Cohesion/coherence in ACs

[kiddoes]

Hello all!
If you're writing an AC on a spoken text - formal or otherwise - is it necessary to include a paragraph on coherence and cohesion? Is it enough to include a few mentions of it within other subsystems' paragraphs when features contribute to them?
Would it differ depending on spontaneous/non-spontaneous text types, or on the formality of the register?
I've been told by some in my class that you should always include it, but nitpicking transcripts for features to get a couple of sentences' examples is eating up valuable writing time for me in exams, so I want to see if it's worth the search.
Thank you! 

[dmitridr]

Hello all!
If you're writing an AC on a spoken text - formal or otherwise - is it necessary to include a paragraph on coherence and cohesion? Is it enough to include a few mentions of it within other subsystems' paragraphs when features contribute to them?
Would it differ depending on spontaneous/non-spontaneous text types, or on the formality of the register?
I've been told by some in my class that you should always include it, but nitpicking transcripts for features to get a couple of sentences' examples is eating up valuable writing time for me in exams, so I want to see if it's worth the search.
Thank you! 

Hi there!

For formal pieces, 100% include it. Remember that coherence/cohesion is a feature or written discourse, so if you end up getting a formal speech on the day, I would still mention it (because oftentimes formal speeches are planned and are often reminiscent of a written piece anyway).

For informal written pieces, I would include a BP on 'discourse' in general. This could include informal discourse features such as nonstandard orthography or emoticons. As for informal spoken pieces, I would include coherence/cohesion within the necessary BPs, and focus more on phonological features, spoken discourse features and conversational strategies.

I hope that makes sense!

[GGWP VCAA]

Hi there!

For formal pieces, 100% include it. Remember that coherence/cohesion is a feature or written discourse, so if you end up getting a formal speech on the day, I would still mention it (because oftentimes formal speeches are planned and are often reminiscent of a written piece anyway).

For informal written pieces, I would include a BP on 'discourse' in general. This could include informal discourse features such as nonstandard orthography or emoticons. As for informal spoken pieces, I would include coherence/cohesion within the necessary BPs, and focus more on phonological features, spoken discourse features and conversational strategies.

I hope that makes sense!

Sorry to hassle you there, but what does BP mean?

[heids]

Sorry to hassle you there, but what does BP mean?

Body paragraph.

[GGWP VCAA]

Body paragraph.

Cheers

[kiddoes]

Hi there!

For formal pieces, 100% include it. Remember that coherence/cohesion is a feature or written discourse, so if you end up getting a formal speech on the day, I would still mention it (because oftentimes formal speeches are planned and are often reminiscent of a written piece anyway).

For informal written pieces, I would include a BP on 'discourse' in general. This could include informal discourse features such as nonstandard orthography or emoticons. As for informal spoken pieces, I would include coherence/cohesion within the necessary BPs, and focus more on phonological features, spoken discourse features and conversational strategies.

I hope that makes sense!

It does! Thank you kindly. 

[MrsNicoleB]

The criteria explicitly requires that you discuss the discourse - this could include cohesion, coherence, typical feature of the text type (e.g. for spoken texts you could discuss turn-taking, topic-management, prosodics etc, for a FB conversation you could mention time stamps, hyperlinks, photos etc). 
Previous assessor report – "Cohesion and coherence are of less importance in a spoken transcript than in a written one" (2014).  I don't recommend that students discuss it when analysing spoken texts - there are other more interesting things to write about, and you have very limited time.  By all means comment on the planned, edited nature of the text if it is a speech. 

[kiddoes]

The criteria explicitly requires that you discuss the discourse - this could include cohesion, coherence, typical feature of the text type (e.g. for spoken texts you could discuss turn-taking, topic-management, prosodics etc, for a FB conversation you could mention time stamps, hyperlinks, photos etc). 
Previous assessor report – "Cohesion and coherence are of less importance in a spoken transcript than in a written one" (2014).  I don't recommend that students discuss it when analysing spoken texts - there are other more interesting things to write about, and you have very limited time.  By all means comment on the planned, edited nature of the text if it is a speech.

Thank you also! That really helps me. So, essentially coherence/cohesion in a written text is equivalent to conversational strategies and turn-taking in a spoken text?

[MrsNicoleB]

Thank you also! That really helps me. So, essentially coherence/cohesion in a written text is equivalent to conversational strategies and turn-taking in a spoken text?

Yes, that's right!  If you think about it, turn-taking and topic-management helps to keep the conversation 'coherent' (i.e. on topic, easy to understand, logical) - assuming of course that people are being cooperative...