BOS has no idea... (1 Viewer)

[sprog]

Strangely enough, English exams have nothing to do with memorising an essay and more to do with how you can structure your words. They want you to demonstrate everything you have learned about words & sentences over the past however many years, but they need something to "talk about" to get you to do this. They try to make it fruitful and arty, but in typical teacher fashion, fail miserably.

It isn't about how well you understand the topic of power (pre 2003), journeys (2004-2009?) or 'belonging' (2010+), but how well you articulate yourself. The content of the essay is somewhat irrelevant. It's a bit deceitful in this way, because all of your other subject exams are memory tests - how well you remember dot points or formulas. English is a bit more (or less, whatever way you look at it). It's not about how well you can remember a particular text, but how well you articulate what you remember about it and respond to the question.

 

[4025808]

Strangely enough, English exams have nothing to do with memorising an essay and more to do with how you can structure your words. They want you to demonstrate everything you have learned about words & sentences over the past however many years, but they need something to "talk about" to get you to do this. They try to make it fruitful and arty, but in typical teacher fashion, fail miserably.

It isn't about how well you understand the topic of power (pre 2003), journeys (2004-2009?) or 'belonging' (2010+), but how well you articulate yourself. The content of the essay is somewhat irrelevant. It's a bit deceitful in this way, because all of your other subject exams are memory tests - how well you remember dot points or formulas. English is a bit more (or less, whatever way you look at it). It's not about how well you can remember a particular text, but how well you articulate what you remember about it and respond to the question.

which is why some people don't even have to study the text that well and can still ace english. =_=
unlike me, I actually studied my texts in depth and I still can't write very well T_T

 

[forthehsc]

all those saying the english exam was shit (like me) are saying it because the questions both in paper one and paper two were completly different to what they had studied for and they were so specific, like speeches. Any one saying that the exam wasn't too bad/ good or whatever, thats probably because you guys got lucky and the questions were exactly what you had prepared for like in module b with hamlet, speeches etc
english exams do test our skills, but i think the whole exam is based on someones luck not their ability. if the exam fits what they studied for obv they'll do better than someone who is much smarter but the exam has no relevance to what they did. the english exam structure needs to be changed.

 

[themanman]

all those saying the english exam was shit (like me) are saying it because the questions both in paper one and paper two were completly different to what they had studied for and they were so specific, like speeches. Any one saying that the exam wasn't too bad/ good or whatever, thats probably because you guys got lucky and the questions were exactly what you had prepared for like in module b with hamlet, speeches etc
english exams do test our skills, but i think the whole exam is based on someones luck not their ability. if the exam fits what they studied for obv they'll do better than someone who is much smarter but the exam has no relevance to what they did. the english exam structure needs to be changed.

*looks at name*
lawl

 

[mirakon]

They have made an exam for everything they despise

Paper 1: Catered to Pre-planned responses whilst everyone else who played the game the way they wanted it done got fucked over

Paper 2: (easy for me) but ridiculously hard for people doing plays/novels

One of the most unfair papers ever implemented

Band 6 cut-off = 74 (an all time low)

Good job BOS

Paper 1: Only if you're doing the immigrant chronicles. Any other core text and you had to think outside the box. So no.
Paper 2: I did novels/plays and it was perfectly fine and the questions were very fair actually

By no means unfair at all. I don't mean to have a go at you if you think you did badly, but this doesn't justify you blaming and having a whinge about it.

 

[Lumix]

Paper 1: Only if you're doing the immigrant chronicles. Any other core text and you had to think outside the box. So no.
Paper 2: I did novels/plays and it was perfectly fine and the questions were very fair actually

By no means unfair at all. I don't mean to have a go at you if you think you did badly, but this doesn't justify you blaming and having a whinge about it.

True, novels and plays were fair but speeches/poems werent. By specifying a specific speech/poem they are making the entire process luck-based and that is clearly unfair for those students who did not prepare for the speech. I know you are supposed to study every single poem/speech but the people who prepared for the specified speech/poem most likely only prepared 2 or 3!

But it doesnt matter anymore because I won't have to put up with the crappy English Advanced HSC syllabus ever again in my life.

 

[mirakon]

True, novels and plays were fair but speeches/poems werent. By specifying a specific speech/poem they are making the entire process luck-based and that is clearly unfair for those students who did not prepare for the speech. I know you are supposed to study every single poem/speech but the people who prepared for the specified speech/poem most likely only prepared 2 or 3! But it doesnt matter anymore because I won't have to put up with the crappy English Advanced HSC syllabus ever again in my life.

Ok I don't want to come across as a callous dickhead, but I'm sorry, if you're supposed to study it that way, choose not to study every poem/speech as they specified this is hardly the BoS fault and entirely that of the student.

 

[ZachBC_94]

English teaches communication skills and is basically a primer for university. You don't like it, do standard, or the BEC English course they introduced this year

 

[DevilBoy]

You had to have really specifically studied place though, because I found it easy to talk about place 'facilitating a sense of belonging' as in Duke senior/The Forest of Arden, but i hadn't specifically studied how it 'hindered one's sense' so i was a bit fucked. I just wrote about the social demands of court life and how they reflected Olivers mistreatment of Orlando, thus left him feeling Ostracised in the court.
Tbh i didn't study for trials and only studied the night before. Most stupid thing I've ever done in my life.
Studying is just shit. & I'm lazy. Haha.


On another note: Mod B was fucked, I went in with 2 Slessor Poems, Five Bells was one of them, but we were told to only study 3, so to those who didn't study FB, i feel so sorry for them!

yeahhhh that would be me, i had Sleep, Beach Burial and Out of time prepared and they throw in that. I had 3 full ready to go, thesis' planned out from 2007-2010 and that happens. I only knew the basic story behind five bells, didnt have any quotes.

 

[DevilBoy]

I have a feeling the whole aim of this year's HSC English exam is to redistribute band 6's from Advanced to Standard.

First, paper 1 allowed for pre-prepared responses (I was lucky I could mould my short story and essay into "place". For those who prepared for "groups" or "communities", all they had to do was say "since the community of this place rejected the individual, therefore the place rejects the individual, therefore the individual doesn't belong to the place... blablabla)

Paper 2 English Standard this year was very similar to last year (I think the only difference was the wording of the questions... otherwise, this year's paper 2 standard english asked for the same thing last year)


Anyone agree with me?

One of the kids in standard said to me that for Educating Rita they had the exact same question as in the CSSA trial. Whats the go with that. Like word for word questioned the same.

 

[enoilgam]

One of the kids in standard said to me that for Educating Rita they had the exact same question as in the CSSA trial. Whats the go with that. Like word for word questioned the same.

Coincidence. HSC papers are written before the CSSA trials. Also, I think that the people who write HSC exams cannot be teaching during that year, whilst those who write the CSSA can be.

 

[sophielee169]

They have made an exam for everything they despise

Paper 1: Catered to Pre-planned responses whilst everyone else who played the game the way they wanted it done got fucked over

Paper 2: (easy for me) but ridiculously hard for people doing plays/novels

One of the most unfair papers ever implemented

Band 6 cut-off = 74 (an all time low)

Good job BOS

is that your assumption of the band 6 cut off?

 

[sophielee169]

Totally disagree... Paper 1 screwed all pre planned responses as it was about place... unless your essay was about place, it would have suited people who had a few quotes from other sources aswell.

Paper 2 for me was fine (I did justice game, FrankenBR and Hammy) I did hamlet and that question was much better than the rest of them, especially if they specified a speech you hadn't studied.

But im shit at english

yessssss i agree completely! i did speeches and it was fucked! however, Frank was great along with conflicting perspectives

 

[sophielee169]

all those saying the english exam was shit (like me) are saying it because the questions both in paper one and paper two were completly different to what they had studied for and they were so specific, like speeches. Any one saying that the exam wasn't too bad/ good or whatever, thats probably because you guys got lucky and the questions were exactly what you had prepared for like in module b with hamlet, speeches etc
english exams do test our skills, but i think the whole exam is based on someones luck not their ability. if the exam fits what they studied for obv they'll do better than someone who is much smarter but the exam has no relevance to what they did. the english exam structure needs to be changed.

agreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

 

[mirakon]

agreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

disagree. I didn't exactly prepare for a question about the "closing scenes of Hamlet" at all, there is no way I could have predicted that. However, its not a matter of luck, its a matter of knowing your text well and wholistically rather than regurgitating a prepared essay. Its not luck, its the ability to adapt to a question.

 

[sophielee169]

True, novels and plays were fair but speeches/poems werent. By specifying a specific speech/poem they are making the entire process luck-based and that is clearly unfair for those students who did not prepare for the speech. I know you are supposed to study every single poem/speech but the people who prepared for the specified speech/poem most likely only prepared 2 or 3!

But it doesnt matter anymore because I won't have to put up with the crappy English Advanced HSC syllabus ever again in my life.

agree!

 

[TheWolfsLunch]

its a matter of knowing your text well and wholistically rather than regurgitating a prepared essay

This, and exactly this.

+Rep.

 

[engie_benji]

the wolfs lunch, from kempsey. im from macksville

 

[sophielee169]

disagree. I didn't exactly prepare for a question about the "closing scenes of Hamlet" at all, there is no way I could have predicted that. However, its not a matter of luck, its a matter of knowing your text well and wholistically rather than regurgitating a prepared essay. Its not luck, its the ability to adapt to a question.

i didnt have a prepared essay. i did what i was told and taught to do by not only teachers, but hsc markers giving seminars, which was learn 2-3 of the speeches in depth.. it is near impossible to learn all eight that have no link throughout them all what so ever.. having disconnected speeches doesnt really allow you to learn it wholeistically. i wasnt relying on luck.. and in the end i did adapt my information to the question, i jsut didnt have the knowledge to the question as best i could, but yes i do believe people doing speeches and poems and essays that arent a whole text had a massive disadvantage

 

[Riproot]

I did Gate and didn't do Hamlet.

That could've been shit too?
I honestly have no idea what happens in advanced so I'm just gonna smile.

English teaches communication skills and is basically a primer for university. You don't like it, do standard, or the BEC English course they introduced this year

Standard all the way mah farkahs!

Paper 2 English Standard this year was very similar to last year (I think the only difference was the wording of the questions... otherwise, this year's paper 2 standard english asked for the same thing last year)
Anyone agree with me?

I disagree completely. Lol
Paper 2 last year was completely different.
Also, yeah, into the world was the trial question. I think 'portrayed' was 'conveyed' in the trial or some shit.

Or perhaps this coincidence is because the syllabus for the standard english modules is not very broad? You could basically sum up the syllabus for each module in one or 2 sentences.
EDIT: Or may be some questions on the paper got leaked? perhaps indirectly (by wording the questions differently)

I think it's more that if you eliminate everything they've done before you leave the board with only few options for what they can do in the paper. Kind of like how the AoS syllabus is ginormous, yet the CSSA trial was on belonging to place.