A letter to the Board of Studies re: Paper 2 and its stupidity... (1 Viewer)

[nwatts]

I was chatting with a few of my esteemed English colleagues recently about the English Paper 2 exam, and the shear stupidity of its entire makeup.

We learn three modules of work over an entire year, in very significant detail, to then come to the HSC exam with only 40mins to express our knowledge and understanding into each module. I feel (and apparently, so do many others) that this is a pretty unfair practice. Students are expected to know a vast amount of information, and come HSC exam time, 70% of it will be thrown away in order to sustain a coherent response in 40mins.

I find it astounding at what a difference 20mins can make to an essay. In Extension 1 (as all E3U students would know), the essay is allocated 60mins, as is the creative task. I find this extra 20mins increases my ability to express and inform on a complex, detailed level that gets me the high marks.

So I'm planning on drafting a brief letter to the Board of Studies, suggesting that English Paper 2 be allocated 3 hours, and each essay be allocated 60mins. It would increase the markers' ability to differentiate between a very good response and a brilliant response; and would also allow students the opportunity of really showing what they've learnt and understood throughout each module.

I have the support of my English class. What do you guys think? A waste of time, or a solid idea? Even if the BOS do nothing, they'll still be aware that many believe the Paper 2 to be poorly organised. Perhaps come 07 when they revise the syllabus they'll alter it a little.

Any comments/questions?

Nick

 

[santaslayer]

I was chatting with a few of my esteemed English colleagues recently about the English Paper 2 exam, and the shear stupidity of its entire makeup.

We learn three modules of work over an entire year, in very significant detail, to then come to the HSC exam with only 40mins to express our knowledge and understanding into each module. I feel (and apparently, so do many others) that this is a pretty unfair practice. Students are expected to know a vast amount of information, and come HSC exam time, 70% of it will be thrown away in order to sustain a coherent response in 40mins.

I find it astounding at what a difference 20mins can make to an essay. In Extension 1 (as all E3U students would know), the essay is allocated 60mins, as is the creative task. I find this extra 20mins increases my ability to express and inform on a complex, detailed level that gets me the high marks.

So I'm planning on drafting a brief letter to the Board of Studies, suggesting that English Paper 2 be allocated 3 hours, and each essay be allocated 60mins. It would increase the markers' ability to differentiate between a very good response and a brilliant response; and would also allow students the opportunity of really showing what they've learnt and understood throughout each module.

I have the support of my English class. What do you guys think? A waste of time, or a solid idea? Even if the BOS do nothing, they'll still be aware that many believe the Paper 2 to be poorly organised. Perhaps come 07 when they revise the syllabus they'll alter it a little.

Any comments/questions?

Nick

I'd like that done.

 

[Rafy]

ALthough we wouldnt benefit from it.

nah, just let future years suffer what we had to go through.

 

[frootloop]

ALthough we wouldnt benefit from it.

nah, just let future years suffer what we had to go through.

lol so true!

Although it is a very thoughtful idea if it doesn't help us (now) then I'm not really that bothered about it.

 

[*girl04*]

I was chatting with a few of my esteemed English colleagues recently about the English Paper 2 exam, and the shear stupidity of its entire makeup.

We learn three modules of work over an entire year, in very significant detail, to then come to the HSC exam with only 40mins to express our knowledge and understanding into each module. I feel (and apparently, so do many others) that this is a pretty unfair practice. Students are expected to know a vast amount of information, and come HSC exam time, 70% of it will be thrown away in order to sustain a coherent response in 40mins.

I find it astounding at what a difference 20mins can make to an essay. In Extension 1 (as all E3U students would know), the essay is allocated 60mins, as is the creative task. I find this extra 20mins increases my ability to express and inform on a complex, detailed level that gets me the high marks.

So I'm planning on drafting a brief letter to the Board of Studies, suggesting that English Paper 2 be allocated 3 hours, and each essay be allocated 60mins. It would increase the markers' ability to differentiate between a very good response and a brilliant response; and would also allow students the opportunity of really showing what they've learnt and understood throughout each module.

I have the support of my English class. What do you guys think? A waste of time, or a solid idea? Even if the BOS do nothing, they'll still be aware that many believe the Paper 2 to be poorly organised. Perhaps come 07 when they revise the syllabus they'll alter it a little.

Any comments/questions?

Nick

Really bad idea. Firstly all hsc english students ( yes, even if you go back to the 80's) have had to write within a 40 min time-frame. If students every year have done this and done well, why shouldn't/couldn't you do so?

You state that you in ext. you " find this extra 20mins increases my ability to express and inform on a complex, detailed level that gets me the high marks". As does it for EVERY student in the state. What would be the advantage of increasing time? so everyone in the state does a little bit better? Can you imagine the media attention then? HSC gets even easier.

The whole idea of english is to adapt your knowledge and fit it to the question in a time or word limit so they can see you ability to be succinet, non verbose and complete a task within a time frame.



No offensive, but you are just another student to the board of studies. You have to deal with writing in 40 min.

 

[*girl04*]

I. It would increase the markers' ability to differentiate between a very good response and a brilliant response;

Ah no. If longer period of time was given, the standard would be higher and harder to distinguish between students. As instead of the mark spread being from say 3/19 -19/19
it may go to 6/19-20/19, making the mark rane narrower

 

[nwatts]

Really bad idea. Firstly all hsc english students ( yes, even if you go back to the 80's) have had to write within a 40 min time-frame. If students every year have done this and done well, why shouldn't/couldn't you do so?

They've "done well" within the 40 minute time frame that they have been set. I don't really care if it's an age-old tradition. I still think it's pretty unfair considering how much content the BOS pack into the modules.

You state that you in ext. you " find this extra 20mins increases my ability to express and inform on a complex, detailed level that gets me the high marks". As does it for EVERY student in the state. What would be the advantage of increasing time? so everyone in the state does a little bit better? Can you imagine the media attention then? HSC gets even easier.

If you know the content, then it's easier. Having an hour to write instead of 40 minutes will surely emphasise how much others have learnt throughout the HSC year, and how little others have done. They'll simply run out of things to say. I had it happen to me with my History Extension half-yearly. I hadn't done bits and pieces of the coursework, and come 45 minutes of writing, I'd run out of things to say.

Which means those who put more effort in, but then aren't necessarily as talented, get rewarded because they can sustain the hour of writing.

No offensive, but you are just another student to the board of studies. You have to deal with writing in 40 min.

I know I have to deal with it. I'm voicing my opinion, which may in turn help students down the track. I don't know whether or not the BOS realise that many students are unhappy with the 40 minutes they've been allocated. And, I can't imagine it would do any harm.

Ah no. If longer period of time was given, the standard would be higher and harder to distinguish between students. As instead of the mark spread being from say 3/19 -19/19
it may go to 6/19-20/19, making the mark rane narrower

I mentioned earlier that the longer time period would allow for some differentiation between those who have learnt the content and those who have not. It also would allow for a certain degree of marks to be awarded on how much effort a student has put into their work, which I feel is needed.

I've seen too many cases of people who learn the work, practice at home, only to run out of time or take too slowly in an assessment/exam. I just don't believe this to be fair. These people have put in the effort, and I feel they deserve to be rewarded.

 

[rightie]

i wouldnt - i have a better idea - that we just dont learn so much!! or dont do the exam.

 

[nwatts]

i wouldnt - i have a better idea - that we just dont learn so much!! or dont do the exam.

Ah, no. I don't think that's such a brilliant idea.

 

[heidi_kak]

easier just to do the bloody exam and not complain about it. it really isn't that difficult.

 

[nwatts]

easier just to do the bloody exam and not complain about it. it really isn't that difficult.

Have I said it was difficult?

All I'm saying is that I don't really think it's fair we learn so much when we aren't able to demonstrate to markers the extent of our depth of understanding.

 

[AsyLum]

I was chatting with a few of my esteemed English colleagues recently about the English Paper 2 exam, and the shear stupidity of its entire makeup.

We learn three modules of work over an entire year, in very significant detail, to then come to the HSC exam with only 40mins to express our knowledge and understanding into each module. I feel (and apparently, so do many others) that this is a pretty unfair practice. Students are expected to know a vast amount of information, and come HSC exam time, 70% of it will be thrown away in order to sustain a coherent response in 40mins.

I find it astounding at what a difference 20mins can make to an essay. In Extension 1 (as all E3U students would know), the essay is allocated 60mins, as is the creative task. I find this extra 20mins increases my ability to express and inform on a complex, detailed level that gets me the high marks.

So I'm planning on drafting a brief letter to the Board of Studies, suggesting that English Paper 2 be allocated 3 hours, and each essay be allocated 60mins. It would increase the markers' ability to differentiate between a very good response and a brilliant response; and would also allow students the opportunity of really showing what they've learnt and understood throughout each module.

I have the support of my English class. What do you guys think? A waste of time, or a solid idea? Even if the BOS do nothing, they'll still be aware that many believe the Paper 2 to be poorly organised. Perhaps come 07 when they revise the syllabus they'll alter it a little.

Any comments/questions?

Nick

Life's not fair, deal with it and welcome to reality.

 

[The_highwayman]

I was chatting with a few of my esteemed English colleagues recently about the English Paper 2 exam, and the shear stupidity of its entire makeup.

We learn three modules of work over an entire year, in very significant detail, to then come to the HSC exam with only 40mins to express our knowledge and understanding into each module. I feel (and apparently, so do many others) that this is a pretty unfair practice. Students are expected to know a vast amount of information, and come HSC exam time, 70% of it will be thrown away in order to sustain a coherent response in 40mins.

I find it astounding at what a difference 20mins can make to an essay. In Extension 1 (as all E3U students would know), the essay is allocated 60mins, as is the creative task. I find this extra 20mins increases my ability to express and inform on a complex, detailed level that gets me the high marks.

So I'm planning on drafting a brief letter to the Board of Studies, suggesting that English Paper 2 be allocated 3 hours, and each essay be allocated 60mins. It would increase the markers' ability to differentiate between a very good response and a brilliant response; and would also allow students the opportunity of really showing what they've learnt and understood throughout each module.

I have the support of my English class. What do you guys think? A waste of time, or a solid idea? Even if the BOS do nothing, they'll still be aware that many believe the Paper 2 to be poorly organised. Perhaps come 07 when they revise the syllabus they'll alter it a little.

Any comments/questions?

Nick

I agree with u, but remember, EVERYONE is in the same boat. Besides, do u honestly think we are all gunna remember our studies of english once we dont need it anymore? i dont know about u but i wouldnt care if i didnt notice camera angles again. The HSC is still just a ranking process. It is not the 'real world'. In the real world, you would look up the information, double check and spend a lot more than 40 mins on something u had to hand up. Good idea. Never gunna happen and nor should it.

 

[sunjet]

Well, obviously students are as there are people getting band 6's.

 

[AsyLum]

It is not the 'real world'. In the real world, you would look up the information, double check and spend a lot more than 40 mins on something u had to hand up. Good idea. Never gunna happen and nor should it.

Finish high school first, then come talk.

 

[The_highwayman]

Finish high school first, then come talk.

u mean, the real world isnt how i envisaged it? ahhhhh crap! i dont think i can hand the stress....*finds knife just in case*

 

[silvermoon]

Really bad idea. Firstly all hsc english students ( yes, even if you go back to the 80's) have had to write within a 40 min time-frame. If students every year have done this and done well, why shouldn't/couldn't you do so?

You state that you in ext. you " find this extra 20mins increases my ability to express and inform on a complex, detailed level that gets me the high marks". As does it for EVERY student in the state. What would be the advantage of increasing time? so everyone in the state does a little bit better? Can you imagine the media attention then? HSC gets even easier.

The whole idea of english is to adapt your knowledge and fit it to the question in a time or word limit so they can see you ability to be succinet, non verbose and complete a task within a time frame.



No offensive, but you are just another student to the board of studies. You have to deal with writing in 40 min.

i completely agree. an E3U student is expected to know their material in so much more depth that 60min to complete an essay or creative piece is considered equivalent to 40min for Paper 2. The ability to pick out the most important and relevant pieces of information and express these concisely and fully evaluated and synthesised is what differentiates a "good" student/response from a "brilliant" one. I can sympathise with the frustration you feel but you need to learn to stick to the time limit as you would need to stick to the word limit set in an essay or short paper.

 

[silvermoon]

easier just to do the bloody exam and not complain about it. it really isn't that difficult.

gotta luv the attitude of the post-HSCers. "we had to do it so so do you. shut up!" classic *huggles*

 

[nwatts]

If it was just my problem I wouldn't be here raising this issue. The top students of our school felt the same way.

I don't think you're all reading what i've written the right way. My issue is with the ratio of how much time we have for the essay to how much material is in each module. We learn such a vast amount of information, to only express a small part it. I agree, to get the top marks you need to sift through and sort out what is relevant to the question, effectively use your time, etc. etc.. But I'm not really worried about the marks (in this discussion). I just feel it's poorly organised, in the sense that the BOS set so much work, yet so little of it is tested.

 

[silvermoon]

no, we DO understand how you feel. trust me, the top students everywhere feel the same way. My whole year complained for months about it as we were having tremendous problems with our rankings. but in the end you just have to do it. Look at what you just wrote:

But I'm not really worried about the marks (in this discussion). I just feel it's poorly organised, in the sense that the BOS set so much work, yet so little of it is tested.

in a way, this DOES test your knowledge of the topic as you need to know everything in depth do you are prepared for whatever question or format they ask. Sure, someone could get lucky - know only one aspect of the topic and have that be asked - but that could happen in anything.