VCE Stuff > VCE English & EAL

ok, i'm fked

<< < (5/5)

Khangfu:
gg i got pwned too. The Quiet American question was liek wtf.... o well will vent otu anger on maths and science, hopefully i get above 28 XD

asa.hoshi:
so what were we supposed to write about?

Collin Li:

--- Quote from: "dxb" ---Fuck i cant even remember what I wrote. I'm pretty sure I said somthing along the lines of "We need to protect our children". And i just talked shit too. The ref material was dog as well. How were we supose to relate a picture? WTF?  Fuck Fuck Fuck.

Apprenticeship here we come
--- End quote ---


You deserve an apprenticeship for arguing that we need to protect our children.

Haha, just kidding, just my youth-anarchist roots kicking in.

mouseboi:
I thought I had made a similar mistake. But on closer inspection, here are my thoughts.
The topic isn't exactly "Are we overprotected?". For a full description of the issue, the black rectangular box at the bottom of the instruction page details the topic more clearly.
There's much about "parenting styles" and how "Laws intended to protect people could be seen to prevent them from taking personal responsibility for their own actions". Thus, I believe this is the topic: Whether overprotective parenting has created a "generation of sooks" and led to the creation of laws that dictate even the most trivial of actions (such as crossing the street with an iPod).

The topic I ended up writing on was more about how young people are overprotected by their parents and how if these parents had been more liberal in their parenting, that laws such as banning use of iPods whilst crossing the road wouldn't be necessary.
So, if you talked about parenting, its effects on adulthood and the over protective laws that are in place then that's what I see to be the real topic here rather than just "Are we overprotected/governed by over protective laws".

In short, if you wrote on the same issue/topic as the Part 1 analysis pieces then I believe you should be fine because both Part 1 and 2 are meant to be on the same issue ("Are we overprotected?").
Again, just my opinion and hope everyone went well :)

igs07:

--- Quote from: "mouseboi" ---I thought I had made a similar mistake. But on closer inspection, here are my thoughts.
The topic isn't exactly "Are we overprotected?". For a full description of the issue, the black rectangular box at the bottom of the instruction page details the topic more clearly.
There's much about "parenting styles" and how "Laws intended to protect people could be seen to prevent them from taking personal responsibility for their own actions". Thus, I believe this is the topic: Whether overprotective parenting has created a "generation of sooks" and led to the creation of laws that dictate even the most trivial of actions (such as crossing the street with an iPod).

The topic I ended up writing on was more about how young people are overprotected by their parents and how if these parents had been more liberal in their parenting, that laws such as banning use of iPods whilst crossing the road wouldn't be necessary.
So, if you talked about parenting, its effects on adulthood and the over protective laws that are in place then that's what I see to be the real topic here rather than just "Are we overprotected/governed by over protective laws".

In short, if you wrote on the same issue/topic as the Part 1 analysis pieces then I believe you should be fine because both Part 1 and 2 are meant to be on the same issue ("Are we overprotected?").
Again, just my opinion and hope everyone went well :)
--- End quote ---



I put something about iPods in, then I thought now where the hell did I pull something like that from it doesn't even relate, but there you go there was a bit on music players. sweet.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page