At a presentation held and televised publicly to Australians, financial institution, bigsplash, awarded their annual award to volunteer organisation, ‘Tradespeople without borders’ in 2015. Given to financially support the aims of Australian volunteer organisations, two speeches were given to acknowledge both the awardee and bigsplash, in recognition of the selected volunteer organisation furthering their mission and ethos for contribution to the wider community.
Try to combine the first and second sentences, it should be a fairly succinct contextualising statement Stephanie Bennett, chief executive of bigsplash, carefully constructs a humble and sincere personality to her speech in order that it engages the audience into sharing her humility as being representative of her company, bigsplash.
A little more elaboration on the contention would be good Where their image is concerned, Mathew Nguyen, also engages his organisation in his speech by recognising the public and bigsplash, also, to support the image of an altruistic organisation “giving back to…Australia”.
Are they promoting something? What is this image supposed to encourage? The two speeches were accompanied by visuals illustrating their contentions.
Try to elaborate on this when you're talking about the visuals. Bennett immediately recognises her audience by signposting her gratitude with presenting the award as being a “privilege”
. What is the effect of doing this? Is there an aim/agenda she is trying to promote? Prefacing sincerity to the audience, she maintains a sense of humility in her speech to broadly promote a “vision” by focussing much of her attention on the company’s concern for a “better future”.
This doesn’t really show sincerity or humility on the company’s part, a little more evidence or links would be better While this describes their purpose of creating the ceremony to present the award, through the constant references of individuals and their impact through volunteer work, Bennett’s portrayal of the company seems to be interwoven as being a humble recognition of “heroi[sm]” rather than about group interests.
Evidence of this?Where Bennett weaves comment about the volunteers as being “undervalued” despite their work “complementing our vision”, she wishes to bring to light the ceremony as being about the smaller “differences” that consummate combine to contribute in the making of our “one world”. Audience members are compelled
What are they persuaded to do? (avoid using definite statements like ‘the audience is compelled to…’) by the urgency in Bennett’s tone shift when descriptions of volunteers are built upon by the “kindness of strangers”. Bennett takes the audience to re-evaluate their stance
this doesn’t mean anything, avoid using similar phrases and suggests the audience to participate in the kind gesturing of recognising those individuals to make amends
good, but a link to concrete examples would be better . Where she echoes back to her humility at her introduction, what pervades through the dialogue is her constant references to individual “heroes”, “society” and the “world”.
This sentence says nothing- and having words like ‘heroes’, ‘society’ and ‘world’ without any explanation or context is very vague, and adds little to the analysis The audience is being publicly presented with a company who includes and recognises the “under-recognised”. In doing so, the company’s interests merge with the interests of the common people
how so?, appealing to the wider audiences -who may not have been present at the event - to be included within the reception of the award to congratulate “unselfish acts”
you put a quote here, but if there's no explanation or analysis, it is redundant. The award is presented as a token to honour the contribution of individuals in society, and hence, the audience members are made to feel included that such efforts are ever present in their own communities. From this, Bennett sheds light on the intentions of the company as being thoughtful, progressive,
Yes, and what does this mean for the image the company is trying to project? and their act of necessary goodwill further embeds itself well into the audience’s minds,
to what effect? Does the audience feel anything? their slogan for the award: “giving back…to Australia”. This sense of inclusivity culminates and echoes back from her introduction,
what does the introduction promote or say? how is it reflected here? and persuades the audience to view the award as being genuinely within the interests of “Australians”
because?, the audience members notwithstanding.
Sentence is a little awkward, try to be straightforward in discussing the technique then analysis Thus, Bennett positions the audience and their role as an individual to concede with the awardee’s prize as necessary, and that their ceremony justly rewards their efforts in helping local and global “children” and “neighbours” across “our nation”.
these quotes could be better used during analysis in the paragraph rather than bolted on at the end
In echoing “heroi[sm]” from Bennett’s speech, Nguyen’s acceptance speech espouses from his colloquial language an expression for trust within the audience members watching the ceremony. Similar to Bennett's portrayal of volunteers,
try to integrate quotes properly to make your essay flow better “kindness of strangers”, Nguyen’s humble and familiar language helps in establishing to the Australian audience a kind of trust built upon the familiarity in which the recipient presents in his Australian slang, “Cheers everyone” “tradies” “my mate”. Where he is representing an organisation and recognises naturally some incredulity over the winning title - “we didn't expect this” and “totally blown away” - his language is informal but honest, idealising the image in which Bennett has depicted of the hardworking volunteers whom “we take…for granted”.-
Yes good explanation of informal language, but how does this show that it is intended to be persuasive? What difference would it have made if Nguyen had spoken in a really formal way? While the audience may concede with the fact emphasised by Bennett, Nguyen presents his organisation as being a “new organisation”, and where the simple differences lie in having “access to the loo”, the audience is positioned to view from the honesty of Nguyen as being indicative as a result of his contribution in acting from his own goodwill.
How is the audience positioned to view this from Nguyen’s speech? – The ‘access to the loo’ quote could be explained with more context – From what basis was this group founded etc?.Reminded by the urgency presented with Bennett’s speech, “we should never forget or overlook them”, Nguyen suggests that “volunteering is its own reward”, drawing from his experience as a way to express that “people…are always grateful”. As audience members are made aware of the two facts,
not necessarily facts with Nguyen’s humility in understanding his role as a volunteer presented before the audience, immediately the audience call to mind avoid using definite statements the “heroi[sm]” described by Bennett
.links are good, but more explanation of this link between the two pieces would be better. They might both be talking about heroism, but their manner might be different- link this back to the difference in contentions In removing all guilt from his audience members and reminding them of the altruistic nature of volunteer work, members of the audience may be predisposed into accepting his ideals, and furthermore leaving audience members to fully
again, avoid using sweeping generalisations trust both the initiatives of bigsplash and Nguyen’s organisation, where their intentions are made to be viewed as a “lend[ing] a hand” to society.
this quote would be better served in the analysis
The image hanging from the banner at the lectern depicts a hand holding another, while in Nguyen’s slide behind him, a <collection of hands??lol idek> is included within the speech. Pls help.
A few suggestions- Start from the basics, and look at the elements of the image- hands on top of each other. What do you see? Most importantly how is this relevant to the contention that bigsplash is trying to promote? Think of it as another persuasive technique. Just a few points of improvement- try to move away from listing or describing just the technique or quote but explaining how they position the reader or how they are persuasive, going into the connotations and implications would be really beneficial. Try to also be very specific and avoid sentences that are vague- really delve into what exactly it is about the author’s specific choice of words and phrases that makes the speech persuasive. Every word in a persuasive article or speech(especially on a VCAA exam) has been put there for a reason, and it’s your job to find out why. For example, an ad is trying to get you to buy something, so they use a deliberate choice of words that will make you more likely to do so, so likewise, why are these speeches written as they are? Another thing is to be more clearer in describing links between the two speeches- in what ways are they similar? Think more broadly as well rather than just superficial links (such as similar wording/tone etc).
Also, avoid using sweeping general statements about the audience- don't say 'it removes all guilt from the reader' but rather 'it positions the reader to feel less guilt'Otherwise, there’s some good expression and flow in the essay, and you’ve identified a few good ideas. Hope this helps! Feel free to ask questions if you have any. 
Home
Help
Search
Login
