I am a retard (1 Viewer)

[sandersen]

I read the question carefully as has been impressed on me.

So how the FUCK did I manage to miss that they were specifically asking about the CHARACTER King Lear???????????????????????????????????????????????

I read the question without realising that the 'King Lear' at the end of a sentence was the character and not the play in my panic.

I wrote about Cordelia and her relationship with her father instead...

Did anyone else not realise?

What happens? Do i just get band 1?

Edit: Haha they changed it from fucktard to retard in the title lol

 

[Jago]

I'd hate to tell you this, but if you didn't answer the question asked chances are you're not going to do well.

Pray you get band 2.

 

[The_highwayman]

you cant change it now. chin up, hope for the best and learn from the mistake by making sure u do actually read the questions exactly in your other tests.

there's no point stressing about it now. god knows you have more pressing things to occupy your time.

best of luck.

 

[johnspoon]

I'd hate to tell you this, but if you didn't answer the question asked chances are you're not going to do well.

Pray you get band 2.

I hate to tell you this, but there seems to be something on your forehead *points*

*Wham*

P.S. Don't feel bad, dude, it's not the end of the world.

 

[B35tY]

Yeah that was a bitch of a question, because apart from the fact that it wasn't italicised, you COULDN"T TELL that they wanted the character of Lear and weren't talking about the play.

In the other texts, the character has a different name to the name of the fucking text, but KL was really ambiguous. They should've spelled it out, or just called him Lear.

DW mate i'm sure heaps of people did it too, i didn't realise until i read it for the third or fourth time.

 

[Ennaybur]

well if you write about lear's rship with his daughter then u get some marks... kinda

 

[bananasmoothy]

Hey, lots of people did the same.

... ok, so I only know of one, but I'm sure heaps others did too. I looked at some sample "high-range" essays from 2004 and, when the question said "mention TWO extracts" or something, they didn't mention any. If your content it GOOD (but it has to be really really good) then you'll be fine. Don't stress.

 

[*Ninny-mole*]

I didn't know what the question really meant so I talked about how the character Lear can be represented in different ways and my response to that. If that's wrong then who gives a shit? I'm sick of English and so glad that it's over forever (well, except for extension english...)

 

[sandersen]

Nah Ninny your response was right... I think. That's along the lines of what I would have written, had I realised...

and bananasmoothy the problem was that it was the last essay I wrote and I spent too much time on the other two... content wasn't spectacular and I only managed 4 pages due to lack of time... so I'm thinking band 1 is seriously possible. I didn't think I was going to go particularly well in Lear anyway

Whatever I'm thinking big picture now anyway. Yes it sucks yes I'm stupid but at least I've realised now -- it could have been worse when I got my marks and didnt realise i screwed this module up...

I am not a number. UAI is not measure of success or self worth.

Just angry with myself. Pity it had to happen in the exam that has to count

 

[sam l]

don't worry, alot of people misinterpreted the question. Markers will come across it alot i think... It was poorly worded and very ambiguous plus i think it was too abstract. All the questions were so specific, that no matter how well i prepared i couldn't answer the questions to the best of my abilities. Especially under the time limit, it took me 10 reads of the question and i still didn't get it. Maybe i'm just dumb but i prefer to believe everyone else did the same thing i did... it's a definite fail for me, 3.5 pages of utter crap with no relevance to Lear's enduring power. But wtf is Lear's enduring power anyway???

Of all the great, wonderful, broad questions that they could give us, questions where we could actually show the extent of our "critical analysis" and how well we knew a variety of different readings, etc. The question offered no scope to write alot, well at least that's what i found with the time restraints.

It was a cruel paper that aimed to trick and throw us. It was not testing one whole years worth of studying a topic but rather some abscure aspect of the text. I mean with King Lear, the question really was quite simple. But the way that was expressed made half my grade completely freak out for a start, and then they go and talk about lear's enduring power. If there's a simple way of asking something why didn't they???

OK, maybe i could do that essay at home in like 2 days but not in 40 mins....

i feel severely ripped off

 

[jackal8]

stop fooling yourselves.. by not answering the question it looks like you have simply regurgitated a response with no insight to the question.

i say b4 MAXIMUM with an academy award winning performance i.e. content, otherwise your looking at b2

i suggest refraining from life

 

[mr_brightside]

lol fail.

 

[pzella]

hey dont worry, my teachers keep telling me to stuff the question - its THE RUBRIC you worry about. As long as you answer the rubirc you'll be ok. you'll prob lose a mark for not answering the question but it wont be mean u automatically will get a 2/10.

my teacher that told me this actually is on the senior marking board, and he said it'll be interesting to see how it comes across with the way they worded the question.

here's an example of what i meant by rubric - my teacher told me this story about a kid who ignored the question but followed the rubric perfectly one year - he got a 12/15 - i wouldnt complain with that mark.

 

[jackal8]

my teachers keep telling me to stuff the question

...

B2

 

[ritathecool]

yeah, i dunno. this year's hsc sux so far. i thought the question meant: "how has the universal nature of the play, shaped your reading". i just talked about how the play dealt with universal themes , and thus , my reading was shaped by the 'enduring power' of the play, and hte characterisation of Lear.

does that sound okay? im so freaked out abt this whole thing....

 

[zeek]

if u mentioned power struggle and related this to Lear you should be able to get some marks.
the rubric also required you to talk about context and the only way i think you could have talked about that is if you went into interpretations and the portrayal of lear in those interpretations.

 

[sandersen]

I didn't talk about the other interpretations of Lear, but Cordelia.
I didn't talk about Lear at all except for mentioning his name as he was Cordelia's father in the context of father daughter relationships... There was no power and struggle in my answer

 

[needmoreninjas]

so....the question was asking about the character OF King Lear....well y didnt they bloody say so!?

markers gonna read our answers n say "HEY! THEYRE NOT ANSWERING THE FRICKEN QUESTION!" then we all get screwed over....but this means we get a low average right? which means they must scale it up right? coz our uai is just an indication of our goddam rankings against the state right?

SO STFU 2 ALL U WHO R CRAPPIN UR PANTS OVER THAT PAPER!

 

[rdudash]

well mr. ninja man i think we all hav a right to b scared b cos of all those Victor Virski's and Andrew Barclay's in this world!

I hate them, I hate them ALL!!!

.....

I cry my self to sleep a lot...sum1 hold me....

 

[OhFourOhOne]

Ah well. It's gotta be better then what I did. The questions was sinking, so I just went 'whatever' and shoved everything in from context to different productions and there representation of Lear to my own suggestions for production and then linked it back to characterisation and King Lear at the end.

It was really bad I think.

Oh well. It's over. Never mind. Not anymore, anyway.