Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

July 24, 2025, 03:15:01 am

Author Topic: Section C Discussion  (Read 19058 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

99.90 pls

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 401
  • We who were living are now dying
Re: Section C Discussion
« Reply #45 on: October 29, 2015, 09:44:27 am »
As a marker ...

This is going to be 2011 all over again. Way too long and too much going on. I mean - three audiences (on stage, in the room, watching on TV), two visuals and two lengthy texts?

So, it's going to be one hell of a meeting where we complain about the fact the exams are set by people who don't actually teach Year 12 English. We'll be instructed to mark whatever students managed to do so long as they "had a go" and there will be a sense of "sorry, that was a stuff up" in the room. No way could a student cover everything on that task.

Thanks for weighing in! This gives me newfound hope for the future tbh, having spoken to many other students who included seemingly essential details which I left out (bigsplash's ulterior motive to promote themselves, the multiple audiences, Nguyen's nuanced contention which contrasted and concurred with Bennett at the same time - I made no mention of the contrast).

A question: Given these things I left out, would I be prone to losing marks in the "understanding of the ideas and points of view presented" criterion? My overall interpretation of the texts and visuals was something like  "Bennett aims to encourage a philosophical admiration and respect for volunteering, which Nguyen develops further by encouraging the audience to pragmatically actualise this respect by participating in volunteering.

seems legit

Looking at his post history (dates back to 2013, where he introduces himself articulately and grammatically as an examiner and teacher), I'd say he seems credible. Plus, he seems to have a very good grasp of marking trends and all that. And I guess the harsh truth is that about one-third of the criteria is 'analysing visuals', if we ignore the mandatory 'good expression and language' criterion, since it's an English exam.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2015, 09:49:53 am by 99.90 pls »
2014: Chinese SL (45)
2015: Literature (49) | English (45) | Mathematical Methods (44) | Specialist Mathematics (38) | Legal Studies (36)
ATAR: 99.85

Currently studying a Bachelor of Laws (Honours)/Bachelor of Arts at Monash

dankfrank420

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 892
Re: Section C Discussion
« Reply #46 on: October 29, 2015, 11:03:42 am »
No - we take off a lot more than that.

Is it still possible to get a 7 if you forget to mention the audience in the intro?

tashhhaaa

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 899
Re: Section C Discussion
« Reply #47 on: October 29, 2015, 11:31:52 am »
Thanks for weighing in! This gives me newfound hope for the future tbh, having spoken to many other students who included seemingly essential details which I left out (bigsplash's ulterior motive to promote themselves, the multiple audiences, Nguyen's nuanced contention which contrasted and concurred with Bennett at the same time - I made no mention of the contrast).

A question: Given these things I left out, would I be prone to losing marks in the "understanding of the ideas and points of view presented" criterion? My overall interpretation of the texts and visuals was something like  "Bennett aims to encourage a philosophical admiration and respect for volunteering, which Nguyen develops further by encouraging the audience to pragmatically actualise this respect by participating in volunteering.

Looking at his post history (dates back to 2013, where he introduces himself articulately and grammatically as an examiner and teacher), I'd say he seems credible. Plus, he seems to have a very good grasp of marking trends and all that. And I guess the harsh truth is that about one-third of the criteria is 'analysing visuals', if we ignore the mandatory 'good expression and language' criterion, since it's an English exam.

oh, I didn't even bother to check... I automatically assumed it was a troll. Thanks joe444!

Yeah same, I had a sense of the ulterior motive thing but I thought nah and now I'm kicking myself for not including it

Thankfully I analysed the visuals... the piece was hell though. Not persuasive at all, and I kept fluffing around trying to make some sort of analysis when the piece was just rubbish

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
Re: Section C Discussion
« Reply #48 on: October 29, 2015, 03:37:19 pm »
Is it still possible to get a 7 if you forget to mention the audience in the intro?
Yeah easy. If you write the best essay ever written and forget to mention the audience in the intro you'd get a 20/20 :P.

Just depends how good the rest of your essay is.
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

jasminepen

  • Victorian
  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • School: Oxley College
  • School Grad Year: 2015
Re: Section C Discussion
« Reply #49 on: October 29, 2015, 06:48:26 pm »
Am I screwed because I forgot to mention the audience at home? I kept on telling myself to include it BUT I FORGOT.

Alter

  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 917
  • socratic junkie wannabe
Re: Section C Discussion
« Reply #50 on: October 29, 2015, 06:50:51 pm »
Am I screwed because I forgot to mention the audience at home? I kept on telling myself to include it BUT I FORGOT.
It's unlikely you'll get hindered for not mentioning it. There are so many things you could've talked about, so mentioning one single possible audience in the grand scheme of an essay about analysing language isn't paramount. You'll be fine!
2016–2018: Bachelor of Biomedicine (Neuroscience), The University of Melbourne
2019–2022: Doctor of Medicine, The University of Melbourne

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
Re: Section C Discussion
« Reply #51 on: October 30, 2015, 09:55:33 am »
Am I screwed because I forgot to mention the audience at home? I kept on telling myself to include it BUT I FORGOT.
Definitely not. The way I see the second audience is as an opportunity to gain a 10, not lose a 7.
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

elkxvii

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • School Grad Year: 2015
Re: Section C Discussion
« Reply #52 on: October 30, 2015, 01:47:49 pm »
I didn't realise that it was televised and therefore didn't include this information in my essay. Would this be a problem?

brenden

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 7185
Re: Section C Discussion
« Reply #53 on: October 30, 2015, 02:58:16 pm »
I didn't realise that it was televised and therefore didn't include this information in my essay. Would this be a problem?
Not a big one. More a missed opportunity for extra marks than something that will actively count against you :) --- virtually everyone probably did the same thing.
✌️just do what makes you happy ✌️

drmockingbird

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 134
  • School Grad Year: 2015
Re: Section C Discussion
« Reply #54 on: October 30, 2015, 02:59:34 pm »
Am I screwed because I forgot to mention the audience at home? I kept on telling myself to include it BUT I FORGOT.


No jasmine i swear u worry too much anyways
VCE SUBJECTS

2013 : Legal Studies [50]
2014 : Maths Methods [42], Literature[43]
2015 : Specialist Maths [37] , English [46], French [47]
ATAR: 99.80

2016: Philosophy, Politics and Economics @ Oxford University

If you need tips on applying to the UK (esp Oxford) message me, I'm more than happy to help out :)

cosine

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 3042
Re: Section C Discussion
« Reply #55 on: October 30, 2015, 02:59:53 pm »
If i forgot to mention the audience at all in the my essay, how many marks is automatically lost?
Well i somewhere wrote that the readers, 'aspiring volunteers' were aroused etc... but i dont think thats enough ..
2016-2019: Bachelor of Biomedicine
2015: VCE (ATAR: 94.85)

Splash-Tackle-Flail

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 797
  • diagnosed with bangali-fever
Re: Section C Discussion
« Reply #56 on: October 30, 2015, 03:06:52 pm »
So if we only refer to one audience (instead of the three) are we immediately barred from upper range? In the same way forgetting the visual/s restrict you to about a 6 Max (at least according to my teacher). Like can you make up for it in other ways?

Another thing was I analysed how the audience clapping and cheering promoted togetherness and all that, but my mate says I'll be penalised as the clapping isn't really part is the speech- is this an issue?
VCE: Done!
2016:  Monash University, Bachelor of Medicine/Bachelor of Surgery (Honours)
Currently offering Methods and Chemistry tutoring for 2016! (Currently full for 2016)
Splash's Life Tips :)
How to be the one who knocks

literally lauren

  • Administrator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1699
  • Resident English/Lit Nerd
Re: Section C Discussion
« Reply #57 on: October 31, 2015, 12:07:46 am »
If i forgot to mention the audience at all in the my essay, how many marks is automatically lost?
Well i somewhere wrote that the readers, 'aspiring volunteers' were aroused etc... but i dont think thats enough ..

If you talked about the effect to some extent, then you should be alright. I don't really see how you could do an L.A. without at least implicitly referencing the audience, and just because you didn't have a phrase like 'This impels the audience to think/feel/believe...' doesn't mean you weren't discussing the effects of language in some way.
Though if you called them 'readers,' then a snarky assessor might get annoyed with you :P They wouldn't penalise you hugely though; there are no 'insta-lose-4-marks' factors because marking is holistic, meaning they look at your piece overall and say 'this feels like about a 7/10 or so.' There are formal criteria, but none of them state 'students must use the word 'audience' 3 times per paragraph' or anything that restrictive.

So if we only refer to one audience (instead of the three) are we immediately barred from upper range? In the same way forgetting the visual/s restrict you to about a 6 Max (at least according to my teacher). Like can you make up for it in other ways?

Another thing was I analysed how the audience clapping and cheering promoted togetherness and all that, but my mate says I'll be penalised as the clapping isn't really part is the speech- is this an issue?
Since the multiple audiences thing was really only brought up by a line and a half in the background info, I can't imagine them using that to split the state this year. There's no requirement to discuss different levels of effects (ie. this technique would affect those present at the speech in this way, whilst also affecting those watching the broadcast in this way.) That might've been good in some sections, but the focus is on the language, and dealing with the effects is more like the third or fourth step in that process of spelling things out. You certainly wouldn't be limited to <6 or anything like that. Again, holistic assessment is your friend here - if your analysis is worthy of a certain mark, the things that your piece is missing might amount to a mark or two lost overall, so it's not as though there's a one-to-one correspondence between the components of your essay and your mark out of ten.

Re: clapping, I probably would've left it alone since it's not really a part of the writer's use of language, though you could say the way the speaker invites applause (esp. with that drawn out "And the winner is..." bit just before Mathew's speech) and thus fosters excitement etc.
Then again, they've put that in there for a reason, so you won't be penalised for discussing it. But it might be one of those little things (like someone analysing the fact that the word 'volunteers' was in bold in the first image) - true, and with plausible justification, but not necessarily within the scope of the task. So long as you didn't base an entire paragraph around that single point, and you were able to back yourself up well with the rest of your analysis, you'll be totally fine.