Critique my essay please. (1 Viewer)

[bored of sc]

Attached is my essay regarding the area of study identity. If you have the time could you read it and criticise it?

Cheers in advance, hopefully.

 

[jellybelly59]

Bored of Sc i thought ur essay was good. It wasn't verbose and it didn't retell which heaps of people do and you always linked ur techniques together with your ideas back to identity. The only thing that personally i didn't really like was how you explore each individual text seperately instead of synthesising it all together but everyone has their own way of doing essays, it was just a way i was taught .

 

[bored of sc]

Bored of Sc i thought ur essay was good. It wasn't verbose and it didn't retell which heaps of people do and you always linked ur techniques together with your ideas back to identity. The only thing that personally i didn't really like was how you explore each individual text seperately instead of synthesising it all together but everyone has their own way of doing essays, it was just a way i was taught .

Oh yeah. I don't want to synthesise cause I don't think I can pull it off effectively.

But yeah, thanks for the reply.

 

[-may-cat-]

Oh yeah. I don't want to synthesise cause I don't think I can pull it off effectively.

But yeah, thanks for the reply.

If you want the high marks, you gotta synthesise

 

[sonyaleeisapixi]

If you want the high marks, you gotta synthesise

This is my only critical comment to make about this.

Unless you synthesise, realistically you shouldn't get out of the 9-11/15 basket.
Try finding conceptual links between your texts, aspects of identity - like self actualisation - that are present in your set text and reinforced by your related texts. You set text should dominate your essay, and your related should just reinforce the message.


Also, you need a clear introduction where you set out your thesis and a clear conclusion when its all tied back together.

But you write fluently and articulately. If you synthesise and get good strong intros and conclusions, you should be getting 14/15, even full marks.

 

[bored of sc]

On my God. Thank you guys so much! I didn't realise that I had to synthesise.

Any further hints in linking concepts to two or more texts would be appreciated... I'm really stuck.

 

[lyounamu]

What do you mean by "synthesise?".

 

[sonyaleeisapixi]

Streamline and conceptualise the essay, rather than text by text.

 

[bored of sc]

Streamline and conceptualise the essay, rather than text by text.

So in one of your body paragraphs could you talk about 1 thesis statement about identity and then show how it is represented in your core and related texts?

 

[Zephyrio]

Synthesising involves drawing commonalities between texts to support given thesis.

I.e. "Like the composer of text X, the composer of text Y uses religious imagery to ..."

For the Area of Study, we are often asked to draw upon three texts (prescribed and two related), so it is suggested that you DO NOT attempt to synthesise like this:

Identity is shown to be .... This is evident in text X... It is also seen in text Y... and finally, poignantly developed in text Z.

Only the very best English students can pull that off with sophistication and flair, and even then, many will fail.

It is far easier, more effective and fluent if you structured your AOS analysis text by text, but linking them together often so what you achieve is this "wholeness" in your essay rather than analyses of each text in isolation. A suggested structure may be...

Introduction

Body Paragraph One - Text One

Body Paragraph Two - Text Two. Make sure you highlight some similarities or differences between text one and text two to show that you're looking at the issue as a whole, and exploring the ways composers may develop the same ideas using the same or different structures/forms.

Body paragraph three - text three... you get the drift.

---

Some people will argue that analysing 3/4 texts at once is perfectly legitimate, if not preferred by HSC marking. I think that writing essays in such a manner is unwieldy. Your choice.

 

[bored of sc]

Synthesising involves drawing commonalities between texts to support given thesis.

I.e. "Like the composer of text X, the composer of text Y uses religious imagery to ..."

So will this thesis be in the question?

 

[lyounamu]

Streamline and conceptualise the essay, rather than text by text.

Without that, you get poor mark?

That's a bit far-fetched statement. You won't definitly get the full mark but you won't necessarily lose huge chunk of marks.

 

[sonyaleeisapixi]

A conceptualised and synthesised essay shows a greater depth of understanding of interelation between texts and AOS/Modules. Text by texts you are not demonstrating a higher level of understanding of links and commonalities.

Text by text is simplistic and fails to show a clear and well crafted argument. If you're not showing that your essays construction and content is well crafted, clear and well synthesised and conceptualised, you shouldnt move out of a high C low B band mark.

 

[hopethisworks]

oh god, you are so keen.

 

[lyounamu]

A conceptualised and synthesised essay shows a greater depth of understanding of interelation between texts and AOS/Modules. Text by texts you are not demonstrating a higher level of understanding of links and commonalities.

Text by text is simplistic and fails to show a clear and well crafted argument. If you're not showing that your essays construction and content is well crafted, clear and well synthesised and conceptualised, you shouldnt move out of a high C low B band mark.

Do you mean "synthesising" by the suming all the points together?

You still demonstrate the understanding of the texts and the connection between the texts during the essays. The fact that you failed to sum your points up does not necessarily strip you of a chance to get B or A.


English is highly subjective and there are different markers who adopt different way of marking. You cannot broadly generalise that this one is C and that one is worth A.

 

[bored of sc]

Synthesising involves drawing commonalities between texts to support given thesis.

I.e. "Like the composer of text X, the composer of text Y uses religious imagery to ..."

For the Area of Study, we are often asked to draw upon three texts (prescribed and two related), so it is suggested that you DO NOT attempt to synthesise like this:

Identity is shown to be .... This is evident in text X... It is also seen in text Y... and finally, poignantly developed in text Z.

Only the very best English students can pull that off with sophistication and flair, and even then, many will fail.

It is far easier, more effective and fluent if you structured your AOS analysis text by text, but linking them together often so what you achieve is this "wholeness" in your essay rather than analyses of each text in isolation. A suggested structure may be...

Introduction

Body Paragraph One - Text One

Body Paragraph Two - Text Two. Make sure you highlight some similarities or differences between text one and text two to show that you're looking at the issue as a whole, and exploring the ways composers may develop the same ideas using the same or different structures/forms.

Body paragraph three - text three... you get the drift.

---

Some people will argue that analysing 3/4 texts at once is perfectly legitimate, if not preferred by HSC marking. I think that writing essays in such a manner is unwieldy. Your choice.

Cheers for wasting your time on me! I understand now. My three texts (core and two related) have a lot of common concepts regarding identity (AOS) it's just they present their ideas in different ways i.e. different techniques as they are different text types.

Also, thanks Sonya. For opening up my eyes as to what I meant to be doing.

 

[Finx]

English is highly subjective and there are different markers who adopt different way of marking. You cannot broadly generalise that this one is C and that one is worth A.

Truth. I wrote two essays at around the same time for advanced and extension English. I received 17/20 for Extenglish and 14/20 for advanced.

 

[sonyaleeisapixi]

*shrug*
My teachers been marking for the past 6 years. I'm just regurgitating what she and Karen Yager said to about 300 kids at a lecture.
There are clear marking guidelines. If you are not showing an articulated and well crafted essay that indicates a hollistic understanding, you cannot get out of certain bands. Its very objective at times in that the marking guides tell the marker what you should be doing to acheive top marks.

No, by synthesing I mean making connections and supporting your thesis conceptually. Not just "Imaginative journeys are about discovery.

Text A IJ

Text B IJ

Text C IJ"

Instead,

"Imaginative journeys are about self discovery.

One aspect of self discover explored in imaginative journey text is blah blah. In blah blah and blah blah, you can see whatever. techniques, examples, effects, drive home the aspect of journey.

Rinse repeat".

 

[sonyaleeisapixi]

Cheers for wasting your time on me! I understand now. My three texts (core and two related) have a lot of common concepts regarding identity (AOS) it's just they present their ideas in different ways i.e. different techniques as they are different text types.

Also, thanks Sonya. For opening up my eyes as to what I meant to be doing.

You're welcome love. Synthesising will get you much better marks, I promise.

 

[Zephyrio]

A conceptualised and synthesised essay shows a greater depth of understanding of interelation between texts and AOS/Modules. Text by texts you are not demonstrating a higher level of understanding of links and commonalities.

Text by text is simplistic and fails to show a clear and well crafted argument. If you're not showing that your essays construction and content is well crafted, clear and well synthesised and conceptualised, you shouldnt move out of a high C low B band mark.

If your modules question asks for two texts only, it is best to highlight the concept you are talking about in each paragraph and then talk about your two texts in conjunction with each other.

However, for the AOS where some people will be talking about up to 4 texts (2 poems from the prescribed anthology, and two supplementary texts), I would really recommend talking about all texts separately, "linked" by certain linking sentences or paragraphs which discuss texts in conjunction. This is because talking about four texts will become exceedingly convoluted, and what you often get is a poorly structured mess.

Of course, I can't say that my opinion is the right one. But my teacher has been a HSC marker for many years, and she advised this... so has my tutor, who actually teaches teachers how to mark the AOS at the HSC marking centres. So yes, they've had a large impact on my approach to AOS.

Do note however that you can still achieve a high A-range response if you did it text by text. However, you must highlight the commonalities between texts, and in this way, you are synthesising.

To conclude: Anybody who does not synthesise at all is opening themselves up for a B range mark, at the most.