word length

[spontaneouscombustion]

would 600-700 word analysis be too short in the exam?

I know it's quality, not quantity that counts, but still, you need sufficient quantity to have good quality...

[StringFever]

would 600-700 word analysis be too short in the exam?

I know it's quality, not quantity that counts, but still, you need sufficient quantity to have good quality...

Personally, I would aim to for 800+, but if you've written all gold, then I'm sure 700 words is fine.
Just think about your arguments and consider is there anything else I can say to further explain the effect of language use, and HOW that feature creates meaning!

[EvangelionZeta]

You're not going to score 18-20/20 with 600-700 words.  If you're ok with a B+/Aish score, then it might be alright.

[StringFever]

You're not going to score 18-20/20 with 600-700 words.  If you're ok with a B+/Aish score, then it might be alright.

I actually disagree with that, VCAA have stated that word length will play no consideration in their marking. Anyways, you're more likely to get a better mark with a succinct, relevant essay than with a longer, less-relevant essay.

[EvangelionZeta]

Longer AND less-relevant is another issue.  However, to have the complexity and depth required for top scoring responses, you really do need at least 1000+ words (as the TC said, "you need sufficient quantity to have good quality).  The top ranking schools all push students towards 1000+ words (some even 1300+ words...) whilst urging students to maintain quality; against that, 600-700 words won't cut it for examiners in regards to being high(est) scoring responses.

If your writing is short but quality, yes it will be better than a crappy long essay.  Still, if you want to increase your score, maintain your quality and start pushing for longer essays whilst you're at it.

[StringFever]

Longer AND less-relevant is another issue.  However, to have the complexity and depth required for top scoring responses, you really do need at least 1000+ words (as the TC said, "you need sufficient quantity to have good quality).  The top ranking schools all push students towards 1000+ words (some even 1300+ words...) whilst urging students to maintain quality; against that, 600-700 words won't cut it for examiners in regards to being high(est) scoring responses.

If your writing is short but quality, yes it will be better than a crappy long essay.  Still, if you want to increase your score, maintain your quality and start pushing for longer essays whilst you're at it.

That is a fair point; however, it really depends on the passages. For example, one of the reasons why I didn't want to do Tobias Wolff's "This Boy's Life" was because the passages, although engaging, didn't provide enough for me to write in depth. Whilst what I wrote scored decently, it was really dependent on the passages I got. So I guess we must also consider the text in question; because some are full of features to write on (like poems or Hamlet, for example), whereas others provide the challenge of finding features to write about in significant depth...

[spontaneouscombustion]

So you would aim for 4-5 paragraphs?

What if you only wrote 3, but they were long paragraphs?

[StringFever]

So you would aim for 4-5 paragraphs?

What if you only wrote 3, but they were long paragraphs?

I know you want definite advice, so please forgive me for this.
But one of the best pieces of advice I've heard all year for Literature is stop paragraph and word counting. Focus on your passage and write as much as you feel is relevant to reveal your understanding of the text. Unlike English, number of paragraphs and words don't count that much.

However, if you want a rough guide, maybe one or two good paragraphs (they do NOT need to be of equal length) on each provided passage.

I myself like to focus on one passage in particular, and then making less detailed references (but sustained by quotes etc) to the other two paragraphs provided.

[EvangelionZeta]

I'll agree with the passages bit in regards to length - still, you should really milk the passage as much as you can, and I don't think 600 words would quite cover everything.

And yeah, in Lit your structure really isn't that important.  I've seen 50-scoring people who wrote 10 paragraphs, and I've seen 50-scoring people who wrote 4.  Anything goes.

[simpak]

One of the examiners told our class that you should have more than about 800 words.

[spontaneouscombustion]

Thank you guys, you've been such a great help to me these last months leading up to the exam. You're all better than my teacher! I don't know where I'll be at this time of the year if it wasn't for this forum. Sorry for the trivial questions though; I've just never understood what can and what can't be done in the exam and you guys have helped to clear it up a lot. So once again, thank you.

[kayf]

Uh, I disagree here. I've had some consistently high marking analyses with about 850 words average, and I'm assuming I'll go for less in the exam. To be perfectly honest, I think it's not a good idea to spend too much time thinking about the length as you might be prone to repeat yourself - this will be detrimental to your overall mark. Keep in mind the criteria and marking descriptors and you should be fine. 

[Trent]

I don't think the length of your analysis matters to a great extent. In a handout I got from a lecture, I think, there was something said about length. It said the examiners are more concerned with the quality of your piece rather than the quantity. You shouldn't degrade your essay by extending it and by doing so not saying anything of value.

[simpak]

Just keep writing until you've exhausted 55 minutes, wrap it up, and move on.

[Eriny]

^ Agreed.

Try to aim for at least 700, I think (600 seems a little short to me), but if what you are saying is profound, then the examiner will know. I think having 5 minutes at the end to look over everything is a good rule of thumb too. Clarity is much much more important than length.