English Advanced Question Thread

[Neutron]

Hey guys! I still don't really understand how I'm supposed to give a 'personal response' for Mod B :/  for example the question "to what extent has your personal response to your prescribed text been shaped by the enduring power of the ideas of the composer?" How on earth do you approach it? Thanks

Neutron

[synix]

Hey, I was wondering for the AOS essay, how much comparison needs to be done between the texts your discussing.
Thnx

[Lauradf36]

Paper 2 question but - I'm really conflicted over which essay to do first! Everything I've read says to do your best section first, and that does normally work for me. However, Mod C is my worst, and in Paper 2 I'm normally pushing for time by the end... so it ends up sounding rushed and normally slightly incoherent, lol. What would your guys recommend?

[:3]

Paper 2 question but - I'm really conflicted over which essay to do first! Everything I've read says to do your best section first, and that does normally work for me. However, Mod C is my worst, and in Paper 2 I'm normally pushing for time by the end... so it ends up sounding rushed and normally slightly incoherent, lol. What would your guys recommend?

Its better to start with the essay that your most comfortable. This is because if you're doing your weakest one and have to think about it, you are in essence wasting valuable time needed to write the other essays. Hence, by completing your strongest, you'll most likely have more time to spend on the weakest one.

[jamonwindeyer]

Hey guys! Any tips for section one of AOS?? My biggest weakness is the unseen texts section 

Hey, I was wondering for the AOS essay, how much comparison needs to be done between the texts your discussing.
Thnx

Welcome to the forum guys! kawther, I hope the responses above helped!

synix, for the AoS essay, not a whole lot of comparison is required. You'll implicitly compare by discussing concepts, but you don't need to devote extra time to it!

[jamonwindeyer]

Hey guys! I still don't really understand how I'm supposed to give a 'personal response' for Mod B :/  for example the question "to what extent has your personal response to your prescribed text been shaped by the enduring power of the ideas of the composer?" How on earth do you approach it? Thanks

Neutron

Hey Neutron! You treat it exactly the same as a normal essay; your personal understanding comes out in your ideas and analysis! This is one of the rare times where that part of the question doesn't really change your approach too much, just make sure you really have a strong argument!

[:3]

A couple of questions (yet again :3) in regards to the short responses:
1. If the five mark response is something like: "texts portray the idea that discovery can be confronting and provocative" are we only limited to talking about the discovery being confronting/provocative? Or can we talk about the ramifications of it as well?
2. Also, how would we go about answering a question in terms of "how is a process of discovery shown"? Do we just talk about the process (i.e. stimulation --> undergoes discovery --> ramifications)?

Thanks peeps.

[jamonwindeyer]

A couple of questions (yet again :3) in regards to the short responses:
1. If the five mark response is something like: "texts portray the idea that discovery can be confronting and provocative" are we only limited to talking about the discovery being confronting/provocative? Or can we talk about the ramifications of it as well?
2. Also, how would we go about answering a question in terms of "how is a process of discovery shown"? Do we just talk about the process (i.e. stimulation --> undergoes discovery --> ramifications)?

Thanks peeps.

1. Ramifications of what is mentioned in the question is absolutely okay!! You can always take the idea they give you and extend it a little!
2. Your suggestion is 100% correct; explore how techniques are used to show the different stages of Discovery!

[birdwing341]

A couple of questions (yet again :3) in regards to the short responses:
1. If the five mark response is something like: "texts portray the idea that discovery can be confronting and provocative" are we only limited to talking about the discovery being confronting/provocative? Or can we talk about the ramifications of it as well?
2. Also, how would we go about answering a question in terms of "how is a process of discovery shown"? Do we just talk about the process (i.e. stimulation --> undergoes discovery --> ramifications)?

Thanks peeps.

So I'm not super qualified but I'll chuck in my two cents.

1. Usually if the question says "texts portray the idea that discovery can be confronting and provocative", they'll usually say evaluate this statement with reference to two texts or something. So it's probably best to focus on these characteristics. HOWEVER, if you start with this and have enough time, you can add something on, say like discoveries can be confronting and provocative, ultimately resulting in individual's dehumanisation. For my 5 marks, I usually try and add something on, spice it up a little and differentiate yourself from the rest of the state. But make sure you're covering the basic principles first

2. Usually when they say 'how is the process of discovery shown' they are focusing on techniques, so you'll want to focus primarily on that. But in order to do that, you do have to kind of show the process of discovery, so you could talk about the process like that, or you could hone down on one aspect of the process of discovery --> for one practice I focused on how barriers to discovery form, but individuals can transcend these barriers leading to discovery. It depends on what you see in the specified text

Oh lol, sorry had this typed up so thought I'd post anyway

[jamonwindeyer]

Oh lol, sorry had this typed up so thought I'd post anyway

Welcome to joys of moderating/helping out with other people on the same thread, happens to me all the time definitely always post anyway! Your response was so helpful, thanks heaps!

[:3]

Thanks Jamon and Bird!

So I'm not super qualified but I'll chuck in my two cents.

1. Usually if the question says "texts portray the idea that discovery can be confronting and provocative", they'll usually say evaluate this statement with reference to two texts or something. So it's probably best to focus on these characteristics. HOWEVER, if you start with this and have enough time, you can add something on, say like discoveries can be confronting and provocative, ultimately resulting in individual's dehumanisation. For my 5 marks, I usually try and add something on, spice it up a little and differentiate yourself from the rest of the state. But make sure you're covering the basic principles first

The problem with this is that there's not really much you can say in regards to this point. Besides saying its confronting...then provocative...then confronting again...repeat for second paragraph. What else should I refer to because my response for this was: initial perspective, confronting discovery, revitalized perspective.

[isaacdelatorre]

Hey, I just had a question regarding my related text which is a speech.
Am I allowed to use aspects of audience reaction such as standing ovation to show they are affected by her speech? or is that technically not part of the speech but of the youtube clip I watched of her giving the speech - in which case would I have to call my related text, the youtube vid??

Thanks

[:3]

Hey, I just had a question regarding my related text which is a speech.
Am I allowed to use aspects of audience reaction such as standing ovation to show they are affected by her speech? or is that technically not part of the speech but of the youtube clip I watched of her giving the speech - in which case would I have to call my related text, the youtube vid??

Thanks

If you think about it, its not really part of the speech (unless it says "crowd jumps up cheering").

So you're probably going to have to refer to it as video or some sort.

[ssarahj]

Hey, I just had a question regarding my related text which is a speech.
Am I allowed to use aspects of audience reaction such as standing ovation to show they are affected by her speech? or is that technically not part of the speech but of the youtube clip I watched of her giving the speech - in which case would I have to call my related text, the youtube vid??

Thanks

The speech is the actual words of the text, not any of the filming of it. However you could analyse a certain line of the speech and say that its intention would be to evoke a ______ audience response. So you're correct in saying that you would have to refer to your related text as the video if you wanted to refer to the standing ovation. 

[birdwing341]

Thanks Jamon and Bird!

The problem with this is that there's not really much you can say in regards to this point. Besides saying its confronting...then provocative...then confronting again...repeat for second paragraph. What else should I refer to because my response for this was: initial perspective, confronting discovery, revitalized perspective.

Yeah absolutely! I face the same problem So you could say something like 'Texts 3 and 4 depict the confronting nature of discovery in its potential to transform individuals' perspectives' and that's a solid thesis