High Scores

[Shenz0r]

Can someone please go into more detail about what they mean by structuring by arguments?

The author of the article will be presenting some kind of point of view or idea. Throughout the entire article you can pick out a few major points or "arguments" that they put forward, and then use each of those as the basis for a paragraph. If there's supplementary material, you should be able to figure out what argument that relates to (is it agreeing or opposing) and slot things in that way etc.

This is what I would be doing to plan my LA during the first 2 mins of writing time:
-Bring highlighters of a different colour
-Identify the separate points/arguments in the article.
-Highlight different arguments with different colours. This will give you a visual plan of what to write.

For each point/argument, you expand on the techniques which the author uses to support them. For example, this is what you'd do in Insight 2010's article:

P1: Grey insinuates that all teenagers want to gain glory and fame by undertaking solo voyages. Encouraging such reckless behaviour will be inevitably destructive as it is persuading more teenagers to embrace danger as a result.
Evidence: "Crude publicity stunt", "daredevil acts", "modern culture of thrill-seeking...pours fuel on the spreading fire of teenager risk-taking", "death-defying feat", "wild adventures", "unjustifiable level of risk".

P2: Grey establishes parents who support this behaviour as irresponsible
Evidence: "Eager parents", "the motives of such parents need to be examined - are they needlessly endangering heir children's lives merely to gain a brief flash of publicity?", "Valuing reckless acts....robs children of the chance to lead normal lives", "parents who allow [such behaviour]....are unfit for the responsibility of child-raising".

P3: Grey portrays the mental fragility of teenagers, who may be psychologically harmed by the realistic nature of solo voyages - one of solitude and depression.
"Endless days and nights pass by in lonely succession", "...child is confronted with the emptiness and immensity of the ocean, the reality of being alone and vulnerable would sink in", "intense loneliness and awareness of vulnerability can be very harmful for young minds", VISUAL IMAGE

P4: Grey portrays adult annoyance at such activity
"It is, of course, we taxpayers who have to foot the bill for a rescue operation every time an inexperienced teen runs aground", "why would those in society who act responsibly have to fund the activities of whose who do not?"

Conclude.

[VivaTequila]

Just curious, is it possible to get a 9 or 10 in Language Analysis by simply going chronologically, but being sophisticated / making links throughout the analysis?
And also, with Context, is it possible to get a 9 or 10 with a well written expository article? Because most of the high scoring VCAA pieces have elements of creativity in them...

thanks

I only analysed chronologically in LA and I only wrote "expository" pieces for context and I got full marks in both. Yeah, sure it's possible, why not?

They're not assessing you on the essay style you pick. They assess you on how well you write in the way that you choose.

[meganrobyn]

I split LA paragraphs by 'aim'.

For instance, evoking fear (generally of a particular thing); inspiring to action; establishing authority as an expert; discrediting alternatives; etc.

I find aims to be better than arguments because rather than being 'content' focused they are 'effect' (on audience) focused. Also, since the aim is not limited to one specific argument you can draw text examples from across the entire piece (plus any images, layout, paratextual components) to connect in the one paragraph.

Awesome, thanks!
Can it be applied to more "unconventional", if you will, texts?
Kinda like last year's blog, which I'd like to be prepared to have something similar this year.

Absolutely! If anything, I find it an easier approach for unconventional texts - in fact, I get students to practice analysing creative texts such as Dickens' 'A Christmas Carol' using that exact formula. With unconventional texts the aims are more subtle, but there are always three broad categories:

1. They want to establish a specific relationship with the audience (expert, sympathy, lecturing, encouraging, etc) that forms the basis of the trust.

2. They want to paint something or someone as negative: they will be *against* something (an idea, a behaviour, a policy, a social structure, etc) and want the audience to disapprove of it, too.

3. They want to paint something or someone as positive: they will be *in favour* of something, and want the audience to be in favour of it, too.