HSC Stuff > HSC Marking and Feedback

English- Go Back Essay need marked please

(1/1)

Suchitra:
Hey could anyone please mark my essay asap thanks

Opengangs:
Hey, Suchitra!

Sure thing! Your essay is located inside the spoiler tag.

Essay (marked)Q: Discoveries may compel individuals to affirm, or challenge, their perspectives on themselves and the wider world.

Changing perspectives mean the discovery of newer values which act as catalysts to learning the truth and the formation of a better individuals and the wider world. (Doesn’t really make sense. Rephrase this.) These channels of discoveries can provide limitless opportunities, for the wider world to reassess their previous perspectives and in turn adopt new transformations. This sense of curiosity and intrigue that accompanies discovery is derived (Derived is perhaps not the best word to use. Consider highlighted, explored, exemplified, demonstrated, conveyed, etc.) from SBS’s reality television series “Go Back to Where You Came From” (Go Back) 2011-2015 which reflect the devastating impact that a lack of understanding and misconceptions can arise from the western world’s clash with other world communities. In addition, as a secondary text Khaled Hosseini’s novel “The Kite Runner” 2003 although  fictional traces the reality of the trauma of poverty and isolation while accentuating reawakening through transformation.  Both texts elucidate the way individuals challenge their perspectives through a self-analysis and the power of relationships for both the audience and the characters in the texts. (I think this does well as an introduction. I think you could make your ideas a bit more complex by thinking about the notion of discovery deeply. Markers like seeing a sophisticated and well-thought out argument to the question, which can be accomplished with a deeper insight into the ideas that surround discovery.)

Every individual has their own social and cultural views, but what matters is their rise to self-discovery and the way it impacts on their transformation that can have a profound. In “Go Back” Raye has strong views about the refugee program that impacts on the wider society. In the opening scene of the first episode Raye, a countryside woman “with strong opinions on boat people” and seated on horseback is captured by a wide angle shot with her vectorial gaze on the detention centre below which then jump cuts to her angry outburst “serves the bastards right” alluding to the Christmas Island boat crash. (What you’re trying to do - specifics - is good, but I think you need to back up a little bit. Your textual evidence is not as clear as it should be. Only include what’s necessary; leave the rest out.) This projects a socially Australian culture and value. The slang culturally sustains a very negative attitude which the audience discovers is borne out of fear and reflects her anger and personal discovery of her personal space being under threat as she believes that the detention centre is being violated. (A little too textual. I’m not really sensing a strong conceptual link here.) A zoom in on her face shows frustration and anger when she talks about, “I could’ve shot the lot of them” with a panning shot of the security gates that locks them in. This however juxtaposes against (with) Raye’s later rhetorical questions during a close up shot “I had no idea it was so bad… how can you live with that?” exemplifying the “emotional rollercoaster” consequence of her physical discovery. (Synthesise more, what’s the significance of this and how does it then relate to our own experiences of discovery?) It is evident that through their “dangerous refugee journey” the personas are able to recognise their own capacity for empathy, a fundamental component of the human condition. This moment of self-discovery is evident when Raye’s views are challenged which lead to a renewed understanding on themselves and the wider world. (Overall, you’re approaching the module a little too textually. Make sure the concept of discovery is always at the forefront of your analysis. Relate it back to the discovery concept you’re arguing, and make sure you’re addressing all parts of your idea. I think you’re relying too much on one specific idea, but it won’t be enough. Make sure it’s broad enough for you to sustain throughout the paragraph.)

Even though “Kite Runner” is fictional (I think this here is unnecessary. A lot of texts are fictitious, so it doesn’t do much.) it explores the cultural and social values of individuals in their own country.  The story entails the protagonist Amir who lives with his father an affluent business man, living a wealthy lifestyle with their servant Hassan. (Still too textual, also retell.) The philosophical discovery that the reader makes is that Amir’s self-discovery like that of the audiences of “Go Back” is a discovery that shames him because he asserts that, “I’ve just found out my whole life is a whole fucking lie”, using the slang to elucidate his emotional frustration with the sudden discovery that not only was his servant Hassan his half-brother but that he had died protecting their name and their house. (A few tips here. One, this is a bit long as a sentence. It’s 73 words long. Two, be careful with the composer and the character. The character doesn’t employ “slang”; the composer does. Three, you’re still a little bit too textual. The subject shouldn’t be about the character themselves; they should actually serve minimal impact on the analysis. Make sure you’re always relating your ideas back to the concept of discovery made by the composer and audience like you did previously.) He learns that “Hassan and I fed from the same breasts…took our first steps on the same lawn in the same yard and under the same roof” endorsing a tone of regret that reflects a self-discovery that is shattering. The analogy that “I felt like a man who awakens in his house and finds all the furniture rearranged” further defines the impact of the self-discovery of his selfishness. The effect of his self-discovery has transformed him with the assertion that “what Rahim Khan revealed to me changed things” and gave him a different perspective to life. Both Raye in “Go Back” and Amir experience a reawakening of their narrowed visions through discoveries ultimately transforming themselves and individuals of the wider world. (Here, I think you’re sacrificing analysis for more textual evidence. Make sure you have a smooth balance between the two. Don’t have too many examples within the text, and make sure your analysis is focused on the conceptual notion of discovery that is made by the audience and the composer rather than the character. You’re still a bit too textually focused, and we can tell because you rarely mention the composer in the paragraph. Make sure you sustain your argument throughout the paragraph, and to address all areas of your argument. There’s more reliance on the self-discovery component when your argument rests on social and cultural views of individuals.)

With the power of relationships comes a newer perspective of people and their circumstances. Through “Go Back” Raquel’s transformation is exemplified in the scene where Maisara reveals her tortured memories of Congo. Raquel who declares she doesn’t like black people, is seen through close up camera shots to be comforting Maisara by touching her on the shoulder and saying “You’re a lovely lady and you don’t deserve it”. (Again, too textually focused.) The sentimental music is powerful in showing the traumatic discoveries that Raquel make about people and how it transforms them as individuals as well as their perceptions and values. The effect of the zoom in traumatic shots reveal to the audience how participants racist and ignorant views were challenged, leading to a renewed understanding of their sense of social justice and the wider world. (A lot of what I’m going to say has already been said. Avoid a textual study of discovery. I’m going out on a limb in saying that this is not finished. As you redraft your paragraphs, pay close attention to synthesising new ideas that encompasses your main argument. Make sure what you argue relates back to the question, your thesis, and your topic sentence.)

Similarly, Amir’s discovery changes his views, urging him to rescue Sohrab, the son of Hassan and his nephew who was put into an orphanage after Hassan and his wife’s death. The discovery of Sohrab’s heart wrenching circumstances transforms him from a coward to a person willing to take action. The discovery of Sohrab’s situation allowed him to realise the extent of his sins as he rhetorically questions himself “What have I ever done to right things?” when Sohrab says that he was dirty and full of sin as he was raped repeatedly by older men, Amir tells him “You’re not dirty and you’re not full of sin” showing his complete transformation from a person ashamed to be associated with an abused person to someone who accepts people regardless of class or what has been done to them. The effect of the repetition “you’re” emphasises a sense of tension portraying to the audience how one’s views can challenge perspectives on themselves and the wider world. (Interesting idea, could definitely flesh this out. Synthesise this point more, and really show how this quote does this effect.) Both Raquel and Amir develop powerful relationships allowing them to better understand another person’s circumstance, resulting in their completely altered perspectives and transformation as individuals and the wider world. (Again, make sure you’re synthesising your points and to make it conceptually focused.)

Discoveries brought by engaging with unfamiliar and foreign people and places challenge and renew ones understanding of themselves and the wider world. This can be seen in the confronting experiences and discoveries made by participants of “Go Back” and “The Kite Runner” which explore the power of the catalysts of discoveries in order to transform individuals and their perceptions of the world. These discoveries trigger a re-evaluation of identity and values, leading to an emotional, intellectual self-discovery.
Mark: 9/15
General feedback:
It definitely has potential, but at the moment, I believe it's around the 8/9/10 mark. You have many strong individual ideas, but together, they don't create a cohesive piece. I felt you had no direction with what you were trying to argue, and that is usually a good sign you're too heavily focused on the text itself. Make sure the concept of discovery is always at the forefront of your piece as opposed to the text at hand. You had a lot of good examples of discovery, but you had too many. There was not enough substance for your analysis to strive. Make sure that is balanced out.

One key area that a lot of students struggle with is synthesis. To do this well, you will need a deeper understanding of the discovery rubric. It's not enough to read the rubric and go from there. To really synthesise your points, you will need to respond to the rubric, and to do this, you will need to reflect on your own experiences of discovery. You will need to understand your text and the rubric on a personal level - it allows you to make new insights to the notion of discovery.

Another key area that pops up every year in the marker notes is your ability to analyse rather than describe your texts. This comes back to the idea of a conceptual focus and not a textual focus. Your Area of Study is discovery, so your area of focus should be on the concept of discovery. How does the composer explore the concept of discovery, and how does this resonate with the intended audience? Does it make us angry, sad? Does it make us think deeper about the discoveries we make? Asking yourself these questions will help you to approach the essay with a more thematic approach.

Being able to address and engage with all parts of the question is something that will secure a band 6 essay. If a question has multiple sections to it, like this, you will need to address each and every part. In this question, we are required to explore how the texts affirm and/or challenge our perspectives on ourselves and the world around us. So, let's unpack the question and see what the question is really asking us.

The first idea that comes to mind is: does the study of discovery in your prescribed text affirm or challenge our own perspectives? How is this shown (techniques)? How can we, as the audience, respond to this discovery? Repeat this with your related text. This enables you to develop your ideas thematically, showing a sophisticated outlook on the question, and you're addressing the question.

The second idea is: does the study of discovery in your prescribed text affirm or challenge our perspectives on the outside world? Repeat the process as above, and with your related. Doing this successfully will allow you to engage with all parts of the question (you and the world that surrounds you).

What to do next:
For now, redraft your paragraphs. This time, place your emphasis towards the specific concept of discovery you're addressing in your main argument. Focus on the composer's purpose and language, and the audience's response to this discovery.

Then, reconsider the rubric and draw out any deeper insights to the concepts you're addressing. Reflect and speculate on your own experiences of discovery, and consider how they are employed within the text.

Good luck with your drafts and the upcoming half yearlies! Hopefully, this gives you some direction as you approach your half yearly exams. If you have any questions, feel free to ask below. :)

Navigation

[0] Message Index