should i do lit or english? yr 12

[Maz]

hey humans...im in a dilemma and id appreciate any help
The Situation:
im in year 12 now (class of 2016). i live in WA so we don't do any 3/4 subjects in yr 11...no matter how smart u are...u can do 7 subjects in yr 12 but none in yr 11... i did year 11 literature last year and finished with an average of 81%...i wasn't planning of dropping it but  some of the teachers were saying that moving down to english pretty much always increases marks, just cos your moving from a harder course to an easier one. but then again in terms of scaling..literature scales better. but then if u drop to english ur marks will (expected) to go up. but then I'm wandering how that happens cos in english u do other texts (movies, advertisements etc)  as well...not just books like we do in litt and i won't really have any practice on that (other than yr 10 and before). after dcl i wanna do med...so i don't specifically want to do anything english-related, i just want the one that'll give me the highest atar at the end of the day...so as you can see I'm at a crossroads and id appreciate any of you guys who maybe want to suggest what they would do...

[DeezNuts]

The above posters have pretty much covered everything with their excellent responses, but I'd just like to add that it could entirely be possible that you find Lit easier than normal English.

I know I did, but at the same time I haven't touched normal English since year 10 (and experimented with English language in year 11) so my judgement may be sorta off. In hindsight, maybe doing normal English as well would have been beneficial, but I more or less jumped into 3/4 Lit and tbh found it relatively easy to pick up, and it just clicked with me much better than I expected it to.

So take my advice with a grain of salt, but I suggest you to also trust your gut feeling on this one and decide for yourself if you think Lit or Eng matches your writing style/way of thinking better.

good luck ! I'm sure you'll be fine

[dankfrank420]

Normal english - less work for a higher mark.

[Syndicate]

Normal english - less work for a higher mark.

Not exactly, English is way more competetive because, it easier. Many students decide to do English because, it either that they feel that English is not complex (for them), or simply because they are forced to do it (some schools of offer English and EAL, like mine  ). .Only a small percentage of the students get the top marks (in English) from the vast majority

If mq123 decides to do Literature, she will have a better chance of obtaining a better mark, as she has already finished the Literature 1/2 course (not English 1/2) and that there are less students finishing Literature 3/4. In terms of scaling, Literature scales quite well, while English scales down.

[appleandbee]

Not exactly, English is way more competetive because, it easier. Many students decide to do English because, it either that they feel that English is not complex (for them), or simply because they are forced to do it (some schools of offer English and EAL, like mine  ). .Only a small percentage of the students get the top marks (in English) from the vast majority

If mq123 decides to do Literature, she will have a better chance of obtaining a better mark, as she has already finished the Literature 1/2 course (not English 1/2) and that there are less students finishing Literature 3/4. In terms of scaling, Literature scales quite well, while English scales down.

Firstly, the same percentage of people attaining top scores in Lit and English are the same. The difference is that, Lit has a cohort of around 5000 students, a large majority who are reasonably good writers (as they could have done English instead,  but obviously they will be some people who simply not great students). English on the other hand has 30000-40000 students with a large percentage who were forced to do it, so you are competing with a smaller percentage of the cohort who are great at English. Sure, there are great students doing English as some good Lit students do English (play with their strengths and kill two birds with one stone) as well people who are aiming for high ATARs (high 99s) where English is a safer option. So the top end of English is competitive (45+), but getting 40+ or high 30s is way easier in English compared to Lit. Also some top Lit students don't do other English subjects. In my school which has the most 40+ Lit SS in the state, most Lit students don't do English (including the two students that got 50).

It's true that some students get better scores in Lit than English but it's most likely that both their SS were great anyway and they were capable of getting a higher English SS. Remember that other factors such as luck, examiners' mood and performance on the day itself comes into play.

[qazser]

Reading this thread makes me feel conflicted... I am in Year 11, and humbly say i am a decent writer (Average 95%+ on essays), which lead to my Head of English to suggest i do Lit as well. Should i be regretting this decision?

Thanks in advance,
Qazser

[DeezNuts]

Have you had prior experience with lit Qazser?

If you are in year 11 this year there is no harm in trying it out

The only time I would not suggest randomly jumping into lit for the standard student, is if you have never tried it prior to year 12 - unless you are confident in your abilities and looked/tried at some of the material beforehand

But you appear to be doing very well anyways so I reckon give it a crack, it was by far my most fav subject

[qazser]

Have you had prior experience with lit Qazser?

If you are in year 11 this year there is no harm in trying it out

The only time I would not suggest randomly jumping into lit for the standard student, is if you have never tried it prior to year 12 - unless you are confident in your abilities and looked/tried at some of the material beforehand

But you appear to be doing very well anyways so I reckon give it a crack, it was by far my most fav subject

Thanks

[Darth_Pepe]

Not exactly, English is way more competetive because, it easier. Many students decide to do English because, it either that they feel that English is not complex (for them), or simply because they are forced to do it (some schools of offer English and EAL, like mine  ). .Only a small percentage of the students get the top marks (in English) from the vast majority

If mq123 decides to do Literature, she will have a better chance of obtaining a better mark, as she has already finished the Literature 1/2 course (not English 1/2) and that there are less students finishing Literature 3/4. In terms of scaling, Literature scales quite well, while English scales down.

I disagree with this. She wont be obtaining a higher mark, as i have already explained most people who do literature know how to respond to the exam as it is different to the sacs, they would have been taught how to write an analysis. I did Literature 1/2 and it didnt help me when i got an A in the exam and it only gave me a 33. What does this mean? The average mark in the exam would most likely be a B+. In English the average mark in the exam is a C-C+. There is a major difference in exam marks.

You state that only a small % get top marks, but then again it isnt about the marks, its about the study score. In a hypothetical situation lets say that 98% of the state get a D, 1% gets a C and 1% gets an A+, those with a C are looking at a 48+, now u cant really argue that only a small % get top marks, because getting C nets u a high study score. Look at Further, shits hard to get a good study score cos a lot of people get high marks, in that case u cant argue its a good subject because alot get good scores, thats the same with Literature, alot of students get A and A+.

Its not about getting a good mark, its about getting a good study score.

Edit: My history study score was 41, my mark in the exam? 76%. My study score for Further was 42, my mark in the exam? 90% and 92% respectively in exam 1 and 2. Marking plays different roles in subjects, and thats the case with Lit and Eng

[Syndicate]

I disagree with this. She wont be obtaining a higher mark, as i have already explained most people who do literature know how to respond to the exam as it is different to the sacs, they would have been taught how to write an analysis. I did Literature 1/2 and it didnt help me when i got an A in the exam and it only gave me a 33. What does this mean? The average mark in the exam would most likely be a B+. In English the average mark in the exam is a C-C+. There is a major difference in exam marks.

You state that only a small % get top marks, but then again it isnt about the marks, its about the study score. In a hypothetical situation lets say that 98% of the state get a D, 1% gets a C and 1% gets an A+, those with a C are looking at a 48+, now u cant really argue that only a small % get top marks, because getting C nets u a high study score. Look at Further, shits hard to get a good study score cos a lot of people get high marks, in that case u cant argue its a good subject because alot get good scores, thats the same with Literature, alot of students get A and A+.

Its not about getting a good mark, its about getting a good study score.

Edit: My history study score was 41, my mark in the exam? 76%. My study score for Further was 42, my mark in the exam? 90% and 92% respectively in exam 1 and 2. Marking plays different roles in subjects, and thats the case with Lit and Eng

by marks, I actually meant the study score.

[Alter]

Just responding to a few of the above posts.

In my opinion, doing 1/2 Literature without 1/2 English should by no means stop you from undertaking 3/4 English instead. I did this exact change (dropping Lit to pick up English) and ended up with a 48 (#humblebrag). This is a score which I definitely would not have obtained if I kept Literature and I'm glad I made this decision in retrospect.

To suggest that it is more difficult to achieve a higher score in English simply doesn't make sense. English is definitely not more competitive in the sense that in order to get an A+ in the exam, you don't have to be as strong a student as you would be to pull this feat off in Literature. Granted, you might have a very targeted skill set whereby you can pull off passage analyses far better than all three sections of the English exam. However, in general, the cohorts are completely different in skill level for reasons that many above posters have pointed out. This is why English is considered to be the more safe bet.

I'd also like to touch on the point of scaling. I'm of the belief that this should hold very little bearing on your subject selection and is anything but a point in favour of electing to do Literature. At the end of the day, scaling all sorts itself out and (usually) accounts for the difference in subjects. However, to avoid English because of its negative scaling is silly. Heck, if you play your cards right, your English score might even scale up as opposed to down.

I'm a bit biased because of my own experiences with the two subjects, but if your priority is getting a better score, English is the way to go in this situation. 

[The Raven]

Reading this thread makes me feel conflicted... I am in Year 11, and humbly say i am a decent writer (Average 95%+ on essays), which lead to my Head of English to suggest i do Lit as well. Should i be regretting this decision?

Thanks in advance,
Qazser

Just responding to a few of the above posts.

In my opinion, doing 1/2 Literature without 1/2 English should by no means stop you from undertaking 3/4 English instead. I did this exact change (dropping Lit to pick up English) and ended up with a 48 (#humblebrag). This is a score which I definitely would not have obtained if I kept Literature and I'm glad I made this decision in retrospect.

To suggest that it is more difficult to achieve a higher score in English simply doesn't make sense. English is definitely not more competitive in the sense that in order to get an A+ in the exam, you don't have to be as strong a student as you would be to pull this feat off in Literature. Granted, you might have a very targeted skill set whereby you can pull off passage analyses far better than all three sections of the English exam. However, in general, the cohorts are completely different in skill level for reasons that many above posters have pointed out. This is why English is considered to be the more safe bet.

I'd also like to touch on the point of scaling. I'm of the belief that this should hold very little bearing on your subject selection and is anything but a point in favour of electing to do Literature. At the end of the day, scaling all sorts itself out and (usually) accounts for the difference in subjects. However, to avoid English because of its negative scaling is silly. Heck, if you play your cards right, your English score might even scale up as opposed to down.

I'm a bit biased because of my own experiences with the two subjects, but if your priority is getting a better score, English is the way to go in this situation. 

To say that English is preferable to Lit if you want to get a high score is kinda a generalisation and should probably be looked at on an individual basis. I myself am proof of that, as is 99.90pls on these forums. I know of at least three students in my year who did both Literature and English and scored higher in Literature. I think the factors you should consider are:

• Do you like Literature. In order to succeed in Literature you have to enjoy the subject, as a lot of the material and course have to come from your own ideas. Meanwhile English is slightly more formulaic and probably the better option if you would rather not do either subject but have to due to VCE's English requirement.
• How good are your teachers. The quality of Literature cohorts across schools varies remarkably. While at the majority of schools there will be successful English students and strong English teachers, the same cannot be said of Literature. If you have a strong Literature department than choosing Literature could probably lend you an advantage over English. This is because many teachers are unaware of what makes a good Literature essay that fulfils all the exam requirements. Furthermore, due to the general lack of Literature tutors (many people are reluctant to learn new texts to the degree of depth required in Literature) the impact of a good/bad teacher will be greater as they might be your sole source of knowledge / advice regarding Literature

[Deshouka]

English for the study score, Lit for the enjoyment imo.

[Alter]

^^I'm talking about doing solely one of the two, which is what this thread is about. If I had to pick up an extra subject, Literature would've been one of them. That being said, there's a pretty big difference between doing Literature on top of English and doing Literature as opposed to it. In both of the cases you mentioned (yourself and 99.90), you had both of the subjects.

The subjects are definitely complementary. However, if you're picking just Literature, then you're also competing against people that are doing both Literature and English. It's not huge, but it's noticeable.

[Sine]

Imo do english if your in it purely for the study score or if you really enjoy lit maybe do both.

Literature is quite a tough subject your score at the top end due to the cohort being predominantly filled with strong students, in such cases scaling should help. However due to scaling be a result of students performance in there other subjects since the only similar subject is english (and not many people do all 3) literature is only slightly scaled up even though it should scale more due to the cohort strength in english type subjects.

In contrast specialist maths has a very strong cohort and the scaling reflects in as those students generally to very well in ALL their other subjects not 1 or 2.