Belonging - 2 supp texts okay! (1 Viewer)

[Bboy-twoFousand]

too bad bitch, you lose

ditto that... it is over... who gives a shit

 

[westronham]

Dear Ron

Question 3 of the English Paper 1 examination required students to concentrate on two texts; one prescribed text and one related text of their own choosing. This gave students the opportunity to concentrate deeply on these two texts to encourage a considered and detailed treatment of how the texts represent the interpretation of belonging.

Despite some misinformation in regard to the marking of this question it remains clear that in considering students’ responses markers award marks for demonstration of achievement in relation to the requirements of the question. While marks will not be deducted for responses that refer to more than one related text, students who wrote such responses may not have given themselves the opportunity to demonstrate in as much detail how the texts represent the interpretation of belonging as those who wrote on one related text.

The Board will follow its usual practice of reviewing a wide range of responses before the actual marking process begins. Any unusual responses will be taken into account at that stage. All students can be reassured that all responses to this section of the examination will be marked on their merits.


Garry Green
Senior Assessment Officer, English
Assessment and Reporting
(02)93678241
garry.green@bos.nsw.edu.au
02/11/09 04:30 PM

To​

<service@bos.nsw.edu.au>

cc​

Subject​

English Paper 1

 

[Aerath]

Dear Ron

Question 3 of the English Paper 1 examination required students to concentrate on two texts; one prescribed text and one related text of their own choosing. This gave students the opportunity to concentrate deeply on these two texts to encourage a considered and detailed treatment of how the texts represent the interpretation of belonging.

Despite some misinformation in regard to the marking of this question it remains clear that in considering students’ responses markers award marks for demonstration of achievement in relation to the requirements of the question. While marks will not be deducted for responses that refer to more than one related text, students who wrote such responses may not have given themselves the opportunity to demonstrate in as much detail how the texts represent the interpretation of belonging as those who wrote on one related text.

The Board will follow its usual practice of reviewing a wide range of responses before the actual marking process begins. Any unusual responses will be taken into account at that stage. All students can be reassured that all responses to this section of the examination will be marked on their merits.


Garry Green
Senior Assessment Officer, English
Assessment and Reporting
(02)93678241
garry.green@bos.nsw.edu.au
02/11/09 04:30 PM

To​

<service@bos.nsw.edu.au>

cc​

Subject​

English Paper 1

This email has been posted up many a time before.

 

[insideout]

ditto that... it is over... who gives a shit

EXACTLY!
ITS DONE PEOPLE
DEAL WITH IT!!!!
What happened is what happened- nothing you can do to change that-and what you end up getting is what you probably deserved. not saying that if u wrote two ur gonna get worse cos thats not nessicerily true, but if you wrote a shit essay ur gonna get a shit mark anyway!

 

[jellybelly59]

EXACTLY!
ITS DONE PEOPLE
DEAL WITH IT!!!!
What happened is what happened- nothing you can do to change that-and what you end up getting is what you probably deserved. not saying that if u wrote two ur gonna get worse cos thats not nessicerily true, but if you wrote a shit essay ur gonna get a shit mark anyway!

LOL you people who are saying "deal with it" are just putting fuel on fire... just let the thread die off won't you?

 

[random-1005]

LOL you people who are saying "deal with it" are just putting fuel on fire... just let the thread die off won't you?

shut the fuck up

 

[vantastic]

so wait, the BOS is DEFINATELY marking two relateds? wtf! is there some sort of proff of this?like a link or something??

 

[Pyrokinetic]

I can't believe this thread is still going. Also can't believe i've just contributed to this thread.

 

[Schoey93]

Pfft it seems that most of the state are illiterate and the government is once more inflating figures/altering the rules to cover this sad fact up >.>

Did you write about one or two related texts, Anna?

 

[annabackwards]

Did you write about one or two related texts, Anna?

One because that's what the question asked for

 

[kdimitrevic]

i think it is totally unfair. i wrote 2, by sheer accident.
all year we have been told to write 2 and therefore have 2 points and 2 supp texts to back up those points addressed using the core text. noone can write a good essay with one supp text because it will be lopsided and unequally backed up.
i think the board of studies was rewarding the slackers who had decided not to study a second supp text, and was advantaging the lazy people who, unlike myself didnt do 11 timed belonging essays to make sure i could fit everything in without going over time. the BOS was advantaging those who failed to prepare and i personally feel that is unfair.
i acknowledge that i should have written 1 text but my eyes just seemed to skim over that bit, ive beaten myself up enough about it now and have come to the conclusion that this was a sneaky and unfair choice of the BOS, but also agree that we didnt technically answer the question properly and therefore should be marked accordingly.

 

[Cinnamonster]

I wish this thread would die already.

 

[possessionless]

i think it is totally unfair. i wrote 2, by sheer accident.
all year we have been told to write 2 and therefore have 2 points and 2 supp texts to back up those points addressed using the core text. noone can write a good essay with one supp text because it will be lopsided and unequally backed up.
i think the board of studies was rewarding the slackers who had decided not to study a second supp text, and was advantaging the lazy people who, unlike myself didnt do 11 timed belonging essays to make sure i could fit everything in without going over time. the BOS was advantaging those who failed to prepare and i personally feel that is unfair.
i acknowledge that i should have written 1 text but my eyes just seemed to skim over that bit, ive beaten myself up enough about it now and have come to the conclusion that this was a sneaky and unfair choice of the BOS, but also agree that we didnt technically answer the question properly and therefore should be marked accordingly.

you have no idea wtf you are on about!
i prepared 2 related texts in ALOT of detail. but because i can actually read i only wrote about one.
dont make assumptions when clearly you are the one that did the wrong thing by not answering the question.

 

[swathard]

My English teacher told me that at the marking centre, they have come to an agreement that if people used 2 related materials, they will not be penalised automatically. However, if someone has used one related material and has done a wonderful job, they will be rewarded greatly. If a student has used 2 related materials and done a great job, they will be rewarded - but if you've done 2 related materials and done a terrible job, you will be penalised heavily, and the same with if you've done 1 related and poorly executed your analysis of it.

Hope this puts people's minds at ease! Thought I'd let you all know.