The pros and cons of VCE English

[brendan]

I'm studying law and you would think that the skills you learn in VCE English would be useful, but think again. The stuff that you need, they don't teach you, and the stuff that they do teach, you don't really need. I think one of the most important English skills needed in a career in law (and probably just about any other profession) is a good grounding in grammar. Yet, the kind of teaching i received in grammar through my whole 13 years in schooling have been inadequate or non-existent. Another thing, that VCE English claims to teach students is "critical thinking skills". Yet, I think VCE English fails in that goal as well. Take for example, "language analysis". What good is being able to pick out persuasive techniques and their intended effect, if you can't assess their logical validity? If you look at "appeal to history" or "appeal to tradition", you would probably be taught examples of it being used, and its intended effect, but I doubt very much that you would have been taught that in many cases it is used in a logically fallacious manner - i.e. it is logically invalid.

[Ahmad]

That's a good point.

[BA22]

I'm studying law and you would think that the skills you learn in VCE English would be useful, but think again. The stuff that you need, they don't teach you, and the stuff that they do teach, you don't really need. I think one of the most important English skills needed in a career in law (and probably just about any other profession) is a good grounding in grammar. Yet, the kind of teaching i received in grammar through my whole 13 years in schooling have been inadequate or non-existent. Another thing, that VCE English claims to teach students is "critical thinking skills". Yet, I think VCE English fails in that goal as well. Take for example, "language analysis". What good is being able to pick out persuasive techniques and their intended effect, if you can't assess their logical validity? If you look at "appeal to history" or "appeal to tradition", you would probably be taught examples of it being used, and its intended effect, but I doubt very much that you would have been taught that in many cases it is used in a logically fallacious manner - i.e. it is logically invalid.

Your experience applies to those who simply wish to pass the subject by memorization and formulaic responses. People who truly extend themselves in the subject and enjoy their texts can expand their vocabulary and analytic skills exponentially, and since when has grammar even been a VCE responsibility, and not that of middle school. VCE english is not intended as a be-all-end-all education on logical reasoning, and nor is that why it holds a compulsory place in the top 4. Why would media analysis constitute a fallacy of logic? The aim of the task is to make logical assertions of the intended impact of language. It is based upon - granted - predominantly memorized concepts of language use, but imply that the task is overall logically invalid is simply wrong

[Collin Li]

Your experience applies to those who simply wish to pass the subject by memorization and formulaic responses. People who truly extend themselves in the subject and enjoy their texts can expand their vocabulary and analytic skills exponentially, and since when has grammar even been a VCE responsibility, and not that of middle school. VCE english is not intended as a be-all-end-all education on logical reasoning, and nor is that why it holds a compulsory place in the top 4. Why would media analysis constitute a fallacy of logic? The aim of the task is to make logical assertions of the intended impact of language. It is based upon - granted - predominantly memorized concepts of language use, but imply that the task is overall logically invalid is simply wrong

I think this not a very good reply, because you begin by dismissing his argument as one that sides with the "rote-learners." I see nothing in brendan's post that applies to rote-learners.

Fundamentally, it is wrong to make compulsory a subject that you must enjoy, to do well. I enjoy mathematics and science, and that is why I chose to take those subjects in VCE, but to have VCE English forced into my hands as a compulsory subject that makes up almost a quarter of your ENTER aggregate does not create a fair-process. (Why not make a general knowledge test -- with maths, science, IT, etc. -- as the standard instead?)

Even if we agree that some sort of English has to be compulsory, I would argue strongly against the analysis of texts, and would propose a much more simple line of English, one that teaches fundamental concepts like grammar and making logical arguments. However, my ultimate stance is that no English should be compulsory, leave that to the pre-year 11 curriculum.

[brendan]

Why would media analysis constitute a fallacy of logic? The aim of the task is to make logical assertions of the intended impact of language. It is based upon - granted - predominantly memorized concepts of language use, but imply that the task is overall logically invalid is simply wrong

I did not make that claim that the task of language analysis is logically invalid. I said that making assertions or conjectures as to the intended or even actual effect of language is of little use of itself. What use is being able to identify and make assertions as to the intended effect of "appeals to tradition" in pieces of writing, if one is not also able to assess its logical validity?

VCE english is not intended as a be-all-end-all education on logical reasoning,

Of course not, and nor is it my position. I did not say that VCE English was intended to be the "be-all-end-all" of logical reasoning. To suggest that i did would be (ironically) to set up a straw-man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

What i did assert was that VCE English aims to to teach students "critical thinking skills" as evidenced by it's study design published by the VCAA http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/studies/english/englisheslsd.pdf :
"evaluate critically points of view expressed by others;"
"characteristics of sound argument, logical sequencing of information, and appropriate ways of presenting supporting evidence;"
"In the presentation of points of view students will need to focus on: ... a logical and coherent sequence of information and ideas"
"read accurately to locate, understand, analyse and synthesise ideas and information;"
"techniques for critically discussing and evaluating issues and arguments presented in texts."
"techniques for critical analysis and evaluation of ideas, issues and arguments presented in texts."
"comment critically on the way ideas and issues are presented in texts."
"The ability to analyse the use of language for informative and persuasive purposes, along with the capacity to think critically, logically and creatively about a range of socially important issues,"
"Students will benefit from explicit teaching related to these skills, which are relevant to the ability to read sensitively and critically, to make language choices for maximum audience effect when writing, to listen with discrimination and detachment, and to present ideas and information effectively when speaking to an audience."
"The study of media texts assists in developing students? abilities to think critically, logically and creatively about a wide variety of issues and to present personal points of view in an effective manner."
"develop listening strategies to enhance critical thinking and assist in processing complex information;"

However, I do not think that VCE English actually achieves these aims, particularly that of:
"characteristics of sound argument, logical sequencing of information, and appropriate ways of presenting supporting evidence;"
"In the presentation of points of view students will need to focus on: ... a logical and coherent sequence of information and ideas"

[enwiabe]

The entire English system falls down in its sheer inability to teach even the basic rudiments. We are sending out many people into the workforce who are functionally illiterate without Microsoft Word and Spellcheck. Just look around at MySpace sites and Facebook etc. It's utter drivel! Nobody uses proper English anymore, and further to that point, not many people know how. Grammar is pushed aside as if it is nothing. Spelling is barely looked at past the 8th grade, and it is utterly disgusting.

Essays are often formulaic because we are taught to get marks, not for the use of the English language. Anything that will get us a better mark, we use. It's all fine and dandy to claim that there are those out there who do learn English for love of the subject, but it is a narrow minority. The entire concept of English being taught as a VCE primary 4 subject must be overhauled and replaced with something workable.

[Odette]

The entire English system falls down in its sheer inability to teach even the basic rudiments. We are sending out many people into the workforce who are functionally illiterate without Microsoft Word and Spellcheck. Just look around at MySpace sites and Facebook etc. It's utter drivel! Nobody uses proper English anymore, and further to that point, not many people know how. Grammar is pushed aside as if it is nothing. Spelling is barely looked at past the 8th grade, and it is utterly disgusting.

Essays are often formulaic because we are taught to get marks, not for the use of the English language. Anything that will get us a better mark, we use. It's all fine and dandy to claim that there are those out there who do learn English for love of the subject, but it is a narrow minority. The entire concept of English being taught as a VCE primary 4 subject must be overhauled and replaced with something workable.

I totally agree

[brendan]

OMG i don't believe it. i think someone has been reading my posts

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22677061-13881,00.html

"GRAMMAR will return to Queensland classrooms in Years 11 and 12 under a revised English syllabus requiring that students be taught grammar, spelling and punctuation.

The Queensland Studies Authority, which is responsible for school curriculums, says a new senior English syllabus to be taught from 2009 will remove the "over-emphasis on critical literacy" used to analyse literature.

Critical literacy is a theory used to analyse texts which holds that language is never neutral and should be dissected to reveal how the writer is manipulating the reader. "

So what is this "critical literacy"?
http://wwwfp.education.tas.gov.au/English/critlit.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_literacy

[melanie.dee]

i now officially hate the fact that english has to be in your top 4

[Odette]

i now officially hate the fact that english has to be in your top 4

I always did hehe

[rustic_metal]

simple solution. do literature or english language.

[Pencil]

simple solution. do literature or english language.

I wouldn't recommend doing lit instead of english, because lit will have to be in your top 4, and lit is notoriously harder to get better marks in. It's because in lit you don't get all the illiterate bogans filling out the low scores like you do in english, and yet the scaling doesn't compensate it like it should

[melanie.dee]

i wish id done lit as well as english tho, to allow me to stuff up in one.. i was gona do it, i did 1/2 last year, but continued with chem instead of lit.. although i am glad i did chem so hmm. i wish my school gave you the option of doing 2 3/4s in yr 11

[rustic_metal]

i plan on doing all 3 englishes

[brendan]

thats extreme! and i see you got 8 subjects, that's a lot i think its better for you just to do 7

if you want a bit of a challenge i suggest this:

2008: Methods, English Language
2009: Physics, Spesh, Chemistry, Uni Math