VCE Stuff > AN’s Language Analysis Club

2018 AA Club- Week 14

<< < (2/3) > >>

MissSmiley:

--- Quote from: Anonymous on May 09, 2018, 02:48:35 pm ---That the These starting words make this sentence confusing. Maybe like "Australian NAPLAN's measures of learning are currently questionable?" Is that the gist of your opening? Australian wide NAPLAN gives an accurate measure of learning and education quality is met with equally widespread doubt. Dan Hogan’s opinion piece in The Guardian (n.d.) contends that the use of NAPLAN testing is “crude and arbitrary”. His authoritative and declarative tone is directed towards members of the education industry, namely teachers students and parents as well as towards the various state and Federal governments. This is also reflected in its formal and informative style. There is the underlying intention of Hogan to have his audience convert to a different writing enrichment approach, however he attempts to avoid too much affirmation of his position of authority to avoid marring his piece with the semblance of bias as he is a teacher. Yeah I really like these last two lines! :) But maybe save this for the body paras :)

Hogan’s intention to be clear and concise in order to avoid confusion is this his absolutely necessary purpose? maybe write about his first argument here which would make it a stronger topic sentence. in what is considered a complex issue is reflected the statement of contention at the very beginning. By introducing the contention that NAPLAN is “crude and arbitrary” Hogan avoids this message being lost in the jargon and myriad arguments he presents this sounds good, but is it absolutely necessary to mention this as a part of 'analysis'? This is meant to ensure that his audience can read the piece with clarity and avoids putting potential readers off through vagueness or convoluted points. Interestingly the ‘we’ doesn’t intend to include the reademaybe don't say this, because you don't know for sure. The readers may be parents of students, not just teachers. r but instead present a united front of teachers to the reader, in order to make the teachers’ contention what does this mean? more appealing as well as establish the expertise of Hogan as a teacher. He uses his stake in the issue to present himself as knowledgeable without emphasising his career. He avoids this as to prevent the appearance of bias. How does this add to his argument? Link everything to a central argument to do with NAPLAN.

In order the to counterbalance the acceptance of the NAPLAN in Australian society Hogan attempts to legitimise his analysis of it. The antithetical statement of ‘anxieties high and results down’ further intends to justify his choice of topic by portraying the NAPLAN as currently ineffective, painful and counterintuitive, this is really good! which is unappealing on a personal level to the reader as it appeals to the notion of time is money. Do you think so? I didn't think this was the effect. This is then reinforced by the appeal to logic the secedes it, as by arguing that ‘it is fair to question’ the NAPLAN, Hogan implies to the audience that there are already substantial flaws. 

There is a juxtaposition between the varying experts by acknowledging “NESA, ACARA and the NSW Department of Education’ yet portraying them as inferior to “Les Perelman’ and the “NSW Teachers Federation” by using words such  as “leading” and “academic” to elevate Perelman to a more authoritative status. This juxtaposition is framed to argue that  there is change happening to the NAPLAN system and that change is positive. Firstly I like this juxtaposition thing, but I don't think the effect is this. Yes I agree, with elevating Perelman's status but then link this to how Perelman has similar arguments to Hogan and that's why Hogan has selected evidence from Perelman. But I don't think so for the 'positive change' effect though It also preemptively rebuts potential objections of NAPLAN being a tried and true system, whilst supporting Hogan’s contention that NAPLAN is crude and uninformative with expert opinion. Additionally, he draws on the metaphor that “students [are] in the dark” which attempts to engage the audience as well as acting as a hyperbole to make the situation seem dire. Hogan later draws on a similar metaphor of “casting shade” and the repetition of this light and dark motif not only help create a visual image in the readers’ minds but also play into the connotations of light and dark with good and bad, subtly reinforcing the author’s position. Lovely writing about the metaphor, but link this to how the audience would feel and what they are likely to do as a result of reading this.

Hogan attacks the NAPLAN system, accusing it of being too data based and formulaic. Hogan repeats the words  ‘essay’, ‘test’ and ‘data’, particularly in the sentence ‘time and resources analysing of results…data… tests and data’ which intends to create a atmosphere around NAPLAN that it is bureaucratic and uninspired, which is unappealing to the reader. This is supported by the loaded language used that feeds into a negative image of NAPLAN, including ‘pedagogical’, ‘inflicted’, ‘cynical’ and ‘bare bones fact’. This intends to have the reader conclude that the NAPLAN system is ineffective. Rather than quoting so much evidence and language techniques, maybe just pick out two and unpack their connotations, impact on audience and likely action :)

This attack is sustained by the accompanying visual. The centralising of the children gives the impression that they should come first, however the similar colour palette, as so the children almost blend into their surroundings, amplifies the notion that they are being forgotten and left behind by the NAPLAN system. The pigtails of one of the children, a traditional happy-go-lucky motif of innocent girls, fosters the image that the students submitted to the NAPLAN are unfairly treated by the system. Try and just write about the more obvious features of the image. I really like your point about children being forgotten, but maybe link this to how they've got their backs to the camera.

Beginning his argument r Now you've talked about the 'beginning' of his argument towards the very end of your piece. This just doesn't sound coherent enough. Try introducing this argument earlier. egarding the foolishness of keeping NAPLAN while there are better options with a cliche what cliche?, Hogan is adopting an almost mocking tone. The concept that this new paradigm  will be ‘music to educator’s ears’ lays the impression that where the potential system is melodious in nature, the current system is distinctly unimpressive, which attempts to align the reader with the view that a new system should be adopted. yes! This is really good! referring back to ‘evidence -based’ information gives the author some credence in suggesting an alternative. There is also a denigration of the present system with negatively connotated lexemes of ‘time heavy’ and ‘lurch being associated with it, while a proposed system is described as ‘rich’. this sentence seems 'tacked on' and a bit incomplete.

To conclude his argument, Hogan emphasises his position of authority by the use of jargon, notably ‘writing construct’ I don't think this is jargon.  that imply to the reader that all that he is saying and has said can be trusted as he is a person with expertise. This is accompanied by additional in depth knowledge, which the audience is unlikely to be aware of further attempts to establish him as a trusted figure.

Thank you in advance for your advice and feedback. Please be as harsh as you like - I need to improve. I wrote this in 40 minutes with about 10 minutes planning time.

--- End quote ---
Hi there,
Really good points coming through this here!
I do sometimes feel though you focus more on what the 'author' desires to do with their identity, status etc, rather than focus on how the 'audience' feel and are likely to do as a result of reading his piece.
Yes you should focus on author, but like the proportion is 10-90. (90 is the audience part you should focus on).
Just insert like two lines somewhere in your piece about the author using their credentials to portray their point... and then move straight to their argument, audience analysis and effect.
And also I feel that you could even step back a little bit with using language techniques and examples, and instead just focus on 2 or 3 per para and really zoom into these analysing their impact on audience.

Please please take these as suggestions only - I'm in Year 12 as well, so far from perfect!!
Thanks! :)
(Hope I wasn't too picky! :P)

Anonymous:

--- Quote from: MissSmiley on May 09, 2018, 07:07:23 pm ---In response to the impending Naplan testing and Les Perelman’s Naplan writing guide, The Guardian’s Dan Hogan fervently (great word) contends in his opinion piece that Naplan testing is not always standardised or relevant to real life context; it is merely a pressure on schools and students (this is a very long contention, could it be summed up more concisely?). His sardonic tone later shifts to an earnest one as he portrays to teachers, parents of students and the Government’s education department of Naplan’s lack of consideration for real life implication. An image of students sitting in a classroom seeks to aggrandise the writer’s argument. (target audience? style?)

With the intent of casting Naplan testing as rudimentary and an absurd method of education, Hogan begins his piece with an appeal to teaching and education values and the logic associated with these values. The antithetical juxtaposition “anxieties high and results down” carry undertones of fear and a lack of mental health balance (clumsy wording, perhaps: a deterioration of the mental health balance). In turn, teachers are likely to feel apprehensive about their students sitting Naplan( … your point here is unclear). Referencing reputable governing authorities such as “Nesa, Acara and the NSW Department of Education” but then claiming that their methods “leave teachers and students in the dark - the idiom implying uncertainty in our education system (I think this is unnecessary) – the writer seeks to make teachers and parents of students feel despaired (clumsy wording perhaps: feel despondent). This is because the writer questions whether high credentialed organisations such as the ones aforementioned can actually be trusted to control student’s education, for their “extremely limited and highly reductive” Naplan grading systems which are “crude” – the adjective carrying connotations of unprofessionalism and dryness that lacks consideration of students’ mental wellbeing and worldly knowledge. This sardonicism seeks to galvanise (great specific word) Hogan’s readership to protest against Naplan testing, contributing (not the right word here it implies this has already happened perhaps: intending to lead to or something similar) to the testing’s upheaval and hence (perhaps unnecessary) eventual disappearance in our education curricula.

Mirroring Les Perelman’s sense of authority – a leading US education academic – Hogan sympathises with school teachers by using the agentless passive “are pressured into” (good pick up, but how does the agentless passive affect the writing) - with its connotations of entrapment and coercion – to depict Naplan’s “capricious data and standardised testing” as a burden for teachers who must “analyse results, enter data” and use “copious amounts of time” at the expense of critically reviewing whether Naplan testing is fulfilling contextual relevance for students’ academic development. Hogan’s providing of solidarity (clumsy wording perhaps: gesture of solidarity?) is likely to help teachers realise that their efforts are being exploited in return for supporting a system that has been “built in a vacuum,” reflecting its “absurd” lack of conviction for helping students who need to “communicate ideas” in the 21st century. The accompanying (to be clear that this isn’t a literary image) image also intends to magnify Hogan’s argument that Naplan testing is not in the best interests of students. The young students with papers on benches and their backs towards the camera, symbolise hopelessness and apathy towards education; they seem unwilling to participate in this type of education and perhaps fear of it. This is likely to encourage teachers to refute (reject?) Naplan testing in their schools and instead remodel their focus on a different type of testing which is practical to real life (clumsy wording).

The shift to an earnest tone is intended to prompt action to investigate the implied unreliability of the expert claim “ideas is given only five marks, while spelling is given six.” Teachers are likely to empathise with Hogan’s critiquing and hence are likely to advocate for banning Naplan, taking side with Hogan. I think this is a very good analysis! Well done, you have a great vocabulary.
--- End quote ---

MissSmiley:

--- Quote from: Anonymous on May 10, 2018, 06:11:06 pm ---
--- Quote from: MissSmiley on May 09, 2018, 07:07:23 pm ---In response to the impending Naplan testing and Les Perelman’s Naplan writing guide, The Guardian’s Dan Hogan fervently (great word) contends in his opinion piece that Naplan testing is not always standardised or relevant to real life context; it is merely a pressure on schools and students (this is a very long contention, could it be summed up more concisely?). His sardonic tone later shifts to an earnest one as he portrays to teachers, parents of students and the Government’s education department of Naplan’s lack of consideration for real life implication. An image of students sitting in a classroom seeks to aggrandise the writer’s argument. (target audience? style?)

With the intent of casting Naplan testing as rudimentary and an absurd method of education, Hogan begins his piece with an appeal to teaching and education values and the logic associated with these values. The antithetical juxtaposition “anxieties high and results down” carry undertones of fear and a lack of mental health balance (clumsy wording, perhaps: a deterioration of the mental health balance). In turn, teachers are likely to feel apprehensive about their students sitting Naplan( … your point here is unclear). Referencing reputable governing authorities such as “Nesa, Acara and the NSW Department of Education” but then claiming that their methods “leave teachers and students in the dark - the idiom implying uncertainty in our education system (I think this is unnecessary) – the writer seeks to make teachers and parents of students feel despaired (clumsy wording perhaps: feel despondent). This is because the writer questions whether high credentialed organisations such as the ones aforementioned can actually be trusted to control student’s education, for their “extremely limited and highly reductive” Naplan grading systems which are “crude” – the adjective carrying connotations of unprofessionalism and dryness that lacks consideration of students’ mental wellbeing and worldly knowledge. This sardonicism seeks to galvanise (great specific word) Hogan’s readership to protest against Naplan testing, contributing (not the right word here it implies this has already happened perhaps: intending to lead to or something similar) to the testing’s upheaval and hence (perhaps unnecessary) eventual disappearance in our education curricula.

Mirroring Les Perelman’s sense of authority – a leading US education academic – Hogan sympathises with school teachers by using the agentless passive “are pressured into” (good pick up, but how does the agentless passive affect the writing) - with its connotations of entrapment and coercion – to depict Naplan’s “capricious data and standardised testing” as a burden for teachers who must “analyse results, enter data” and use “copious amounts of time” at the expense of critically reviewing whether Naplan testing is fulfilling contextual relevance for students’ academic development. Hogan’s providing of solidarity (clumsy wording perhaps: gesture of solidarity?) is likely to help teachers realise that their efforts are being exploited in return for supporting a system that has been “built in a vacuum,” reflecting its “absurd” lack of conviction for helping students who need to “communicate ideas” in the 21st century. The accompanying (to be clear that this isn’t a literary image) image also intends to magnify Hogan’s argument that Naplan testing is not in the best interests of students. The young students with papers on benches and their backs towards the camera, symbolise hopelessness and apathy towards education; they seem unwilling to participate in this type of education and perhaps fear of it. This is likely to encourage teachers to refute (reject?) Naplan testing in their schools and instead remodel their focus on a different type of testing which is practical to real life (clumsy wording).

The shift to an earnest tone is intended to prompt action to investigate the implied unreliability of the expert claim “ideas is given only five marks, while spelling is given six.” Teachers are likely to empathise with Hogan’s critiquing and hence are likely to advocate for banning Naplan, taking side with Hogan. I think this is a very good analysis! Well done, you have a great vocabulary.

--- End quote ---

Hello!
Thanks a lot for checking this, and especially, for giving me suggestions for my word choices! I really like the specific words that you told me, so I'll make sure to really consider the meaning of the words that I use.

Yeah, thanks for pointing out style! I guess I should practice writing about it more, since I never write style in my intro!  ::)
Aw and the audience was here just to let you know:
His sardonic tone later shifts to an earnest one as he portrays to teachers, parents of students and the Government’s education department

Thank you once again! :)
--- End quote ---

clarke54321:
** Oops, I didn't realise that someone had already corrected your work. Well, I suppose you'll benefit from an extra correction  :D


--- Quote from: MissSmiley on May 09, 2018, 07:07:23 pm ---Thanks to Clarke for starting the AA club again! :)

In response to the impending Naplan testing and Les Perelman’s Naplan writing guide, The Guardian’s Dan Hogan fervently contends in his opinion piece that Naplan testing is not always standardised or relevant to real life context; it is merely a pressure on schools and students. His sardonic tone later shifts to an earnest one as he portrays toawkward use of the verb, portray. Revise the expression of this sentence. teachers, parents of students and the Government’s education department of Naplan’s lack of consideration for real life implication. An image of students sitting in a classroom seeks to aggrandise the writer’s argument. Great. Nice and succinct. If this were to be a comparison AA, I don't think it would be necessary to include discussion of the visual. That should really be kept to the bulk of the piece.

With the intent of casting Naplan testing as rudimentary and an absurd method of education, Hogan begins his piece with an appeal to teaching and education values and the logic associated with these values. The antithetical juxtaposition “anxieties high and results down” carry undertones of fear and a lack of mental health balance. In turn,hmm..you could probably do with some more explanation of the previous quote before concluding. teachers are likely to feel apprehensive about their students sitting Naplan. Referencing reputable governing authorities such as “Nesa, Acara and the NSW Department of Education” but then claiming that their methods “leave teachers and students in the dark - the idiom implying uncertainty in our education system how so? You must make these things explicit.– the writer seeks to make teachers and parents of students feel despaired. This is because the writer questions whether high credentialed organisations such as the ones aforementioned can actually be trusted to control student’s education, for their “extremely limited and highly reductive” Naplan grading systems which are “crude” – be careful with this type of transitioning. It isn't entirely coherent. the adjective carrying connotations of unprofessionalism and dryness that lacks consideration of students’ mental wellbeing and worldly knowledge. This sardonicismI didn't get much of a feel for this in your paragraph. Remember that clarity > verbose language. Keep it simple and relevant. seeks to galvanise Hogan’s readership to protest against Naplan testing, contributing to the testing’s upheaval and hence eventual disappearance in our education curricula.

Mirroring Les Perelman’s sense of authority – a leading US education academic – I think this is becoming a bit of a habit. Try and minimise this tendency and stick to conventional grammar. Commas will do the trick. Hogan sympathises with school teachers by using the agentless passiveif you want to include this knowledge, you need to elaborate on its contextual significance. “are pressured into” - with itswhat specifically? The verb "pressured?" Make this clear. connotations of entrapment and coercion – to depict Naplan’s “capricious data and standardised testing” as a burden for teachers who must “analyse results, enter data” and use “copious amounts of time” at the expense of critically reviewing whether Naplan testing is fulfilling contextual relevance for students’ academic development. Hogan’s providing of solidarity? is likely to help teachers realise that their efforts are being exploited in return for supporting a system that has been “built in a vacuum,” reflecting its “absurd” lack of conviction for helping students who need to “communicate ideas” in the 21st century nice zoom out to reader effect. I'd like to see more of this in your writing.. The image also intends to magnify Hogan’s argument that Naplan testing is not in the best interests of students. The young students with papers on benches and their backs towards the camera, symbolise hopelessness and apathy towards education; they seem unwilling to participate in this type of education and perhaps fear of it. This is likely to encourage teachers to refute Naplan testing in their schools and instead remodel their focus on a different type of testing which is practical to real life. Excellent

The shift to an earnest tone is intended to prompt action to investigate the implied unreliability of the expert claim “ideas is given only five marks, while spelling is given six.” <-- you need to elaborate on this if you want to include it.Teachers are likely to empathise with Hogan’s critiquing and hence are likely to advocate for banning Naplan, taking side with Hogan.

Thank you very much! :)


--- End quote ---

Very nice effort, MissSmiley. There is a noticeable improvement from your earlier pieces. Topic sentences were strong, introduction was concise, a seamless integration of the visual was included, and a nice acknowledgement of tone was made. To improve, try not to depend too heavily on connotations, substitute hyphens for commas and elaborate on all quotes included. Also, I think you arranged your analysis under the assumption that this was a comparative? If so, you may have made more work for yourself  ;)

MissSmiley:

--- Quote from: clarke54321 on May 10, 2018, 09:34:16 pm ---** Oops, I didn't realise that someone had already corrected your work. Well, I suppose you'll benefit from an extra correction  :D

Very nice effort, MissSmiley. There is a noticeable improvement from your earlier pieces. Topic sentences were strong, introduction was concise, a seamless integration of the visual was included, and a nice acknowledgement of tone was made. To improve, try not to depend too heavily on connotations, substitute hyphens for commas and elaborate on all quotes included. Also, I think you arranged your analysis under the assumption that this was a comparative? If so, you may have made more work for yourself  ;)

--- End quote ---
Thanks a lot for taking out time to check this Clarke!
I'm a HUGE HUGE fan of your feedback, so I love this extra correction!! :)
I'll definitely work on the things you've mentioned!
Thank you very much! :)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page