Text Response: How'd you go, what'd you think?

[brenden]

The prompts for Twelve Angry Men were quite approachable, which was a nice surprise. I had been preparing for topics specifically related to setting so it was a shame I didn't get to incorporate as much of my knowledge of that as I would have liked, but very happy overall with what we were given!

Yep I'd agree with that. Prompt 1 was very open and accessible to all students, low-high tier. I think prompt two was a little more subtle for 12AM and will have more of the higher level students attempting a response. Did anyone else write on prompt 2?

Agreed! Both were friendly and allowed plenty of discussion, but I ended up selecting the second prompt as I had a feeling most students would go for the first. Did you choose prompt 2 also?

Yeah for the same reason as you. Essentially I said Rose condemns the power abuse of the judicial system and the imbalance that occurs when there's a 'win lose' situation because of the adversary system and used the disparity between the lawyers and also worked in the witnesses in there (witnesses sound shit now but I think I pulled it off). For P2 I discussed the 3rd and 10th, said 3rd was trying to vicariously punish his son and was taking it personally-> used 'leaping into the breach, 'i know him', something something, and said 10th was an embodiment of the xenophobia aruond McCarthyism, used "theyre a danger" and "they hate us... they want to destroy us" and then said they were misusing the power invested in them with their votes as they were using their votes as a weapon. Then said something like "despite showing misuses of power etc etc, Rose also provides a model for how power should be used in his idealistic view of a man in 8th Juror" (but the sentence was less shitty. also, props to Werdna, the 'despite' was my however paragraph )
How did you take it?

[BD1994]

Hey, my friend is concerned that during the eam stress he coloured in the right box for which text response he was doing, but then failed to colour in the right question. Eg: wrote on question II) when coloured box I) :S will this matter or will the examiners see this and realise the minor mistake??

[charmanderp]

Won't matter.

[Lado]

The prompts for Twelve Angry Men were quite approachable, which was a nice surprise. I had been preparing for topics specifically related to setting so it was a shame I didn't get to incorporate as much of my knowledge of that as I would have liked, but very happy overall with what we were given!

Yep I'd agree with that. Prompt 1 was very open and accessible to all students, low-high tier. I think prompt two was a little more subtle for 12AM and will have more of the higher level students attempting a response. Did anyone else write on prompt 2?

Agreed! Both were friendly and allowed plenty of discussion, but I ended up selecting the second prompt as I had a feeling most students would go for the first. Did you choose prompt 2 also?

Yeah for the same reason as you. Essentially I said Rose condemns the power abuse of the judicial system and the imbalance that occurs when there's a 'win lose' situation because of the adversary system and used the disparity between the lawyers and also worked in the witnesses in there (witnesses sound shit now but I think I pulled it off). For P2 I discussed the 3rd and 10th, said 3rd was trying to vicariously punish his son and was taking it personally-> used 'leaping into the breach, 'i know him', something something, and said 10th was an embodiment of the xenophobia aruond McCarthyism, used "theyre a danger" and "they hate us... they want to destroy us" and then said they were misusing the power invested in them with their votes as they were using their votes as a weapon. Then said something like "despite showing misuses of power etc etc, Rose also provides a model for how power should be used in his idealistic view of a man in 8th Juror" (but the sentence was less shitty. also, props to Werdna, the 'despite' was my however paragraph )
How did you take it?

Nice use of the lawyers/witnesses! The way I approached the essay was quite similar to the way you did yours actually. For the first para I discussed Jurors 10 and 3 and their respective prejudice/bias (can't remember the exact quotes I used for this one, but I think there was a bit of "real trash" and "these people are born to lie" and "I have no personal feelings about this", etc.), then for the second para I focused on the indifference of Jurors 7 and 12 and how this too demonstrates misuse of power and negligence of social responsibility. The third para I contrasted with Juror 8 and also threw a bit about Jurors 11 and 4 in there as well and how they upheld their duty, as well as including a bit of 11's praising of democracy quote. So overall contention was something like Rose essentially extols the judicial system and its empowerment of individuals, but also emphasises the capacity for individuals to misuse this power, etc.

[CCCCrystal]

I found YOW pretty easy, even for me as an ESL~~

[BigAl]

The prompts for Twelve Angry Men were quite approachable, which was a nice surprise. I had been preparing for topics specifically related to setting so it was a shame I didn't get to incorporate as much of my knowledge of that as I would have liked, but very happy overall with what we were given!

Yep I'd agree with that. Prompt 1 was very open and accessible to all students, low-high tier. I think prompt two was a little more subtle for 12AM and will have more of the higher level students attempting a response. Did anyone else write on prompt 2?

Agreed! Both were friendly and allowed plenty of discussion, but I ended up selecting the second prompt as I had a feeling most students would go for the first. Did you choose prompt 2 also?

Yeah for the same reason as you. Essentially I said Rose condemns the power abuse of the judicial system and the imbalance that occurs when there's a 'win lose' situation because of the adversary system and used the disparity between the lawyers and also worked in the witnesses in there (witnesses sound shit now but I think I pulled it off). For P2 I discussed the 3rd and 10th, said 3rd was trying to vicariously punish his son and was taking it personally-> used 'leaping into the breach, 'i know him', something something, and said 10th was an embodiment of the xenophobia aruond McCarthyism, used "theyre a danger" and "they hate us... they want to destroy us" and then said they were misusing the power invested in them with their votes as they were using their votes as a weapon. Then said something like "despite showing misuses of power etc etc, Rose also provides a model for how power should be used in his idealistic view of a man in 8th Juror" (but the sentence was less shitty. also, props to Werdna, the 'despite' was my however paragraph )
How did you take it?

what about 11th juror..did you include him in your essay?