Oh man, I learned this the hard way. I had this problem last year, except the discrepancy wasn't on minor issues but on the entire essay structure itself. My tutor taught me an alternative structure to the one endorsed by my Lit teachers. To be fair I put myself in an awkward position. I was getting tutoring because I wanted to learn this style and I was the only one in my cohort writing in that way. I actually found the whole issue pretty stressful at the time, but know that it does work out in the end.( I think that making that decision positively affected my results.)
Ultimately I would give you this advice: in your SACS you have to play your teacher's game, but in the exam, do what you think is best for you. Absorb the feedback from both your teacher and tutor and make your own decisions as to how you want to write; experiment with what generally seems to elicit a positive response and what doesn't. However, as we're still in SACville and there's a little while before we approach Exam city, for now take what your teacher says as priority over your tutor.
I agree with Lolly, in SACs you have to be able to present a piece that your teacher will be pleased with and in the exam go with something that like Lolly said, that will put you in an advantageous position. As for structures, for all three sections of the English examination, especially Context, there are varied structures that you can adapt and allow you to convey your meaning. Personally I like going with a structure that enables me to explore the complexities of a prompt/question or a piece of language analysis immediately, and it is reflected through your writing. Don't worry too much if your tutor and your teacher prefer different styles, it's just the nature of writing, some people will prefer one method and others another. Go with a format/structure that you feel comfortable with and enables you to write a coherent and detailed piece that explores as many possibilities of a prompt/question or language analysis piece.
As for subjectivity, I wouldn't necessarily agree that the English is purely subjective and if you write something highly provocative you'll be punished. It's more about 'have you chosen an idea and actually explored its complexities in depth and in a cogent manner'. You could pick any idea (as long as it pertains to the questions or prompt at hand), whether it be something quite controversial and challenging or just something in the 'safe zone', as long as you explore your idea and write something that explains
your view on it, there shouldn't be an issue.
• detailed knowledge and understanding of the selected text, demonstrated appropriately in response
to the topic
• development in the writing of a coherent and effective discussion in response to the task
• understanding and effective exploration of the ideas, and/or arguments relevant to the
prompt/stimulus material
• effective use of detail and ideas drawn from the selected text as appropriate to the task
Those three dot points are straight from the English examination criteria, and as you can see it's about exploring the intricacies of your ideas.
I have a podcast with the chief assessor discussing and the English curriculum and he said: "Two students could be sitting side-by-side and could think of totally different ideas or approaches to the question and still obtain full marks".
Like I have said, it's about developing ideas and exploring them in detail, not just writing a sentence about it and expecting the examiner to connect the dots for you.
In the English examination, two assessors will mark each one of your essays, so in total six assessors will mark your paper. There is a maximum discrepancy of one mark between two assessors, and to my knowledge if there is a two mark discrepancy - say if one assessor gives you a ten and once gives you a eight - then it goes to a third marker and I believe that would be the chief assessor who determines the final mark of your piece.
Home
Help
Search
Login
