2010 Exam: HOW DID YOU FIND IT?

[lorcan_raven]

Topic kinda speaks for itself, y'all!
Anyway, I'll start us off!

I found Language Analysis to be an absolute gift... Very straightforward.
Text Response questions for Hard Times were alright. I chose the "suffering" one ... Pretty obvious choice haha!
And context (imaginative landscape) seemed like a normal "inner vs. outer reality" topic... But this is the essay I badly timed for and only had 30 mins to do in it's entirety lol! I got 3 and a half pages for it... very rushed and shitty handwriting...

BUT IT'S OVER! Everyone, even if you felt like it was anti-climactic or stuff-up, it's over. So just find solace that you wil never have to do that again haha. And I think most people would be pleasantly surprised by how they went in English anyway - comparing to the absolute belcurve of language ability in the state haha!

[8039]

The language analysis was a piece of crap. I hated it. I think I did well on it tho... other than my analysis of the introduction logo which I shoved in there for the sake of it and only focusing on the parent/child aspect.

The text response was EASY, almost word for word of what my insight book was focusing on.

The context 'encountering conflict' was also pretty easy, definitely seen some elements of it in practice exams. However I did resort to rambling on since I only had about an hour and a half left to do that AND review all my work.

[gold104]

I agree that the LA was fairly straightforward, which gave me early confidence:) My 1984 text response although lengthy i believe may been deemed somewhat superficial.

I too studied Imag. Landscape... and i'm not 100% sure if i fully got the crux of the prompt

Glad to hear you did well!

[Slumdawg]

Was so happy with the imaginative landscape prompt. Thankfully my short story was about the inner and outer world. I'm praying the assessors won't be annoying and mark it more harshly cos it's imaginative :S

[Spreadbury]

I liked the LA, at first I found nothing but it was fairly easy none the less. did everyone analyse both graphics? I spoke to a heap of people at my school who didn't even touch the "2010" graphic...

[spaciiey]

i analysed both graphics -- i put the logo at the start and the photo at the conclusion because it bookended it nicely, i thought. i didn't really focus on the graphics much though.. maybe i should have in hindsight.

[kazekage]

I believe this years exam was a fair exam!

[pirocan1]

LA was pretty gay.

[kazekage]

I was just sad that I didn't get an invite the Internation Biodiversity Conference ):

[Studyinghard]

omg there are like 1000 threads about the same topic. TALK ON THE SAME DAMN THREAD

[werdna]

Hated it.

[mojomojo]

Loved it.

The LA had a lot to write about and it was very straight-forward and shallow.

The topics for text reponse were easier than I thought.

And the prompt for context is quite common.

[cypriottiger]

loved my analysis, if given more time i could've really nailed it and pushed for a 10
text response initially threw me, but i figured a plan and nailed that one, hopefully 9
context is gonna hurt though, a lot of arguments and valid points but poorly contructed and incoherent, so i think 7 there

[Kotza]

well, the examiner had it on my desk... so i found it pretty easy

[lara2707]

Kotza - What do you mean the examiner had it on your desk? :S

I thought that the language analysis piece was great; there was a LOT of stuff to talk about. However, I missed the info box somehow which was annoying coz I didn't write a great contention or have the speaker's name :S

I did 'Look Both Ways' and the topics were brilliant. Think I did well there.

Context was shocking for me. I did 'Encountering Conflict' and I think that the prompt was fine, I just ran out of time and my piece was poorly written. I don't think I really practised enough!

I didn't get time to read over my work, but I'm good at spelling and grammar so hopefully it will be OK!

Anyway, as you say, it's all over! Just gotta let it be and focus on the rest of the exams!!