What did everyone think/do about the exam. Personally I found it quite fair and aim fairly confident in my outcome. I've seen people complaining about the Language Analysis saying there was no argument, but I think that's because they didn't fully understand the speech.
Whilst I wasn't prepared for it to be a speech instead of an article, the only real changes needed were to just call the "authors" by their last names, and reference the audience as being fellow volunteer organisations who were attending the event.
The argument I got from the speech was that Bennett was warning of the decrease in appreciation of volunteers, and was disapproving of their expectation/reliance towards their help. Contrasting this idea with Nguyen's "counter acceptance speech" who gave an opposing emotive plea that those in need, who need others help the most should be allowed to expect to receive help.
Basically just did my essay as Embrace Condemn Do, contrasted for each, made brief mentions of the two images, and continued the comparison in each paragraph. (the argument I referenced above was basically the condemn paragraph) And of course, I embedded quotes from the speeches all over, and explained of the effect their statement made on the reader for pretty much every point I included.
I feel like where people had trouble was that the tone of Bennett's speech was happy/supportive and so gave off the impression that she had no argument.