Urgent correction!!sac tomorrow

[EvangelionZeta]

You sure you didn't read the example of a "bad" essay?

Regardless, yes.  The fact of the matter is, it's not very strong structurally.  =/  Try and brush up a little bit, follow some "easy" templates, and hopefully it should be ok. 

[shinny]

'Wrong' is pretty hard to define in English. Rather than wrong, I'd say a lot of what you/examiner's report said is instead what I'd call 'redundant'. Using evidence in the introduction serves no purpose and prevents you from using it later. Also, story telling anywhere in the essay has universally been acknowledged to be bad because the examiner knows the story, and hence retelling it back to them serves no purpose either. In the exam, you'll have a limited amount of time, and wasting time story telling rather than ANALYSING what the events imply means that you'll have less actual content, and just a load of story retelling.

Also, I've said many times before, the 'high scoring responses' tend to be around 8s or so, so they are in no way perfect and something that you should be learning and basing your own writing off. However, since the rest of the essay is pretty good, that could also be a reason why that essay was stated as a 'high scoring response'. I know you'd be more inclined to trust VCAA than me, but this is how I've been taught and this has been what has worked for me, so I can assure it isn't 'wrong' to follow my advice. Whether your/the examiner's report's method is 'wrong' isn't something I can answer since I'm not a VCAA examiner, but I think I've justified myself enough to show that it's at least not an efficient way of writing even if you won't lose marks for it.

[polky]

this is kinda confusing, because i used the 2006 assesemnt report essay to structure my paragraph..it was on kite runner.... so are u saying that person is wrong too??..

Assessment reports aren't always the best thing to draw examples from for your writing.  

Your introduction isn't really "wrong" in any way, just that it needs refining.  You've got the basics right, your main points (or what seem to be your main points) are there, but the expression and structure can be improved upon to make your introduction tighter, more succinct.  

For introductions, the way I was taught, and what I did, was to:
1) Start off your introduction with some sort of statement that is relevant both to the text and the theme/character you are exploring.  
2) Immediately delve into your 3 (or however many) main points.  One sentence for each.
3) The last sentence of your introduction is your actual contention.

This may or may not work for you, but I find putting the contention at the end of your introduction sums up your introduction, provides a good starting point for your next paragraph (body paragraph #1), and helps with the flow of the essay.

[shinny]

For an example of what polky is talking about since I didn't follow it too well in my previous example, here's a piece I did end of year which got 10/10 on a trial exam marked by a VCAA examiner. I don't have the exact wording of the topic, but it's something along the lines of 'In Hard Times, Dickens' female characters show a hope for a better future'.

"Rachael...Thou art an angel!" Stephen Blackpool's exclamation in Charles Dickens' Hard Times is an exemplar of the benevolence which Dickens endows upon his female characters. Through the depiction of qualities such as sympathy, benevolence and moral integrity in some of the female characters, Dickens offers a beacon of hope for a better future within the bleak microcosm of Industrial England that is Coketown. However, not all the female characters possess such qualities, so Dickens does not present a completely positive vision for a better future - that is, one in which the dehumanising attitudes prevalent throughout the Industrial Revolution are extinguished. Nevertheless, Dickens evidently potrays the patriarchal aspects of society in Hard Times, and due to such repression, Dickens expresses a sense that the benevolent qualities of women could not be fully capitalised to create a better society.

and now with annotations;

"Rachael...Thou art an angel!" Stephen Blackpool's exclamation in Charles Dickens' Hard Times is an exemplar of the benevolence which Dickens endows upon his female characters. Through the depiction of qualities such as sympathy, benevolence and moral integrity in some of the female characters, Dickens offers a beacon of hope for a better future within the bleak microcosm of Industrial England that is Coketown. However, not all the female characters possess such qualities, so Dickens does not present a completely positive vision for a better future - that is, one in which the dehumanising attitudes prevalent throughout the Industrial Revolution are extinguished. Nevertheless, Dickens evidently potrays the patriarchal aspects of society in Hard Times, and due to such repression, Dickens expresses a sense that the benevolent qualities of women could not be fully capitalised to create a better society.

Colour Key:
Main Point 1
Main Point 2
Main Point 3
Defining ambiguous words/phrases in the topic - this is another purpose of an intro which is very important in certain essay topics (such as this one)
Author's contention, which in turn is mine too for this essay since I'm analysing what the author tried to do in this book

[EvangelionZeta]

Without detracting from anything Shinny wrote, just remember that when typing, the text's name is italicised.  Only underline when handwriting.  Just a minor, technical thing. :p

[costargh]

Soz, I have a bone to pick. Are all MHS boys taught to write in a really 'uppity' sorta way? Like, I've read quite a bit of MHS postings over times and what I mean by 'uppity' is that the writing comes across as very sophisticated (but in a sorta... confusing sorta way?) if that makes any sense.

Maybe it's just me having a quite limited vocabulary. I'm a very working class writer IMO.

For people who go to public schools or don't go to rich inner city private schools, I would suggest not trying to emmulate some of the vocab of these people. I say this because your GOAL should be to come across as having a very clear essay that doesn't confuse the reader. These MHS people (and I will generalise) generaly have been taught (I think) in a differnt way to say, how I have (like more of a focus on novel structure and stuff)- look to be honest I probably havee no idea what I'm talking about. Dont get me wrong, imo MHS people + other rich inner city schools IMO are fantastic writers- I just wouldnt suggest people who aren't taught in a rich kid/top school to try emmulate their writing- more than likely you'll end up with a muddled and confused essay that the marker cant understand (not saying that shinnys writing cant be understood- his is an example of good writing but someone trying to emmulate his writing could get muddled up if they wernt careful

Sorry, I don't mean to come across as being confrontational or anything, it's just been an observation

I'd suggest to people are very av. writers and dont go to the best school to focus on the basics

1.Make your writing very clear
2. Have clearly defined separate points
3 Back up your claims with evidence

If anyone wishes for me to ellaborate on my post, by all means ask. I dont mean to come across as confrontational like I said, its def not my intention!

[shinny]

Without detracting from anything Shinny wrote, just remember that when typing, the text's name is italicised.  Only underline when handwriting.  Just a minor, technical thing. :p

I copied this from a handwritten piece since it was from a trial exam =P You shouldn't really have any typed work in VCE English anyway. But yes, a single underline for book titles is enough from what I've been taught for handwriting (no need to italicise AND underline AND quotation marks).

Soz, I have a bone to pick. Are all MHS boys taught to write in a really 'uppity' sorta way? Like, I've read quite a bit of MHS postings over times and what I mean by 'uppity' is that the writing comes across as very sophisticated (but in a sorta... confusing sorta way?) if that makes any sense.

Maybe it's just me having a quite limited vocabulary. I'm a very working class writer IMO.

Honestly, it's just how I'm generally used to writing and yeh, others don't need to worry about this kinda stuff as clearly costargh did better than me in the end anyway so it's not like you NEED to have a big vocab or anything. Often it can be counterproductive if used incorrectly too so as costargh said, if you're not used to it, don't force yourself into it and I hope my writing wasn't too 'imposing' or anything. My purpose of posting that up was for the structure, not the expression. As for the MHS generalisation, I don't think that really stands. I wouldn't say much of MHS wrote like I did at all as we weren't taught writing styles actually, but perhaps its just a trend seen more maths-sciency style students since we tend to like complexity.

But yes, I'll reiterate on costargh's point to NOT try and adopt complicated writing if you're not used to it. For me, during the middle of the year, I tried to expand and play around with my vocab, and by the end of the year, I ended up having to regress and take words out as my essays just simply became a load of incomprehensible crap. The general rule I came up with is if there's a word which can simplify a phrase (i.e. multiple words), choose that, regardless of its complexity (well, be reasonable...don't choose something ridiculous). If you're choosing between words which have the same meaning, then choose the simplest and most commonly used. And lastly, complex words should at least be separated at least by a comma, but preferably only one per sentence. Note that I didn't always follow this perfectly as some uncommon words had actually become part of my vocab and didn't think too much about using them, but yeh, I think this is a good guideline to go by. However, if that's too much to think about, just stick to good ol' KISS (keep it simple stupid) and it's just as effective =T

EDIT: Oh, in terms of complexity of words, the time I do recommend you try and slip them in however is either for metalanguage (language that describes language), or for words that are SPECIFIC to your text. For example, for Hard Times, this would mean words such as 'utilitarian', 'patriarchal', 'microcosm' etc. Other than that, don't do what I did at times and try and replace every word in your vocab with a more complicated one. It isn't necessary.

[shinny]

Oh and costargh, I assume most of your hesitations in your post were directed toward me but yeh don't worry since I actually agree. I've said many times already that I am by no means a natural at English since I've seen myself as a maths-science person all along. It's because of this that I actually see my use of complex language not as an indication of talent in English, but a lack thereof. Structure and content are things that I can practically break down  into 'formulae', but expression isn't given the almost infinite number of ideas I needed to convey in the subject, and I pretty much use complex language just as a facade to cover this up really. Since costa raised the point of vocab and stuff, the point I'm trying to make is if you are actually a natural at expression and such, stick with what you're doing as it's actually better.

[jaja]

yeh u are right.. i tried to increase my vocabulary, however when implementing it in my essays my teacher said it didn't make sense... Anyways.. regarding the intro structure, my teacher said that you need to contextualise the question (... explain a bit about the question, where is came from..ect) and also give a nuanced response (...... say yes and no) and of course contention and points... However, your suggestions are more to the point and more structured... Anyways.. i guess i will go with your way,, since you guys did get about 40... i had my sack today.; tried to write more 'Sophisticated but turned out more confusing.... Anways.. it's the exam that counts.. here's my 3rd try implementing your suggestions.. although i think the "sophistication' part could take some time as it can't happen automatically.

 The novel, The Kite Runner, narrates Amir’s journey of betrayal, guilt and finally redemption. As a child and an adult Amir is essentially  self centered consumed in winning Baba's love. However, it is when he is on the path of redemption that his altruistic individuality is shown and due to such selflessness he is then able to fully redeem himself.

[shinny]

Still quite a few expression errors and I still don't think you're making your contention clear enough. A sense of contradiction is still evident when you say that he is 'essentially self centered', but then in the next sentence state that he is 'altruistic'. Also, you should mention the author, but it's good that you've included the text type this time. I still don't see your main points though - just what appear to be two contradictory contentions actually. It might be a good idea to use colour coding like I did before to make it clear to yourself what you're doing. Also, if you happen to be rushing these, I'd advise not to. Essays at the start of the year would literally take me 4-5 hours to write, and unless you take it slowly now to begin with, you're going to just keep tripping over on the starting line like this. As for the sophistication, like I said, don't bother with it if you're not comfortable with using it since it's just going to create more problems.

[costargh]

Still quite a few expression errors and I still don't think you're making your contention clear enough. A sense of contradiction is still evident when you say that he is 'essentially self centered', but then in the next sentence state that he is 'altruistic'. Also, you should mention the author, but it's good that you've included the text type this time. I still don't see your main points though - just what appear to be two contradictory contentions actually. It might be a good idea to use colour coding like I did before to make it clear to yourself what you're doing. Also, if you happen to be rushing these, I'd advise not to. Essays at the start of the year would literally take me 4-5 hours to write, and unless you take it slowly now to begin with, you're going to just keep tripping over on the starting line like this. As for the sophistication, like I said, don't bother with it if you're not comfortable with using it since it's just going to create more problems.

+1

The most important part of text responses is UNDERSTANDING. If you understand you will be able to write; even if its not the most sophisticated. Also with time limits, throw them out the window UNTIL you are able to understand the text in a great deal of depth. Writing and writing and writing and writing is pointless if you keep writing the same muddled essay with very loose direction.

Don't be scared to immediately make your main contention in the first sentence of the introduction. I did this with almost all my text response essays for a simple reason. It ensures my essay is based upon my main contention.

Every time I feel I am getting a little off topic I look at the top in my first sentence in the introduction and its a good reminder of what I'm trying to achieve in this essay.

Clarity in writing comes from understanding. Shinny has pointed out that your two main points seem contradictory. (I can't support him jere because I don't know the text at all but I'll take his word for it.)

To me, this is indiciative of a general misunderstading of the text.
Just think of the text in lay-mans terms. Don't worry about being fancy in your writing. Understanding the text is pivotal (and I know I keep saying this but I am trying to reiterate this point for EVERYONES benefit.)

[shinny]

Oh wait sorry. Ignore the contradictory thing. Misunderstood what you meant due to the phrasing 'As a child and an adult'. Thought you meant that as in his entire life, but what I guess you mean is that initially he was self-centered, and then redeems himself later by being altruistic. In that case, I don't think you should use phrasing like that since 'adult' life could be comprehended to mean basically, the rest of his life. Establishing a solid sense of chronology is important here, and the words you choose to do it with will be important in establishing your contention and your supporting arguments for it.

EDIT: Also, you haven't addressed the first half of the topic, 'Despite rescuing Sohrab'. I haven't done this text so I don't know the significance, but it definitely feels like its a component that you should tackle down in your intro.

[costargh]

Rofl- thanks Shinny now you make me look like a total doush for taking your word

[teacher28]

In no way detracting from shinny's efforts and his generosity in sharing I have to say that I would have liked to see some synonyms for 'benevolence/benevolent'.

'an exemplar (there's nothing wrong with the word "example"!) of the benevolence with which Dickens endows some ofupon his female characters'

and I think it is best to avoid cliches if you can.

I have to agree with those who stress that your primary goal is to be understood, and I want to add that equally important is elegance of prose.

[shinny]

Heh, I was well aware of the synonym problem but it's quite hard to deal with in a timed exam when I keep hitting mental blocks every time I tried to think of one. Even when I got one, it's often quite hard to find synonyms which are true synonyms and retain the original meaning, and that's something else people should watch out for. I've seen plenty of people 'chain' synonyms throughout their essay - often through the synonym tool in Microsoft Word - and by the end of the essay, a key word in the essay originating in the introduction could become completely obscured by the conclusion through ongoing synonym torture (think Chinese whispers).