Advanced is compulsory?mjgeneral said:Well, in my school adv. english is compulsory
Selective?watatank said:yeah, a few schools are like that. my old one for one.
Like memjgeneral said:Well one main point i think raised b4, is that, is to prevent the further domination of fobs, which is true to an extent. The majority of students wont need to analyse texts in the future. So...answer this for me: Is it fair for a student to have his UAI pulled down because he could not decrypt shakespearian literature or poetry?? And we assume that he has fluent speaking skills and knows how to write essays.
Yes, I think so. We ought to be able to expect a certain level of literacy in tertiary students, and isn't that what a UAI is for?mjgeneral said:Well one main point i think raised b4, is that, is to prevent the further domination of fobs, which is true to an extent. The majority of students wont need to analyse texts in the future. So...answer this for me: Is it fair for a student to have his UAI pulled down because he could not decrypt shakespearian literature or poetry?? And we assume that he has fluent speaking skills and knows how to write essays.
It's not that hard though, especially if you have a good teacher.mjgeneral said:Note how i said: he can speak fluently and can write essays. I think that passes the certain level of literacy. If u raise the standards where u MUST decrypt shakespeare and poetry, then system is a failure (more than it already is, i hope the next head of the BOS has the sense to make educational reforms). A UAI is for determining ur intelligence, it doesnt exactly test the student if they know what a metaphor is.
Yes I was able to comprehend your post. I have to wonder what it is this hypothetical fellow writes essays about, though. I should make clear what I mean by literacy. In kindergarten, literacy is being able to recognise individual letters, eg. this is an "a". Then we move on to words, which have meanings. Then we move on to sentences, which give us the opportunity to communicate more meaning than individual words. Fast forward 10 years, is it not reasonable that there's a difference in the level of meaning we extract from texts in Year 10 and the level of meaning we extract from texts in Year 12?mjgeneral said:Note how i said: he can speak fluently and can write essays. I think that passes the certain level of literacy. If u raise the standards where u MUST decrypt shakespeare and poetry, then system is a failure (more than it already is, i hope the next head of the BOS has the sense to make educational reforms). A UAI is for determining ur intelligence, it doesnt exactly test the student if they know what a metaphor is.
That's a fairly grim view of education. I think those that study for understanding will generally perform better than those who only aim for memorisation.Tulipa said:UAI is the result of your stamina in relation to a number of subjects that require rote memorisation instead of actual learning.
yeah selective school.Tulipa said:Selective?
EDIT: Ah, interesting situation.
It depends on the person. It's a grim view of the UAI system but it's not a system that really encourages learning. I learnt concepts and ideals and didn't fare as well as the memorisation kiddies in the end even if I did beat them at things that required creative thinking throughout the year.Captain Gh3y said:That's a fairly grim view of education. I think those that study for understanding will generally perform better than those who only aim for memorisation.
Hmm... so why is there a HSC Advanced english module that is specifically titled "Comparitive study of Text and Context"? pretty sure context is somewhere in there...S1M0 said:The current English course requires nothing more than to state language/visual features and to relate them to examples in whatever text you happen to be studying.
Boring.
Extension English on the other hand, requires you to analyse the hidden meaning behind the text, and the context to which the text was written in.
Which isn't boring.