LA questions.

[Felicity Wishes]

Went to the VATE lecture this weekend and the LA guy said a few conflicting things (from what I have been taught).

1. If we are analysing comments or letters that have appeared after the article or whatever, are we allowed to state the contention of these letters/comments? The speaker said that doing that means that you are treating the assessor like they are dumb, and therefore they will treat you like you are dumb. He said things like "don't tell me the contention, I'm smarter than you all and I already know the contention"

2. Is it a bad thing to analyse the article in chronological order?

3. If the letters/comments appear after the article, where do we analyse them because usually I have a linking sentence which includes them in the analysis of the article but the speaker implied that this was wrong and that you had to include them during the analysis of the article.

Thanks in advance.

[Lucid]

1. If we are analysing comments or letters that have appeared after the article or whatever, are we allowed to state the contention of these letters/comments? The speaker said that doing that means that you are treating the assessor like they are dumb, and therefore they will treat you like you are dumb. He said things like "don't tell me the contention, I'm smarter than you all and I already know the contention"
Well, state whether the commentor agrees with the authors contention or not, don't simply state their contention, looks a bit repetitive.

2. Is it a bad thing to analyse the article in chronological order?

Not a bad thing, I've never taken a different approach and I still got an A+ on my last analysis SAC. Examiners want a holistic approach, but if you write better with the flow, do that.

3. If the letters/comments appear after the article, where do we analyse them because usually I have a linking sentence which includes them in the analysis of the article but the speaker implied that this was wrong and that you had to include them during the analysis of the article. You can either dedicate a paragraph to them, or chuck the comments in throughout the article, linking them to what they agree with (preferred), if that makes sense?

[nisha]

3. Link them to the argument /contrast in argument that the author puts forward-to allow a greater flow and show the examiner that you have understood that they connect in some way.

[HERculina]

2. Sometimes doing it chronologically can be limiting because it'd be hard to link one thing at the start of the article to one thing at the end. But if it works for you, go ahead cause it can make things so much easier, expecially for shorter pieces imo
I went to VATE too, i was meant to be in sessionA with that guy but the room didnt have lecture tables so i went in sesh B ... LUCKILY. The lady we had was so good!!!