[English] Reframing the English study design?

[Reynolds, Gail G]

Janny I was not at the Assessors meeting so I am not quite clear, was that three paragraphs on the visuals? I didn't mark last year's paper, but have marked for fifteen or so years prior to that. The instructions on the paper (as I am sure you know) require students to analyse written and visual language.  Saying how much (or little) they should write really depends on the paper and the way the individual student approaches it.  
 
As with every year there was the unexpected, in 2010 there were two quite separate graphics (the heading plus the other one)  I can see that three paragraphs would probably have been excessive, especially if done at the expense of dealing with the passage,  BUT I  think there is a real danger in quantifying length when the demand of the task is to analyse. Advice not to spend a long time on the graphics in isolation from the text seems like good advice, but a blanket do not spend long on the visual material seems less useful.  Good students can weave the graphics into their analysis comparing and contrasting the way the graphics augment the message of the written word and exploring the difference in impact of the visuals and the written material. (A possible approach not a mandatory one!!!)
 
I confess that I am also worried by any advice that offers a formula for the opening paragraph.  My experience suggests that there are many many successful ways to frame the analysis, from no introduction at all (which I personally prefer to the formulaic waffle)  through to the framing of the background before beginning the analysis itself. We have always been trained to accept the value of the various methods, looking to reward what is there, not penalise what is not. Long experience, and my knowledge of the executive, mean that I do not believe that advice has changed!  
 
I am one who will speak out if I believe there is cause for concern, but in this case I think the message you have taken away from the Meet the Assessors is the result of one person's expression of their observations and understanding of the process.  Remember that all papers are marked by a minimum of 6 Assessors all of whom have undertaken specific and very effective training in order to mark the paper accurately.  Subverting (reframing) the Design is unlikely in the culture of lively discussion which is a necessary to achieve the consensus marking English demands. There are a lot of strong voices and sound knowledge of the Design in a room full of 250 or more assessors.
 
Gail

________________________________

From: english-bounces at edulists.com.au on behalf of mccurryj at netspace.net.au
Sent: Tue 15/02/2011 7:40 AM
To: 'VCE English Teachers' Mailing List'
Subject: [English] Reframing the English study design?



Presenters at VATE's Meet the Assessor's evening offered valuable insights into
the ways that students responded to the 2010 English exam and included 
practical advice about how we teachers might understand the various tasks and
support our students as they learn how to do them effectively with an eye on
performing well in the end of year exam.

However, I was a bit surprised that some of the advice was s so definitive
about the form a language analysis response should take.

For instance, apart from comments about what should appear in the first
paragraph, it was suggested, I think, that students should be advised not to
write at length on visual components within a text and that three paragraphs
were certainly too many. Perhaps this was clearly the case in relation to the
2010 Section C material and the range of student responses that were seen by
assessors. However, I wonder if it was the case for the 2008 exam where the
cartoon showing the asinine parent had quite a bit going on in it, much of
which picked up points made in the verbal text. And will it be the case for the
particular visual elements of the text chosen by the Exam setting panel for
2011? And, anyway, how long is a paragraph?

Taking into account what I think I heard, along with the way the 2010
Examiner's report distinguishes between the 'visual' and 'the passage', I
wonder if there is a danger that assessors are reframing the intention of the
study design in relation to visual language. I had assumed that students need
to be attentive to the details of design apparent in both visual and verbal
text and that accounting for the persuasive intention of these design choices,
shaped as they are by the context of the text, was what was at issue in the
task.

Janny McCurry




------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent from Netspace Webmail: http://www.netspace.net.au <http://www.netspace.net.au/> 

_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au <http://www.edulists.com.au/>  - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
VCE English Teachers' Mailing List kindly supported by
http://www.vate.org.au <http://www.vate.org.au/>  - Victorian Association for the Teaching of English VATE and
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/studies/english/index.html - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority



Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening or using attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender, and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 7298 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/english/attachments/20110215/b73c4b73/attachment.bin