I am confused (4 Viewers)

[erm]

With Lear I hear the board is trying to shift the emphasis back to the original play and not worry too much about productions and readings. My bf rang up the advice-line and apparently it's not necessary to include these.

But i keep hearing contradictions. HELP?

Is this true?

And as an afterthought, how are you guys structuring your essays? I was thinking of structuring it according to themes.

 

[Just.Snaz]

bumping this thread cause I'm also uncertain..

 

[danz90]

wtf... most of my module b has revolved around the readings?

man the syllabus talks about shakespear's enduring text... its reception in a range of contexts... that is where the readings fit in.

gosh, if they say theyre shifting away from readings, ima go hunt BOS exam question writers myself.

 

[advanced sam]

hey its danoz direct!

seriously im screwed if there arent meant to be critical theories. mine is all about my interpretation, and then how they change via crit theories.

?????!!!

 

[danz90]

LOL @ danoz direct.

gosh i reckon this module is screwed all together. there are so many different opinions. my teacher keeps driving the message thru that readings are central to this module.. as the syllabus requires you explore how shakespeare's text has endured the ages yadda yadda... and gosh if readings (eg Eyre and Brook) aren't the way to go with that.. then IM SCREWED

my teacher even says to revolve your topic sentences of the response around the directorial representations.
but then when i go to analyse.. i provide a direct quote from the play.. analyse SHAKESPEARE's techniques... then i talk about the director's representation. and then go on to the other essential elements of the paragraph.

im calling up hsc advice line tomorrow to settle this shit lol

 

[erm]

Yeah the whole module is retarded.

Someone ring up too and confirm with me.

 

[SkimDawg]

I rang them up last week in relation to readings (for gwen harwood) and he said its such a insignificance that it is best not mentioning them at all. I'm not sure if this applies to king lear also?

 

[SOPHIE.]

I rang them up last week in relation to readings (for gwen harwood) and he said its such a insignificance that it is best not mentioning them at all. I'm not sure if this applies to king lear also?

you're joking.

that's pretty much all we've learnt.

 

[m.ish]

This was taken from the syllabus for Module B: Critical Study of Texts:

...The syllabus does not require students to engage with particular critical theories in order to generate possible ‘readings’ of the text. Exposure to specific critical theories, such as feminist theory, postcolonial theory or New Historicism, is not a requirement of the English Stage 6 Syllabus in any of the compulsory English courses and modules. A focus on ‘readings’ of a text without a student’s personal engagement with and understanding of the text does not constitute a critical study of text, as required by this module.


i hope that clears up some confusion

 

[janaranaran!]

seriously though, if the whole state is this confused, the board of studies is obviously doing something wrong in its communication

 

[erm]

This was taken from the syllabus for Module B: Critical Study of Texts:

...The syllabus does not require students to engage with particular critical theories in order to generate possible ‘readings’ of the text. Exposure to specific critical theories, such as feminist theory, postcolonial theory or New Historicism, is not a requirement of the English Stage 6 Syllabus in any of the compulsory English courses and modules. A focus on ‘readings’ of a text without a student’s personal engagement with and understanding of the text does not constitute a critical study of text, as required by this module.


i hope that clears up some confusion

hi thanks a lot....could you please link me to the document? (i can't seem to find it in the syllabus document)

edit: not to worry, found it

 

[SOPHIE.]

seriously though, if the whole state is this confused, the board of studies is obviously doing something wrong in its communication

exactly. i have two different teachers telling me two utterly conflicting things at this point. here comes the influx of confusion.

but seriously, about an entire effing module?

 

[erm]

it's like they changed the syllabus secretly without telling anyone.

 

[erm]

has already been discussed, to some extent, here:

http://community.boredofstudies.org/showthread.php?t=69234&page=5

 

[eddy11]

a teacher at my school who's a senior marker said its all about your own personal interpretation, he told this to the entire advanced cohort. he also said the examiner this year is pretty straightforward and wont ask anything surprising, although by the sound of things with all the mixed messages going round it sounds like many people will be surprised. As far as i know, different productions are pretty old school and not required

 

[axlenatore]

Meh fuck this thread you are scaring everyone, look for module B you have to show a different contexts result in different readings, and you have to show how your context doesnt result in your getting the readings other people get, ie you wont see a Freudian ready. You have to show what your context result in your reading the poems as as well, ive always done this, its always been marked like this, its all thats been taught, and thats what im doing, just do what youve been taught dont try write about something else.

The past few questions ask about enduring power etc how can you talk about that without showing how different contexts result in different meanings its essential imo

 

[erm]

Meh fuck this thread you are scaring everyone, look for module B you have to show a different contexts result in different readings, and you have to show how your context doesnt result in your getting the readings other people get, ie you wont see a Freudian ready. You have to show what your context result in your reading the poems as as well, ive always done this, its always been marked like this, its all thats been taught, and thats what im doing, just do what youve been taught dont try write about something else.

The past few questions ask about enduring power etc how can you talk about that without showing how different contexts result in different meanings its essential imo

they have too (which was what spawned my confusion).........keep in mind that syllabus update is pretty new (and didn't apply to last year) so I understand how looking at past questions may confuse you.

 

[tau281290]

What the f......

Why is there no KL Sample response in the syllabus document when it is the most popular text?
http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/syllabus_hsc/pdf_doc/english-adv-support-module-b.pdf

anyone got a sample response for KL in 2006 or 07?

edit: seriously wtf, even standard packages for 2007 don't have KL....omg

http://arc.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/standards-packs/SP07_15140/go/2007/english-advanced/q4c-winton-cloudstreet/exam-question/index.html

 

[axlenatore]

they have too (which was what spawned my confusion).........keep in mind that syllabus update is pretty new (and didn't apply to last year) so I understand how looking at past questions may confuse you.

Not just looking at past questions, looking at my assesment for module B and trial questions but related to the enduring power so

OP is probably making this up to confuse a lot of people to make them write something which they havent been taught

 

[erm]

Not just looking at past questions, looking at my assesment for module B and trial questions but related to the enduring power so

OP is probably making this up to confuse a lot of people to make them write something which they havent been taught

how about you read the module document before jumping to conclusions?

I think you're just in denial because you don't want to have to change your essay plan/structure