How is English actually marked? holistically?

[panda31]

Hi!

I just wanted to know how they get your study score for English. VCAA  says they mark you holistically. Does this apply just for each piece, or broadly across all 3 pieces. Like, do they look at all 3 of your pieces combined and then give you a score based on your overall performance/ sophistication of writing and ideas, or is your study score strictly based on the ranking you get from the combined scores of all three essays?

So, could you do outstandingly well in 2 essays, and your 3rd is decent, and because they think from your other 2 essays that you're an excellent writer, could you get a very high score based on this?

Thanks

[nerdgasm]

I honestly don't know too much about the English marking process - but from what I've read, each of your three essays is marked individually by two separate assessors - so you will have (at least) six different people marking your exam paper. You get a separate mark for each essay (so for example, you could get 8/10 and 8/10 for Text Response, 5/10 and 6/10 for Context, and 6/10 and 7/10 for Language Analysis) or something like that. As each essay you write is marked independently of the other essays, I think you would need to do well on all three essays if you want a really good mark.

[Professor Polonsky]

^ Exactly. Different examiners for each writing piece, exactly to avoid examiners making those assumptions (consciously or not). And besides, the more examiners, the less likely your overall mark is to be affected by any one particular examiner's preferences or marking style.

[panda31]

Ok Great. Thanks guys

[drake]

don't even worry about how your examiner marks your paper, it's all very subjective. your examiner could read your essay after a REALLY good one, in which case they may mark yours more harshly. or they could read your essay after they've marked a REALLY bad one, in which case they may mark your essay much better than normal. and they may read your essay when they are really tired - so they mark it easier because they can't be bothered... or when they are really fresh - so they mark it harder... and then it also depends on the examiner's writing style and (if he/she is a teacher) how he/she taught their class... it's all too subjective... you just have to hope for the best!

[brenden]

don't even worry about how your examiner marks your paper, it's all very subjective. your examiner could read your essay after a REALLY good one, in which case they may mark yours more harshly. or they could read your essay after they've marked a REALLY bad one, in which case they may mark your essay much better than normal. and they may read your essay when they are really tired - so they mark it easier because they can't be bothered... or when they are really fresh - so they mark it harder... and then it also depends on the examiner's writing style and (if he/she is a teacher) how he/she taught their class... it's all too subjective... you just have to hope for the best!

I really have to disagree with this pretty fundamentally. It's inevitable that human bias will influence the assessor's, but this post gives off the idea that English assessor's are entirely sporadic, undependable and inconsistent. I'm also dubious that an assessor would penalise someone for doing things differently to how they teach they class. Assessor's for any subject attend an assessor's meeting before they start marking their first paper to ensure as much consistency and uniformity as possible.

Assessors mark holistically, relating student performance to the published criteria and ranking students over the full range of marks available. Determination of the mark is assisted by descriptors of Expected Qualities for the Mark Range; these have been written to reflect the level of achievement expected at a particular mark or mark range. The descriptors are only a general guide: they do not necessarily match precisely the performance of an individual response. Both the criteria and the descriptors are fully explored and directly related to the range of student responses during intensive assessor training before and during the examination assessment process.

Expected Qualities for the Mark Range – Section A
The extent to which the response:
9-10/10
-Demonstrates a close and perceptive reading of the text, exploring complexities of its concepts and construction.
-Demonstrates an understanding of the implications of the topic, using an appropriate strategy for dealing with it, and exploring its complexity from the basis of the text.
-Develops a cogent, controlled and well-substantiated discussion using precise and expressive language.

It'd be incredibly unlucky for a teacher to look at a piece that convincingly demonstrates textual knowledge, analysis, and excellent writing and then say "ah, I teach my students that they must have no less than seven quotes per paragraph, and this student has an average of five good quotes per paragraph. Their textual knowledge is lacking, they'll have to be marked down".

As an extension to the checks and balances already mentioned in this thread, the chief assessor (and I think some senior assessors) for each subject will randomly/sporadically mark papers  from other assessors and give the assessor feedback on whether they are marking too harshly or too easily, and all the assessors know that they will be scrutinised on whether or not they are too easy or too harsh.

The marking system is very well run. Of course, there are always chances that human fallibility will factor into an assessor's perception of the piece, but them's the breaks. It's not down to luck and nothing to hope for. If you get a bad mark, your essay didn't hit the criteria and that's that.

[Professor Polonsky]

I agree with Brenden. English marking is very consistent, and there are procedures in place to ensure that it remains so.

[zvezda]

I really have to disagree with this pretty fundamentally. It's inevitable that human bias will influence the assessor's, but this post gives off the idea that English assessor's are entirely sporadic, undependable and inconsistent. I'm also dubious that an assessor would penalise someone for doing things differently to how they teach they class. Assessor's for any subject attend an assessor's meeting before they start marking their first paper to ensure as much consistency and uniformity as possible.
It'd be incredibly unlucky for a teacher to look at a piece that convincingly demonstrates textual knowledge, analysis, and excellent writing and then say "ah, I teach my students that they must have no less than seven quotes per paragraph, and this student has an average of five good quotes per paragraph. Their textual knowledge is lacking, they'll have to be marked down".

As an extension to the checks and balances already mentioned in this thread, the chief assessor (and I think some senior assessors) for each subject will randomly/sporadically mark papers  from other assessors and give the assessor feedback on whether they are marking too harshly or too easily, and all the assessors know that they will be scrutinised on whether or not they are too easy or too harsh.

The marking system is very well run. Of course, there are always chances that human fallibility will factor into an assessor's perception of the piece, but them's the breaks. It's not down to luck and nothing to hope for. If you get a bad mark, your essay didn't hit the criteria and that's that.

How would you explain somebody receiving a 5/10 for an essay instead of an 8-9??

[brenden]

How would you explain somebody receiving a 5/10 for an essay instead of an 8-9??

There's a series of expected qualities per mark range. Someone receiving a 5/10 would suggest that they hit the criteria to an average standard, as opposed to an above average standard. I'm not quite sure I understand your question.

[zvezda]

There's a series of expected qualities per mark range. Someone receiving a 5/10 would suggest that they hit the criteria to an average standard, as opposed to an above average standard. I'm not quite sure I understand your question.

Yeah sorry shouldve probably given some sort of context. I had 10/20 for LA on the exam which, according to the teacher i sat with to read it, shouldve been an 8 minimum. What do you think happened there if the assessors werent inconsistent?

[brenden]

Yeah sorry shouldve probably given some sort of context. I had 10/20 for LA on the exam which, according to the teacher i sat with to read it, shouldve been an 8 minimum. What do you think happened there if the assessors werent inconsistent?

That is pretty curious. Is your teacher an assessor?
Without meaning to sounds like a dick in anyway, my best bet would be that there was a disparity between your teacher's perceptions of what an 8/10 meant and the criteria laid out by VCAA. If your teacher was an assessor, then perhaps their perceptions are in someway distorted by their experience with you. For example, one of the dot points for a 5 is "Attempts a planned and supported piece of writing using adequate language and expression". There's a chance that because your teacher is familiar with your writing, they see what is in reality slightly unclear or damaged expression and they know what you mean simply because they know you, but in reality, there could be reasonable expectations of improvement as far as that essay's expression went. Could also explain interpretation of the other dot point. If your teacher is familiar with you, they might see what you're trying to say about the way language is being used to persuade, but the assessor's simply couldn't.

Perhaps there was also some other random factor like not analysing the image at all and only focussing on a few 'techniques' rather than the language as a whole that your teacher overlooked because they weren't in the same "look for x things" mode as the assessor's would have been.

[zvezda]

That is pretty curious. Is your teacher an assessor?
Without meaning to sounds like a dick in anyway, my best bet would be that there was a disparity between your teacher's perceptions of what an 8/10 meant and the criteria laid out by VCAA. If your teacher was an assessor, then perhaps their perceptions are in someway distorted by their experience with you. For example, one of the dot points for a 5 is "Attempts a planned and supported piece of writing using adequate language and expression". There's a chance that because your teacher is familiar with your writing, they see what is in reality slightly unclear or damaged expression and they know what you mean simply because they know you, but in reality, there could be reasonable expectations of improvement as far as that essay's expression went. Could also explain interpretation of the other dot point. If your teacher is familiar with you, they might see what you're trying to say about the way language is being used to persuade, but the assessor's simply couldn't.

Perhaps there was also some other random factor like not analysing the image at all and only focussing on a few 'techniques' rather than the language as a whole that your teacher overlooked because they weren't in the same "look for x things" mode as the assessor's would have been.

She isnt an assessor but very experienced. I may have interpreted your first couple of sentences in the wrong way, but i dont think you have to be an assessor to know what classifies as a good essay. I dont think she was biased either; she tried extrememly hard to find reasons for losing marks (she read the essay 4-5 times). Without sounding arrogant either, i was second or first in the cohort. So if its not inconsistency on the assessors part, im not sure what it is.

[brenden]

Yeah certainly not, but it's possible for a teacher to be very experienced and have never actually looked at VCAA's criteria. It's possible for an essay to look like a good essay and still not quite match the criteria at a high range, but I'll take your word that your teacher knows what she's talking about.

Pretty puzzling scenario on the whole. It's possible that you got two assessors that both had distorted perceptions of your essay, but equally as possible that your teacher was looking for the wrong things to take marks off for or some other such thing. Who knows, she could have been so focussed on looking at things to take marks off for that she forgot to evaluate whether you had a perceptive analysis of the way language was being used to persuade. Maybe your assessor's were on LSD. Unless you applied for a remark, which I'm assuming you didn't, no one will ever probably know. Congratulations on your achievements, nonetheless.

[zvezda]

There were assessors amongst the english department at our school so she is quite familiar with the criteria. She is a great teacher and has had plenty of high 40 scorers and a fair few 50s, so i would think she made sure to look at the actual analysis; she did actually make positive comments about it during the script examination and pointed out at one messy part of my essay which was, in the grand scheme of things, fairly minor and not enough to mark me down heaps. I did apply for a remark and got rejected so yeah who knows. But out of that whole process i cant help but think it came down to inconsistency on the assessors part.
And thanks hahah.