8th grade, and it is utterly disgusting.
Essays are often formulaic because we are taught to get marks, not for the use of the English language. Anything that will get us a better mark, we use. It's all fine and dandy to claim that there are those out there who do learn English for love of the subject, but it is a narrow minority. The entire concept of English being taught as a VCE primary 4 subject must be overhauled and replaced with something workable.
-
The entire English system falls down in its sheer inability to teach even the basic rudiments. We are sending out many people into the workforce who are functionally illiterate without Microsoft Word and Spellcheck. Just look around at MySpace sites and Facebook etc. It's utter drivel! Nobody uses proper English anymore, and further to that point, not many people know how. Grammar is pushed aside as if it is nothing. Spelling is barely looked at past the 8th grade, and it is utterly disgusting.
Essays are often formulaic because we are taught to get marks, not for the use of the English language. Anything that will get us a better mark, we use. It's all fine and dandy to claim that there are those out there who do learn English for love of the subject, but it is a narrow minority. The entire concept of English being taught as a VCE primary 4 subject must be overhauled and replaced with something workable.
I totally agree :)
-
OMG i don't believe it. i think someone has been reading my posts :D
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. "
So what is this "critical literacy"?
http://wwwfp.education.tas.gov.au/English/critlit.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_literacy
-
i now officially hate the fact that english has to be in your top 4 :)
-
i now officially hate the fact that english has to be in your top 4 :)
I always did :P hehe
-
simple solution. do literature or english language.
-
simple solution. do literature or english language.
I wouldn't recommend doing lit instead of english, because lit will have to be in your top 4, and lit is notoriously harder to get better marks in. It's because in lit you don't get all the illiterate bogans filling out the low scores like you do in english, and yet the scaling doesn't compensate it like it should
-
i wish id done lit as well as english tho, to allow me to stuff up in one.. i was gona do it, i did 1/2 last year, but continued with chem instead of lit.. although i am glad i did chem so hmm. i wish my school gave you the option of doing 2 3/4s in yr 11
-
i plan on doing all 3 englishes
-
thats extreme! and i see you got 8 subjects, that's a lot i think its better for you just to do 7
if you want a bit of a challenge i suggest this:
2008: Methods, English Language
2009: Physics, Spesh, Chemistry, Uni Math
-
lol, I reckon doing 8 subjects is better. It means you can stuff up two subjects and still be ok :P
-
i wish id done lit as well as english tho, to allow me to stuff up in one.. i was gona do it, i did 1/2 last year, but continued with chem instead of lit.. although i am glad i did chem so hmm. i wish my school gave you the option of doing 2 3/4s in yr 11
Same. We were discouraged from doing so, but there were people doing it anyway. =\ should've jumped on the bandwagon.
-
i wish id done lit as well as english tho, to allow me to stuff up in one.. i was gona do it, i did 1/2 last year, but continued with chem instead of lit.. although i am glad i did chem so hmm. i wish my school gave you the option of doing 2 3/4s in yr 11
gah me too! that is like my biggest regret! but my school told us we wern't allowed, it wasn't until later that I found out you had to fight for it.
-
yeh it annoys me everytime i think about it, but because i moved to a new school in yr 11, i wasnt realy in a position to fight hahah, and i didnt even no really that people did 2, but i found out that a few people were doing 2. like seriously, its so much easier doing themin yr 11, i dont know why you wouldnt.
they stopped my friend from even doing one in yr 11, and i think thats so stupid, because it puts more pressure on her this year and she only has one back up subject now, and like seriously, what wouldve been the worst thing that could happen with her doing one last year? yeh not getting as well as possible, but then who cares, its a good experience!
-
thats extreme! and i see you got 8 subjects, that's a lot i think its better for you just to do 7
if you want a bit of a challenge i suggest this:
2008: Methods, English Language
2009: Physics, Spesh, Chemistry, Uni Math
already doing that, but swapping spesh and language, and lit added into the 2nd year.
my 2nd year is going to be so hardcore
-
yeh it annoys me everytime i think about it, but because i moved to a new school in yr 11, i wasnt realy in a position to fight hahah, and i didnt even no really that people did 2, but i found out that a few people were doing 2. like seriously, its so much easier doing themin yr 11, i dont know why you wouldnt.
they stopped my friend from even doing one in yr 11, and i think thats so stupid, because it puts more pressure on her this year and she only has one back up subject now, and like seriously, what wouldve been the worst thing that could happen with her doing one last year? yeh not getting as well as possible, but then who cares, its a good experience!
I know, at my school they even discourage you from doing 1 and make out like only the 'smarter' students can handle it, so alot of my friends got scared out of doing it cos they thought you had to be real smart , and now they reallly regret it. It takes so much pressure off if you can do well in it. And you don't have to be smart, you have soo much more time when you are in year 11. If I had done 2 last year, I would only really have to concentrate on 2 this year, it would be a breeeze damit!
-
yeh it annoys me everytime i think about it, but because i moved to a new school in yr 11, i wasnt realy in a position to fight hahah, and i didnt even no really that people did 2, but i found out that a few people were doing 2. like seriously, its so much easier doing themin yr 11, i dont know why you wouldnt.
they stopped my friend from even doing one in yr 11, and i think thats so stupid, because it puts more pressure on her this year and she only has one back up subject now, and like seriously, what wouldve been the worst thing that could happen with her doing one last year? yeh not getting as well as possible, but then who cares, its a good experience!
I know, at my school they even discourage you from doing 1 and make out like only the 'smarter' students can handle it, so alot of my friends got scared out of doing it cos they thought you had to be real smart , and now they reallly regret it. It takes so much pressure off if you can do well in it. And you don't have to be smart, you have soo much more time when you are in year 11. If I had done 2 last year, I would only really have to concentrate on 2 this year, it would be a breeeze damit!
Exactly the same at my school ... sigh.
-
teh same at mhs
-
already doing that, but swapping spesh and language, and lit added into the 2nd year.
my 2nd year is going to be so hardcore
i know im suggesting that program i put up instead. cos its better to do methods before spesh (what i did). and there is no point in doing 8 subjects as only 6 will be counted, so you are better off focusing your scarce resources (time) on stuff that will count towards your ENTER.
-
yeh it annoys me everytime i think about it, but because i moved to a new school in yr 11, i wasnt realy in a position to fight hahah, and i didnt even no really that people did 2, but i found out that a few people were doing 2. like seriously, its so much easier doing themin yr 11, i dont know why you wouldnt.
they stopped my friend from even doing one in yr 11, and i think thats so stupid, because it puts more pressure on her this year and she only has one back up subject now, and like seriously, what wouldve been the worst thing that could happen with her doing one last year? yeh not getting as well as possible, but then who cares, its a good experience!
yeah i don't think its about fighting, its just about demanding that your educational needs be met, if they don't want to, move somewhere else, or take the VCE subjects you want outside of school from RMIT or VIC uni or CAE, they all provide VCE subjects. If you want it, they have it.
In the end, we are all consumers of education, and the schools are producers. Set out what you want, and find out a school that will provide you with what you want. When my school didn't let me do what I wanted in year 12, i pushed for it, and when they wouldn't budge, i picked up and left to a school that did let me do what i want.
-
The problem is, that we effectively made our decisions for VCE at the end of year 9 (to start some 1/2s in year 10), at that point in time people tend to trust their school and not look outside it for other options.
Eg at my school the maths department pushes really hard to get heaps of kids doing methods, so there's always a year 11 3/4 class. At the same time, school also pretty much doesn't let people do physics/chem earlier. Looking back I would have loved to have swapped when I did methods and chem.
And also, I only learnt about things like distance ed, and there is a 1/2 that leads on to spesh, this year. My vce program would have looked quite different if I knew all of that beforehand (definitely wouldn't have IS in there).
I'm glad though that my school runs language, first time I've liked english and I would have never known about it if school didn't run it.
And that my school lets quite a few people do 2 3/4s in year 11 (although I think starting next year they are going to be a lot tighter on it but)
-
already doing that, but swapping spesh and language, and lit added into the 2nd year.
my 2nd year is going to be so hardcore
i know im suggesting that program i put up instead. cos its better to do methods before spesh (what i did). and there is no point in doing 8 subjects as only 6 will be counted, so you are better off focusing your scarce resources (time) on stuff that will count towards your ENTER.
time aint a problem for me. i study about once a month for each subject and still pull good results. should probably cut down a few shifts a week though..
-
My school doesn't let students do 2 3/4 subjects in Year 11 either unless the second subject is a language or music. I wish I was allowed to do 3/4 English in Year 11. The course is pretty much identical and that way you get a second chance for a crucial subject although I'm not even sure VCAA allows that.
-
My school doesn't let students do 2 3/4 subjects in Year 11 either unless the second subject is a language or music. I wish I was allowed to do 3/4 English in Year 11. The course is pretty much identical and that way you get a second chance for a crucial subject although I'm not even sure VCAA allows that.
vcaa does allow that, but if you dont get a good score the first time in english, you should probably do language the second time.
-
MHS discouraged English Language, and I think there was a shortage of demand so it didn't run in my year. I really think a solid investment in English Language resources and advertising it as a viable alternative to English would go a long way to help the 'logically inclined' of MHS.
We get great raw scores, but only few match good raw scores with good English raw scores.
-
english language requires strong natural english skills. if you dont get it, you dont get it, and probably wont.
-
english language requires strong natural english skills. if you dont get it, you dont get it, and probably wont.
I second that. If you can't do well in english, you won't do well in language.
It's been up and running at my school for a good few years now.
A lot of people chose EL 1/2 thinking it would be easy and left us after semester 1. Another lot of people did english unit 1, english language unit 1 (we did unit 2 first to allow people to try both) and most of them never wanted to touch the subject again either. And there are a lot of people who do it this year who would be better off in normal english.
And we have either 29 or 31 people doing language 3/4 this year (it's one of those, the other number is how many do chinese xD)
-
I'm not sure about that. I think they target different audiences. Language analysis seems much easier to me, simply because I do not like studying lengthy boring texts, but I don't mind analysing a series of short articles. They are interesting for a few hours, whereas you have to be interested in a crappy text for a term.
-
I'm not sure about that. I think they target different audiences. Language analysis seems much easier to me, simply because I do not like studying lengthy boring texts, but I don't mind analysing a series of short articles. They are interesting for a few hours, whereas you have to be interested in a crappy text for a term.
They do target different audiences yes, but you definitely still need to have skills comparable to english.
We don't analyse things like what the section in the English exam is like.
About 35 mins for 1-2 written texts from any source (not just articles, can be fiction, ads, random bits of information, emails), and 35 mins on a spoken text (chit-chats, interviews etc), and answering specific questions. Some of them are stupidly easy (what is the function of this text, what part of speech is blah, what sentence type is this) but the 4 and 6 markers you need to have a complete understanding of what is in front of you and understand what the question is asking, and not to just re-use generalised answers from previous experience
And then theres the essay. If you can't write one in english, you won't be any better here (in some aspects it's probably harder, because the book is effectively a limit on all there is to know/include, and your quotes cant exactly be 'unoriginal' or 'standard' quotes). You can use 'I' in them but, that is good fun xD
-
I have great writing skills, but I have no skill in VCE English. It is because 66% of the exam is text response.
I am sure I could do well in English Language. I would argue the same for other logically minded people, because the subject is a bit more technical.
-
The problem with English is that too much of it hinges on the final exam. I remember finishing it just in time; a bit of a close call...
-
So Ledward, if you're a BCom/BIS student at unimelb...
Why is your e-mail [email protected]? :P
-
becos he is is a l33t h4x0r :P
-
Why should you care about being able to write well?
Hedge fund manager Mark Sellers tells Harvard business students the secrets to success as an investor. http://www.beearly.com/pdfFiles/Sellers24102004.pdf
"As an investor, you need to perform calculations and have a logical investment thesis. This is your left brain working. But you also need to be able to do things such as judging a management team from subtle cues they give off. You need to be able to step back and take a big picture view of certain situations rather than analyzing them to death. You need to have a sense of humor and humility and common sense. And most important, I believe you need to be a good writer. Look at Buffett; he's one of the best writers ever in the business world. It's not a coincidence that he's also one of the best investors of all time. If you can't write clearly, it is my opinion that you don't think very clearly."
-
Well maybe Mark Sellers just suck ass XD
-
i disagree droodles.
You dont need to express yourself to the extent that vce english covers in order to fucntion in university life, let alone society as a whole.
You might need language analysis etc to help from being brainwashed / influenced by eveyrthing around you, but when will you need to analyse filming techniques of an australian film etc...
I get Cs on english essays, but A+s on physics/psych AND specialist maths.
Am i a dumbass?
-
English filters out the people who are dumbasses, if u suck at english u will suck at uni then life
What a wild proposition. What evidence do you have that relates performance in VCE English with academic results at university and then earning capacity in employment/business?
-
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.
-
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.
I agree =]
-
English filters out the people who are dumbasses, if u suck at english u will suck at uni then life
I completely disagree! A person's ability in English alone is not a measure of one's potential success in life. Also success in life may not mean becoming filthy rich for some people. Different people measure success in their own way. Some may find that they have succeeded in life once they are old, retired and have a well established family. Not everyone measures their success with wealth and quality of career.
Ultimately people who measure success with establishing a family can succeed in life without having to learn analytical skills.
Clearly in your perspective success means going to university, advancing your career and making plenty of money. So in your case English is necessary.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
text responses imo should b allocated solely to Lit
-
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).
-
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. "
-
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.
-
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:
-
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"
-
Mmm sounds good =)
-
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 :P
-
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...
-
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 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.