vcaa 2017 argument analysis

[melodyy123]

hey! i would really appreciate if anyone could give me some feedback on this analysis i did, and any ways i can improve. it is from last years exam. thanks in advance

The growing amount of rubbish and packaging waste at a Melbourne primary school has caused recent concern for the school’s principal. Denise Walker, principal of Spire Primary School presents this issue to parents in the school’s weekly newsletter. In an assertive and concerned tone, Walker urges parents to reduce the amount of packaging used by their children. She adds that the large amount of waste poses a great threat to the environment. A frustrated tone is used by Louise, a parent at the school, to contend that the principal’s proposal is highly inconvenient to busy parents, like herself, who are already doing as much as they can to reduce waste. These pieces are targeted towards the parents of Spire Primary School.

With the intent of arousing fear in the readers from the outset, Walker asserts that the rising amounts of rubbish will result in “irreversible” environmental damage. Readers, especially those concerned with environmental issues, are invited to feel alarmed by the fact that damage done will be impossible to undo. However, readers are left to feel that the school is already striving to resolve this issue as she lists the different things they are involved in. “We are the only school that has a walk/pedal to school once a week.. we have four different bins for our waste products..” Here, readers may feel a sense of admiration towards the school for their great efforts, and may commend Walker for all that she does. She presents the bigger picture of this issue eventually spreading to affect “our country” and adds that “we are responsible for the future of the world.” The inclusive language used here may arouse a sense of fear in the readers as they realise that their country is in danger, and that this issue directly affects them.

Walker then urges parents to ensure that their children leave as little waste as possible. Parents are presented with the issue of “little packets becoming waste products,” but are then given the solution of using “reusable containers.” Walker here aims to present herself as a reasonable person, as she has considered the problems, whilst also proposing appropriate solutions. Readers may be swayed to support her as she has considered their problems, but has provided them with ways to overcome them. To further emphasize this point, she acknowledges that “reducing our packaging will be a challenge at home and at school.” However, the assertiveness in her statement that “we must confront it for the sake of future generations” urges parents to take responsibility for their actions as it will eventually affect everyone. The accompanying image highlights her viewpoint that “mounds” of waste products will continue to increase if change does not occur. The darkness in the picture, namely the black rubbish bags and the dark grey sky, may elicit fear among the readers as they come to realise what the future has to hold if something is not done regarding the waste issue. The picture shows bags stacked on top of one another – and Walker may be depicting the potential effects of this issue on not only the school, but the world. Readers are therefore encouraged to fear for the future of the environment, and ultimately agree with her viewpoint.

In her comment left, Louise challenges the view of the principal, as she believes that parents already do enough in attempt to be sustainable. Louise raises questions as to why the principal wants to make their “lives more difficult,” leaving them unable to “enjoy the benefits of 21st century living.” Here, Louise aims to evoke a sense of anger in the parents from the school, as these plans will be of great inconvenience. Louise then uses her personal experience of having her “kids walk to school every day” to stress the fact that parents “are already doing what [they] can.” Readers are invited to also feel frustrated that the principal wants them to do more than they already are. Walker’s idea of bringing the “old communal teapot” back in use sparked outrage in Louise, who believes “we passed the days when civilised people were happy to all drink the same stewed tea.” The use of a disappointed tone in her statement may influence readers to agree with her that this idea neglects the advancements made in society. Louise positions the principal to acknowledge the hard work these parents already do, and attempts to persuade her to reconsider her ideas. “Finally, why begrudge us all the easy night off.. takeaway food is a lifesaver for busy people.” This positions parents to also feel aggravated that these ideas will make their lives more difficult. The cumulative impact of the techniques used by Louise is to reinforce her viewpoint that parents should not be expected to do more than they already are – as she aims to stroke a sense of outrage among the readers who are parents.

These two texts use a variety of techniques and language styles in order to persuade their respective audiences. Both pieces rely heavily on the use of evidence and anecdotes to support their contentions, and in turn, strengthen their arguments. 

[Maheskutty]

hello melodyy123
I read your piece and you have actually done quite well.
just a few suggestions
-"Readers are therefore encouraged to fear for the future of the environment, and ultimately agree with her viewpoint." --> who are the readers, be specific and instead of saying readers it's better to say (whoever the reader is...) and stakeholders
- "A frustrated tone is used by Louise"- you can't use a tone but instead you could perhaps say Adopting a frustrated/exasperated tone, Louise.....
- “Finally, why begrudge us all the easy night off.. takeaway food is a lifesaver for busy people.” This positions parents to also feel aggravated that these ideas will make their lives more difficult. ---> instead of having the whole quote as the sentence, it is ideal to embedded it in the impact sentence. eg. Many people in today's world "takeaway food" as it is a "lifesaver for busy people" reflecting the idea that the daily lifestyle would become disorientated positioning readers (stakeholders) who have commitments to feel a sense of aggravation.
Finally, you did well but yeah just consider the suggestions and you would be good to go
 

[BlameTheKulaks]

Ik this is an old thread but it may help nonetheless.

Some things to improve:
1. Changing up how you explain things keeps your writing fresh. Instead of "A frustrated tone is used by Louise, a parent at the school, to contend that the principal’s proposal is highly inconvenient to busy parents..." you could say "Louise employs a frustrated tone" or "Louise adopts an x register".
This also goes for appeals/language - whilst your piece generally flows well, it is at times too formulaic. Although you clearly have the evidence->explanation structure down you should try experimenting with flipping these or layering evidence. For instance, you could explain "irreversible" both in relation to the urgency of the issue and the ominous undertone it presents.

2. Your conclusion isn't as strong as it could be. I always preferred to focus on the arguments and link them in with an overall theme - e.g. "drawing upon her experience with parental responsibilities, Louise implores the school to consider more convenient solutions" - rinse and repeat for the other primary arguments. It is easy to forget that the task is to analyse language AND argument.

3. Try to make your topic sentences a bit punchier. You could slightly change "Walker then urges parents to ensure that their children leave as little waste as possible" to "As her newsletter progresses, Walker shifts focus to the responsibility of parents in environmental preservation". This is probably not perfect either, but it more effectively captures Walker's contention and signposts analysis to follow.

4. Your expression is also quite good, but you should consider removing the frequency of "may" in describing how readers are positioned. I know you're likely trying to prevent overly authoritative statements, but this is unnecessary (imo). Also, continue trying to vary your vocab - alternatives to 'positions', 'presents' and 'aims to' allow you to better differentiate yourself. For example, Walker 'endeavours to', 'illuminates' or 'intimates that'.

Also, as the other commenter said, shorter embedded quotes are better and directly acknowledging the specific audience is great. In this article, and others considering reform, identifying the legislature or in this case, parents is important. Consideration of audience is also tied to things like tone and the use of colloquial language.