ATAR Notes: Forum
VCE Stuff => VCE English Studies => VCE Subjects + Help => VCE English & EAL => Topic started by: Flaming_Arrow on January 18, 2009, 06:40:31 pm
-
hi this is for ESL
some tips my tutor gave me that i don't agree with
- Do you have to write the persuasive techniques used in the article in the introduction?
- Do i have to give a definition of the persuasive technique in the first line of my paragraphs?
- Can i disagree with the writer?
- Can i say that it wasn't a good persuasive technique?
Thanks
-
- Do you have to write the persuasive techniques used in the article in the introduction?
No.
- Do i have to give a definition of the persuasive technique in the first line of my paragraphs?
Definitely not.
- Can i disagree with the writer?
Why are you even giving your point of view in the first place? You shouldn't be agreeing nor disagreeing to begin with. Language analysis is strictly an analysis of the language used; not an evaluation of the arguments presented.
- Can i say that it wasn't a good persuasive technique?
As above; so basically, no, you shouldn't be evaluating.
-
Is lang anal for ESL diff to normal english?
-
Supposedly there's another component to language analysis for them from what I've heard, but I'm not too sure.
-
Is lang anal for ESL diff to normal english?
ye i've been told so, does anyone have how exactly i need to write it? my tutor says he'll teach me the normal english way for analysis
-
You can evaluate a persuasive technique insofar as you talk about its likely impact. You might talk about whether the technique was profoundly important to the writer's argument, or if it was more of a subtle way to point the reader in a certain direction, for instance. A normal reader doesn't say to themselves 'oh look, the title of the article rhymes, therefore I will agree with the writer', but they might say 'oh, this writer works with homeless people, therefore what they have to say about homelessness is valid'. It is good to show an understanding that not all persuasive techniques are equal to each other. In that way, you can talk about the extent of the impact.
It isn't about arguing whether the techniques were good or bad, just about how they effect the reader - no writer will deliberately write something which is perverse to their contention.
Disclaimer: I'm not familiar with the ESL course.
-
one more question
should i only talk about one point\quote in a paragraph?
-
There isn't really a 'rule' about it. It depends. Sometimes you can group a bunch of them together because they all work in the same sort of way and so, they could make up parts of the same point in your essay. The best way to figure it out is to practice and see what feels right.
-
find another tutor.
-
There is a difference for language analysis in ESL. There are 2 parts you are required to do -
Part 1: Note-form summary. This involves writing the article's contention and 5 major points made by the author. There's just one thing you need to remember, you cannot write in full sentences. Use abbreviations, arrows etc. There's an example of what you could do on this link, page 4 and 5 ---> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/studies/english/eslassess/2007/esl_assessrep_07.pdf
Part 2: A piece of prose which identifies the techniques used in THREE of the major points you have recognized in your note form summary. So basically, 3 paragraphs, one for each point, and the whole piece doesn't necessarily have to flow like an essay.
-
ESL looks bludgey. Drawing pictures belongs in vcal. (not intended to offend artsy students- more in the context of drawings that lack artistic integrity)
-
The "drawings" (a rather crude word for it, even the bludgey ESL students know that it's a flow chart!) to which you refer is a valid literary device to convey ideas, or rather, the development and progression of ideas.
Its simplicity makes it ideal for those foreign to the language of English who would invariably find sentence structure difficult. Flow charts cut out sentence structure while preserving a neat flow of ideas. Thus, it is obvious that this exercise examines more closely the students' reading comprehension skills, rather than their literary prose which is examined in the preceding section's essay and the following essay of that section to which you are referring. It is taken as read (pardon the pun) that any students sitting the mainstream English exam have adequate reading comprehension skills. This cannot be assumed for ESL students, and so (as far as I can tell) this skill is assessed in that section.
Calling ESL a "bludge" is also very demeaning to those who come to Australia at the age of say, 13, and struggle greatly to learn the language to sit these compulsory exams. I'm sure you would not find it a bludge to learn (for example) German to the level that is required of ESL students in only 5 or so years. Keeping in mind that ESL students are still required to write one full text response and one full point of view essay. It appears to be a bludge to you because you've grown up with English, so of course it would be significantly easier for you. I think you've been quite unfair in your labelling of ESL and advise you to reconsider your position.
-
ESL looks bludgey. Drawing pictures belongs in vcal. (not intended to offend artsy students- more in the context of drawings that lack artistic integrity)
He never said it was a bludge, hehehe vcal.
-
"Calling ESL a "bludge" is also very demeaning to those who come to Australia at the age of say, 13, and struggle greatly to learn the language to sit these compulsory exams. I'm sure you would not find it a bludge to learn (for example) German to the level that is required of ESL students in only 5 or so years. Keeping in mind that ESL students are still required to write one full text response and one full point of view essay. It appears to be a bludge to you because you've grown up with English, so of course it would be significantly easier for you. I think you've been quite unfair in your labelling of ESL and advise you to reconsider your position."
I think ESL *would* be a cushy option for someone who'd been in Australia for 5 years. Given mine and other people's experiences living in France [even taking into account that learning the language in its different modes was high on our agendas], being in Australia from year 8 onwards gives would give you *ample* time to become as good as you would have been had English been your first language [save for possibly having an accent and isolated difficulties with pronounciation.] Even a year is ample time to become fluent, however you would have to be conscientious and it wouldn't be fair to ask someone who had only come to Australia in year 11 [for whom learning English to the standard of most Australians might not be their highest priority] to do one of the normal englishes. Indeed, it would be unfair on these students to pit them against someone who came in year 8.
-
I know a guy who came to Australia in year 8 from a country where not only was English unknown to him beforehand, but his other language read right-to-left and used an entirely different written script to that of English.
He tried his level best to become fluent and by year 12 held a fairly good vocabulary and had few problems conversing. But when it came to writing an essay (which must be soundly structured and have deep thought put into it) it gave him great difficulty to produce. He wasn't dumb, but he also wasn't the smartest guy I've ever met. If he had been in normal English, he would have struggled a helluva lot more than he did in ESL.
I don't think it's fair of you to say that 5 years is enough to get you up to the standard of, say, the top 9% (40+) who have been using English their whole life and of which English 3+4 is the culmination of 13 years of learning, not 5.
-
The "drawings" (a rather crude word for it, even the bludgey ESL students know that it's a flow chart!) to which you refer is a valid literary device to convey ideas, or rather, the development and progression of ideas.
Its simplicity makes it ideal for those foreign to the language of English who would invariably find sentence structure difficult. Flow charts cut out sentence structure while preserving a neat flow of ideas. Thus, it is obvious that this exercise examines more closely the students' reading comprehension skills, rather than their literary prose which is examined in the preceding section's essay and the following essay of that section to which you are referring. It is taken as read (pardon the pun) that any students sitting the mainstream English exam have adequate reading comprehension skills. This cannot be assumed for ESL students, and so (as far as I can tell) this skill is assessed in that section.
Calling ESL a "bludge" is also very demeaning to those who come to Australia at the age of say, 13, and struggle greatly to learn the language to sit these compulsory exams. I'm sure you would not find it a bludge to learn (for example) German to the level that is required of ESL students in only 5 or so years. Keeping in mind that ESL students are still required to write one full text response and one full point of view essay. It appears to be a bludge to you because you've grown up with English, so of course it would be significantly easier for you. I think you've been quite unfair in your labelling of ESL and advise you to reconsider your position.
Oh dear. Jokes bro, jokes!
-
"I know a guy who came to Australia in year 8 from a country where not only was English unknown to him beforehand, but his other language read right-to-left and used an entirely different written script to that of English.
He tried his level best to become fluent and by year 12 held a fairly good vocabulary and had few problems conversing. But when it came to writing an essay (which must be soundly structured and have deep thought put into it) it gave him great difficulty to produce. He wasn't dumb, but he also wasn't the smartest guy I've ever met. If he had been in normal English, he would have struggled a helluva lot more than he did in ESL.
I don't think it's fair of you to say that 5 years is enough to get you up to the standard of, say, the top 9% (40+) who have been using English their whole life and of which English 3+4 is the culmination of 13 years of learning, not 5."
Hebrew eh? S'pose it would be considerably harder than if you had another proto-indo-european [dervied from Latin] language as you mother tongue. Although general education and knowledge also helps -I'd expect you to understand the French word "metaphysique" better than a French 10-year old, [even though you dropped French after year 10 and it was far from awe-inspiring for you.] When did Mao and Ahmad come to Australia, by the way? I remember Ahmad saying he could have done ESL.
-
this is getting a bit out of topic....
-
Could you write something like, his opinion piece fails to convince the reader, etc?
-
Could you write something like, his opinion piece fails to convince the reader, etc?
No, not really
-
Could you write something like, his opinion piece fails to convince the reader, etc?
avoid making definitive statements like that... u can't predict how ppl are gonna react to what someone's written
-
i think you're meant to say HOW IT effects the reader not HOW EFFECTIVE it is.