Is english pointless? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Gangels
- Start date
ElendilPeredhil
Member
Personally, if Maths was compulsory I would get a crap U.A.I I wouldn't fail because I'm good at other things but it would really stuff me around, and face it, Maths is useless to many people. Anyone who doesn't want Maths to be compulsory is obviously aiming at the humanities, where Yr10 maths will suffice. I’m doing General Maths, and it is logical, and useful (calculating superannuation, loans and annuities), so maybe just General Maths should be compulsory and anyone who wants to can go higher.
I know English is somewhat abstract, but if we went back to learning basic rules of grammar and sentence structure, many people would be very bored, and then it would be pointless, because that basic stuff should already be in a students head.
I don’t think anyone should be allowed into year 11&12 without a competent grasp of English, i.e. passing a spelling, grammar and punctuation test.
I know English is somewhat abstract, but if we went back to learning basic rules of grammar and sentence structure, many people would be very bored, and then it would be pointless, because that basic stuff should already be in a students head.
I don’t think anyone should be allowed into year 11&12 without a competent grasp of English, i.e. passing a spelling, grammar and punctuation test.
The_highwayman
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2004
- Messages
- 4,317
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2005
nobody cares how long u have been a member here.sam04u said:
Back on topic:
I've posted here before and my answer remains the same. English is a necessary and enjoyable part (if u allow it to be) of the HSC. Some of my fondest memories of school come from the english classroom, as opposed to maths which bored me to tears.
English is important to everyday life in ways that maths isnt. Everyone in this country has some need for english (and before u start saying "but they dont need to know how to analyse 'crap'"), i dont mean purely being able to speak the language. Every occupations requires u, at some point to be able to communicate your ideas in a logical written or oral manner. As such, one needs HSC english to adjust their approach to, experiment with and master communications using english which they should have been introduced to in the earlier years of their schooling.
English also encourages thought processes arguably unlike any other subject.
Maths is undeniably important to the functioning of today's society. However, HSC maths does not need to be compulsory since it lacks the potential to be applied to all occupations at any one time. I dont deny that we will all have to use some maths in order to survive in this world, however, HSC maths does not, in my opinion, have as much relevance to everyday life as hsc english.
u can argue against me if u like (debate, if you will [and thus support my point]) but i doubt i'll reply.
Harry Flashman
Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2006
- Messages
- 141
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2006
English is saying in 150 words what could be covered in five, it is intellectual masturbation of the worst order.
ang3licjuliet
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2006
- Messages
- 7
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2006
yea i know what u mean: but hey isnt the english language all about perfecting our art of babbling? a friend of mine came to that conclusion after helping me with my english ass (aka assignment coz its such a pain in the ass)Gangels said:
but i think that there are many things to consider: like although it seems like society's becoming dumber by the day, its really because of the impact of technology
but really there are some people other there that are really bright and intelligent and the main factor that is "dumbing" us down is tehcnology and our leisurely approach to things
so i think that if u want to be "smart" get off the tv, internet, etc and starting reading books, play sport, join organisations, etc
Gangels said:
Your reply is just filled with irony, are you a comic writer? 'basic grammar'? as in not using a colloquial verb ("fuckin") as an adjective? And then of course, the rest of your short rant is filled with pointless and annoying swearing(about 50%). Don't swear in your arguments, instead of giving your sentences emphasis as your probably intended, it paints you as a dumb, shallow indervidual.
At the first point you preach the sorrows of the total bastardisation of the english language, and then complain about reading shakespeare. Many would call shakespeare the epitome of the correct use of the english language.
I do have to agree that the language has only become more colloquial as time has passed, but I think this because, unlike many languages, it has a huge number of second-language speakers who incorporate their own language styles when speaking english. I personally live in singapore, and go to the Australian school there, and you should hear the singaporeans speak english! (for those of you that dont know, singapore was a colony of the british, so a huge portion of the population speak english) They call it singlish, and it is so different from english that i sometimes have to ask several times for them to repeat themselves. But does this mean the language has lost any of its complexity, its worth? Indeed singaporeans are able to carry out fully intellectual conversations in their own invented english.
But I still think it is important to analyse shakespeare as it is important to understand the roots of modern english litrature, indeed it cannot be said that shakespeare has not had a huge influence in this area, as he is possibly the best known english writer in the world.
The HSC English (Advanced) course, in my opinion, is a more of a literature-based course rather than a language-based course. Obviously, those who appreciate the world of literature would enjoy the course more than others with critical and analytical thinking involved.
Whilst in any text we analyse the features of the language being used and how these convey meaning, a primary focus in the HSC English (Advanced) course is the way social, historical, cultural and/or political contexts can shape the way meaning is depicted in a text. The reason that this course has little emphasis on language effectiveness is probably because students are expected to have exhibited mastery the english language to at least a satisfactory extent by the time they have completed their School Certificate (though this is not true for many cases).
However, the English (Standard) course has more emphasis on language effectiveness than the English (Advanced) course probably because students in the English (Standard) course may need more work on how to improve their language skills. Therefore, the many complaints about the jargon riddled English (Advanced) course [which even many teachers complain about, as indicated by a detailed support document found under the online syllabus] by many people could perhaps be a case of the wrong course of choice. If you prefer to study language effectiveness, then perhaps English (Standard) would be more suitable for you. However, if you prefer to study literature in various contexts, then perhaps English (Advanced) would be suitable for you.
The english language is not static, it develops over time. The high frequency of colloquial and next to vulgar language is likely to be a result of youth expansion and freedom as well as (of course) the power of media. It can be said that older generations are trying to keep the value of the older and more formal form of the english language alive and by the time you age, chances are that you'll do the same. The HSC English course (surprise...surprise the BOS is run by older people!...lol) can be said to also try to encourage the preservation in the value of the old english language before the next generation drives it to extinction. Therefore, we are encouraged to appreciate this form of language and preservation of this old english language is the most likely purpose of having compulsory study of Shakespearean plays. Obviously, due to the way that we are shaped by a modern context, this study may prove to be pointless and tedious to some since it does not correspond to our common modern language.
On a side note, something that I had found out recently:
Unfortunately there is an assumption made in this course when it was developed, which I think is a flaw for both English (Advanced) and English (Standard). One aspect of the course which is supposedly an effective way for students to "enjoy" the course is the aspect of related material. The course assumes that all students are reading widely and have had exposure to many texts under various concepts relating to each module. It is believed that students will find the course more enjoyable with flexible access to various related materials which they supposedly enjoy to help them in the understanding the concepts in the course. The incorporation of prescribed texts and related material is believed to be an effective way of managing the course.
Although this ideal appears to be an effective mechanism of the course, in reality a large number of students do NOT read widely or take part in literature actively. Most students often spend more time enjoying the advances of technology and entertainment rather than read widely. I'm sure many would rather be blown away by physical sound effects of a concert or movie than picture it in your imagination. Arguably, it may encourage students to take part in literature in search of appropriate support material in order to meet the requirements of the course, but it is often obvious that once students have found their related material, chances are that many of them do not look any further and do not dig deeper into the wide world of literature.
Whilst in any text we analyse the features of the language being used and how these convey meaning, a primary focus in the HSC English (Advanced) course is the way social, historical, cultural and/or political contexts can shape the way meaning is depicted in a text. The reason that this course has little emphasis on language effectiveness is probably because students are expected to have exhibited mastery the english language to at least a satisfactory extent by the time they have completed their School Certificate (though this is not true for many cases).
However, the English (Standard) course has more emphasis on language effectiveness than the English (Advanced) course probably because students in the English (Standard) course may need more work on how to improve their language skills. Therefore, the many complaints about the jargon riddled English (Advanced) course [which even many teachers complain about, as indicated by a detailed support document found under the online syllabus] by many people could perhaps be a case of the wrong course of choice. If you prefer to study language effectiveness, then perhaps English (Standard) would be more suitable for you. However, if you prefer to study literature in various contexts, then perhaps English (Advanced) would be suitable for you.
The english language is not static, it develops over time. The high frequency of colloquial and next to vulgar language is likely to be a result of youth expansion and freedom as well as (of course) the power of media. It can be said that older generations are trying to keep the value of the older and more formal form of the english language alive and by the time you age, chances are that you'll do the same. The HSC English course (surprise...surprise the BOS is run by older people!...lol) can be said to also try to encourage the preservation in the value of the old english language before the next generation drives it to extinction. Therefore, we are encouraged to appreciate this form of language and preservation of this old english language is the most likely purpose of having compulsory study of Shakespearean plays. Obviously, due to the way that we are shaped by a modern context, this study may prove to be pointless and tedious to some since it does not correspond to our common modern language.
On a side note, something that I had found out recently:
Unfortunately there is an assumption made in this course when it was developed, which I think is a flaw for both English (Advanced) and English (Standard). One aspect of the course which is supposedly an effective way for students to "enjoy" the course is the aspect of related material. The course assumes that all students are reading widely and have had exposure to many texts under various concepts relating to each module. It is believed that students will find the course more enjoyable with flexible access to various related materials which they supposedly enjoy to help them in the understanding the concepts in the course. The incorporation of prescribed texts and related material is believed to be an effective way of managing the course.
Although this ideal appears to be an effective mechanism of the course, in reality a large number of students do NOT read widely or take part in literature actively. Most students often spend more time enjoying the advances of technology and entertainment rather than read widely. I'm sure many would rather be blown away by physical sound effects of a concert or movie than picture it in your imagination. Arguably, it may encourage students to take part in literature in search of appropriate support material in order to meet the requirements of the course, but it is often obvious that once students have found their related material, chances are that many of them do not look any further and do not dig deeper into the wide world of literature.
P_Dilemma
Extraordinary Entertainer
"If the HSC english system is pointless, what are you gonna do about it? Cry? Haha"
..
Well, i believe that some teachers share the POV that the english syllabus today is crudded big-time. The only reason they follow the syllabus is that their paycheck depends on it.
Keep in mind i said SOME. Other teachers will fight to the death to defend this current system. There are students from all around, selective schools, private, whatever, who are scoring high, but many more that are not. Their response? "It's not my problem".
They will defend the system to the death to protect what little success they've accumulated. They are blind. They cannot see that those who score high do so not because of higher intelligence and creative thinking, but because of their ability to absorb bulls***, regurgitate it, and repeat.
Fundamentally, yes, it is simple. But because it goes against our (well, most of our) very basic instincts and beliefs, most still do not score high. I find it absolutely insane that i am implicitly being asked, no, taught, to become a human photocopying machine, with moderate spell-check/grammata "software" substituting our knowledge.
I think, therefore i fail.
..
...most of you may think i'm cooking up an excuse for my bad results in english exams. :mad1: Still, consider this warning: "Do what they tell you, but think for yourself"
I still haven't grasped the former...
..
Well, i believe that some teachers share the POV that the english syllabus today is crudded big-time. The only reason they follow the syllabus is that their paycheck depends on it.
Keep in mind i said SOME. Other teachers will fight to the death to defend this current system. There are students from all around, selective schools, private, whatever, who are scoring high, but many more that are not. Their response? "It's not my problem".
They will defend the system to the death to protect what little success they've accumulated. They are blind. They cannot see that those who score high do so not because of higher intelligence and creative thinking, but because of their ability to absorb bulls***, regurgitate it, and repeat.
Fundamentally, yes, it is simple. But because it goes against our (well, most of our) very basic instincts and beliefs, most still do not score high. I find it absolutely insane that i am implicitly being asked, no, taught, to become a human photocopying machine, with moderate spell-check/grammata "software" substituting our knowledge.
I think, therefore i fail.
..
...most of you may think i'm cooking up an excuse for my bad results in english exams. :mad1: Still, consider this warning: "Do what they tell you, but think for yourself"
I still haven't grasped the former...