ATAR Notes: Forum
VCE Stuff => VCE English Studies => VCE Subjects + Help => VCE English & EAL => Topic started by: nonstop9328 on October 28, 2010, 09:50:57 pm
-
how many marks do u think i would lose if i didn't write the name of the speaker and didn't analyse the first picture?:(n
i wrote 3 pages.
-
4-5 at best probably. Not just for not mentioning the speaker but it's likely that if you missed that you missed other important parts about the context.
-
You'll get about 5 or 6/10 if you didn't mention reader name. Not analysing the first pictures turn it into 3 or 4. Then again, if your essay was a 9-10 standard, you'd still get about a 5.
-
You'll get about 5 or 6/10 if you didn't mention reader name. Not analysing the first pictures turn it into 3 or 4. Then again, if your essay was a 9-10 standard, you'd still get about a 5.
omfg.
I did both.
But still.
-
I am not sure if you guys are joking or is deliberately trying to stifle other students, but don't do what your doing, making marks up just to make people worry more.
-
You'll get about 5 or 6/10 if you didn't mention reader name. Not analysing the first pictures turn it into 3 or 4. Then again, if your essay was a 9-10 standard, you'd still get about a 5.
This is a load of nonsense.
-
Its people such as these that make VCE Notes a 9/10 instead a 10/10 place. Piss off!!
-
I hope those who predicted 4-6/10 are serious (as in, they have been misled to believe so), because if you are intentionally joking then your humor is pretty distasteful and detrimental to the mental wellbeing of others. I am sure you would not want to be in nonstop's situation and have two randoms telling you that your maximum score will be 6/10 since you forgot to mention the speaker's name and analyze the first powerpoint slide.
To argue that forgetting the speaker's name will suddenly make you lose 4-5 marks is neglecting the whole purpose of Language Analysis, which is to have a 'sophisticated analysis and insightful comparison of the ways in which the language of selected persuasive texts is used to position readers in particular ways'; it is not about who wrote the damn speech (it could have been Captain Planet advocating biodiversity for all the examiners care), but what he/she is trying to achieve by writing/reciting it. I will even go so far as to say that forgetting the speaker's name will not have any impact whatsoever on your final mark (ie. you will not lose a mark for it) if you manage to analyse the language well enough.
As for not analyzing the first powerpoint slide, that is a bit different. It would have been better if you did analyze it, but yet again it is not a sudden loss of 2-3 marks just because you did not do it. I am not sure how much emphasis the examiners will place upon analyzing both slides, but at most you would lose 1 mark (however, you may also lose none if they choose to be lenient).
-
I love u Aden..
i worried so much... i though i would have to repeat yr12 again..
hopefully i'll get 34 for ENGLISH..
PLZPLZPLZZZZ LOL thanks anywayzss
-
I hope those who predicted 4-6/10 are serious (as in, they have been misled to believe so), because if you are intentionally joking then your humor is pretty distasteful and detrimental to the mental wellbeing of others. I am sure you would not want to be in nonstop's situation and have two randoms telling you that your maximum score will be 6/10 since you forgot to mention the speaker's name and analyze the first powerpoint slide.
To argue that forgetting the speaker's name will suddenly make you lose 4-5 marks is neglecting the whole purpose of Language Analysis, which is to have a 'sophisticated analysis and insightful comparison of the ways in which the language of selected persuasive texts is used to position readers in particular ways'; it is not about who wrote the damn speech (it could have been Captain Planet advocating biodiversity for all the examiners care), but what he/she is trying to achieve by writing/reciting it. I will even go so far as to say that forgetting the speaker's name will not have any impact whatsoever on your final mark (ie. you will not lose a mark for it) if you manage to analyse the language well enough.
As for not analyzing the first powerpoint slide, that is a bit different. It would have been better if you did analyze it, but yet again it is not a sudden loss of 2-3 marks just because you did not do it. I am not sure how much emphasis the examiners will place upon analyzing both slides, but at most you would lose 1 mark (however, you may also lose none if they choose to be lenient).
You obviously haven't spoken to many examiners then. No you wont lose 5 marks for not saying the speakers name, but without it you are not going to be in the top band of students. Also, obviously if they miss the speakers name, they will miss other important parts about the context of the speech. Most examiners will see it as these people have failed to pick up on these things and therefore there analysis wont be that good either.
-
You argument is truly unsubstantiated, and how can you make the claim that Aden hasn't spoken much to examiners? Firstly, he is probably one of the most experienced and respected English contributors to VCE Notes.
Secondly, how can you rationalise that those people who didn't pick up the names will miss important parts? Clearly it is a matter of reading the background information, and if you haven't read it, then you haven't read it, and during exam pressure, most people would just not bother reading it. How does that have anything to do with your ability to pick up parts on the passage?
What now, illogical causal argument on the way? "Most examiners will see it as these people have failed to pick up on these things and therefore there analysis wont be that good either." As mentioned above, the background information is NOT INCORPORATED in the speech, what it determines is how careful you are ( going through the background information first than to the speech), and not your ability to pick up language techniques.
So, should I nitpick your sentences 'Most examiners will see it as THOUGH these people... and therefore THEIR analysis...' and say that you are not going to be in the 'top band of students' ?
-
I hope those who predicted 4-6/10 are serious (as in, they have been misled to believe so), because if you are intentionally joking then your humor is pretty distasteful and detrimental to the mental wellbeing of others. I am sure you would not want to be in nonstop's situation and have two randoms telling you that your maximum score will be 6/10 since you forgot to mention the speaker's name and analyze the first powerpoint slide.
To argue that forgetting the speaker's name will suddenly make you lose 4-5 marks is neglecting the whole purpose of Language Analysis, which is to have a 'sophisticated analysis and insightful comparison of the ways in which the language of selected persuasive texts is used to position readers in particular ways'; it is not about who wrote the damn speech (it could have been Captain Planet advocating biodiversity for all the examiners care), but what he/she is trying to achieve by writing/reciting it. I will even go so far as to say that forgetting the speaker's name will not have any impact whatsoever on your final mark (ie. you will not lose a mark for it) if you manage to analyse the language well enough.
As for not analyzing the first powerpoint slide, that is a bit different. It would have been better if you did analyze it, but yet again it is not a sudden loss of 2-3 marks just because you did not do it. I am not sure how much emphasis the examiners will place upon analyzing both slides, but at most you would lose 1 mark (however, you may also lose none if they choose to be lenient).
You obviously haven't spoken to many examiners then. No you wont lose 5 marks for not saying the speakers name, but without it you are not going to be in the top band of students. Also, obviously if they miss the speakers name, they will miss other important parts about the context of the speech. Most examiners will see it as these people have failed to pick up on these things and therefore there analysis wont be that good either.
paulie9214, you have totally misinterpreted Aden's post. Read it again.
-
sigh... What are you even trying to achieve with this?
You obviously haven't spoken to many examiners then.
Many, if not most, of the English teachers at my school have been or currently still are assessors for the exam. I don't see why you would choose to directly attack my credibility either when yours is on even shakier ground considering how you retreat from your earlier post and admit in your next sentence that 'no you wont lose 5 marks for not saying the speakers name'.
without it you are not going to be in the top band of students
As my Head of English said, not having the speaker's name is considered as a small error, and many small errors will add up to become a large one which ultimately results in the loss of marks. However, having one small error will not directly result in losing marks if your actual analysis is good enough. Yes, you won't be in the very 'top-tier' because of it, and thus will not get the Premiers Award for English, but a low 10 due to the small error is still a 10 nevertheless.
obviously if they miss the speakers name, they will miss other important parts about the context of the speech.
Well IF they did do that, then that would be many small errors wouldn't it?
Most examiners will see it as these people have failed to pick up on these things and therefore there analysis wont be that good either.
I'd hate to see you as an assessor.
*sees that the student has forgotten to write the name of the speaker*
"You know what, I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this essay because forgetting the name MUST mean they've forgotten other things as well! This essay is a 6/10"
-
Go Aden!
;) ;)
-
You'll get about 5 or 6/10 if you didn't mention reader name. Not analysing the first pictures turn it into 3 or 4. Then again, if your essay was a 9-10 standard, you'd still get about a 5.
mate your a fucking idiot if you think that !
-
sigh... What are you even trying to achieve with this?
You obviously haven't spoken to many examiners then.
Many, if not most, of the English teachers at my school have been or currently still are assessors for the exam. I don't see why you would choose to directly attack my credibility either when yours is on even shakier ground considering how you retreat from your earlier post and admit in your next sentence that 'no you wont lose 5 marks for not saying the speakers name'.
without it you are not going to be in the top band of students
As my Head of English said, not having the speaker's name is considered as a small error, and many small errors will add up to become a large one which ultimately results in the loss of marks. However, having one small error will not directly result in losing marks if your actual analysis is good enough. Yes, you won't be in the very 'top-tier' because of it, and thus will not get the Premiers Award for English, but a low 10 due to the small error is still a 10 nevertheless.
obviously if they miss the speakers name, they will miss other important parts about the context of the speech.
Well IF they did do that, then that would be many small errors wouldn't it?
Most examiners will see it as these people have failed to pick up on these things and therefore there analysis wont be that good either.
I'd hate to see you as an assessor.
*sees that the student has forgotten to write the name of the speaker*
"You know what, I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this essay because forgetting the name MUST mean they've forgotten other things as well! This essay is a 6/10"
I dont remember retreating from my original post because I clearly remember saying in my original post that if you miss something as trivial as the speakers name you are likely to miss other stuff that is given in the background info. As I said in both of my posts. The person also didn't analyse one of the images so this is a big hit too. As you see they have missed two things now. Most English students would tell you that no analysis is good if you leave out important things. Not doing these things will drop your mark.
I never said that you will get a 5 simply because you didnt mention his name, but if you miss that its very unlikely that you will write a good analysis (ignoring the fact that the image was ignored)
-
Ok, so what is your point, man? Judging by your post, you obviously have not even bothered to fully understand (or even read) any of my posts in this thread. If you actually tried to read and understand them, you’ll realize that never in this thread have I ever attacked your statement that making many mistakes will result in the loss of marks. In fact, believe it or not I have actually supported it and explicitly said that ‘many small errors’ will be detrimental to your final score.
What I have attacked, and you read carefully now, is your wrongful and unjustified assumption that the OP has achieved ‘AT BEST’ 4-5 marks for their language analysis. Last time I checked, no human is omniscient, so what gives you the right to assume that nonstop has made many errors and then have the audacity to tell him that the maximum mark he can achieve is a 5? Judging by your use of ‘there’ instead of the correct word ‘their’, your ability to write essays must be pretty poor and you probably have illegible handwriting that examiners cannot read as well, so I’d say the maximum score you got for your essays is a 0. Don’t like it and feel insulted? So you should be because some random who doesn’t even know you at all has just assumed all your faults from one tiny mistake that you had made earlier. This is what you have done, and it is what I have been arguing against all this time. You may attempt to justify your reasoning however you like, but it still doesn’t change the fact that your initial post was unwarranted and pure hypothesis that unnecessarily made nonstop worry.
I did not originally desire to do this and attack you specifically, and had rather wanted to point out to nonstop that the predictions of 4-6 were incorrect and unsubstantiated. However, your continued attempts to re-enter this thread and justify your initial point that nonstop will get 4-5 marks for his language analysis has forced me to take a more aggressive approach.
-
Ok, so what is your point, man? Judging by your post, you obviously have not even bothered to fully understand (or even read) any of my posts in this thread. If you actually tried to read and understand them, you’ll realize that never in this thread have I ever attacked your statement that making many mistakes will result in the loss of marks. In fact, believe it or not I have actually supported it and explicitly said that ‘many small errors’ will be detrimental to your final score.
What I have attacked, and you read carefully now, is your wrongful and unjustified assumption that the OP has achieved ‘AT BEST’ 4-5 marks for their language analysis. Last time I checked, no human is omniscient, so what gives you the right to assume that nonstop has made many errors and then have the audacity to tell him that the maximum mark he can achieve is a 5? Judging by your use of ‘there’ instead of the correct word ‘their’, your ability to write essays must be pretty poor and you probably have illegible handwriting that examiners cannot read as well, so I’d say the maximum score you got for your essays is a 0. Don’t like it and feel insulted? So you should be because some random who doesn’t even know you at all has just assumed all your faults from one tiny mistake that you had made earlier. This is what you have done, and it is what I have been arguing against all this time. You may attempt to justify your reasoning however you like, but it still doesn’t change the fact that your initial post was unwarranted and pure hypothesis that unnecessarily made nonstop worry.
I did not originally desire to do this and attack you specifically, and had rather wanted to point out to nonstop that the predictions of 4-6 were incorrect and unsubstantiated. However, your continued attempts to re-enter this thread and justify your initial point that nonstop will get 4-5 marks for his language analysis has forced me to take a more aggressive approach.
GG. Case closed.
In all seriousness, not writing the name of the speaker may impact the examiner's (assuming one examiner) initial impression of the essay; but if you do proceed on to analyse it clearly, concisely and fluently, then I doubt he would remember and mark you down because of that.