Level Three Essay Exemplars

Don’t forget to check out the Level Three exemplars before our next class. You can find all types of important information on the Resources for English page.

Unfamiliar Texts Tips

I know some of you are starting to get a bit twitchy about the fast approaching exams and need a little bit of reassurance. In this post I will go over the basics of Achievement Standard 90724 (Unfamiliar Texts).

You will answer questions based on two written texts ‑ one prose and one poetry. Questions will be set on each text and there will also be questions involving the comparison of both texts.

You will be given a resource booklet with all texts to be read and a separate question and an answer booklet with lines for you to write on.

I suggest that you spend at least 40 minutes on completing this standard. You could spend 20 minutes reading and answering each text.

As you know questions in this standard no longer have separate parts. The questions are specific enough to apply to the text, but wide enough to enable all students to attempt a response while better students can reach for Excellence. You are not required to write essay responses in this standard. You do need to have a “toolbox” of well-understood language terms. This applies to the specifics of language, grammar, style etc, as well as to understanding the wording of the questions. Terms such as “identify”, “discuss”, “compare” also need to be understood.

Key skills you need to achieve in this standard are:

• ability to read and understand the texts
• ability to identify/label language techniques/features of style
• ability to link language techniques/features of style to effect
• ability to support the above with appropriate references to and/or quotations from the text
• ability to make connections within a text on a literal level
• ability to identify and discuss pivotal points or shifts in tone.

To achieve well in this standard you must be able to:

• write in-depth answers, and provide examples which are then analysed and explained
• identify clearly elements of style/language techniques and explain their effect
• write in an integrated style, providing an holistic understanding of the text (perhaps using embedded quotes) rather than discussing techniques/meanings in isolation
• show an awareness of connections between ideas in the text, commenting on patterns, contrasts etc
• show an awareness of author’s purpose
• show an awareness of how language works
• analyse rather than describe
• identify and discuss clearly elements of style and explain their effect

• identify and discuss clearly changes in tone and explain the effect
• make perceptive links between language features/style and the author’s purpose
• show an understanding of comparing/contrasting
• read confidently for inference, commenting confidently on connotative as well as denotative meanings
• have a fluent writing style
• respond in a personal way and show evidence of intelligent, original thought
• discuss reader response
• evaluate texts effectively.

So no problems there …

Last minute tips

Here are some last minute tips on how to succeed in the Scholarship exam.

Make sure that you explicitly aware of examination requirements, especially the requirement to write coherent essays of a minimum of 800 words. Read through your Scholarship Handbook for a fuller explanation. To succeed in the Scholarship exam you need to possess critical and evaluative skills to a high level. Those with facility and skill in using the English language generally perform well; they possess clever and original ways of expressing themselves – often with wit and humour – and show thinking about their texts, about literary theory and reader response. They present their own ideas about the world they live in, its relationship to the past and how the present transcends that past, and how modern media and literary texts can engage / provoke / challenge / enthuse. The best candidates invariably produce legible scripts allowing markers to focus on the response.

According to the 2006 Examiners Report the best performing candidates in Scholarship English most commonly demonstrated the following skills and / or knowledge:

• the ability to write engaging structured essays with strong introductions and conclusions which often left the reader with something to think about
• the ability to use and control the conventions of academic writing to high levels
• the ability to pace their work across the whole paper, dealing well with close analysis in Section A, familiar genre work in Section B, and the demanding reconfiguration of texts to support an integrated topic-driven discussion in Section C
• the ability to make judicious question choices and follow the directions given
• the ability to analyse texts and the ways in which they are crafted
• the ability to “think on their feet”
• the ability to demonstrate critical knowledge and evident enjoyment of a wide range of texts.

In Section A the best candidates demonstrated:

• the ability to deal with both content and crafting in a balanced discussion
• the ability to take on unfamiliar passages with perceptive analysis that illustrates without resorting to paraphrase, and which works towards synthesised appraisals of the writers’ works
• the ability to achieve an overview of both texts through the comparison of general effects and implications for a reader, and in the process to isolate similarities and differences
• an ability to apply their knowledge of techniques in a relevant and productive way to draw out the crafting or ideas of the writers.

In Section B the best candidates demonstrated:

• the ability to balance both general and particular responses to their studied texts
• the ability to extract from questions and quotations the focus of the required argument
• the ability to reconsider, rework, and even re-fresh learned materials and familiar texts in the light of the questions so that materials are brought to support the questions as asked
• the display of considerable knowledge of texts and an ability to draw on references from texts in judicious and succinct ways.

In Section C the best candidates demonstrated:

• the ability to combine breadth and depth in their discussion so that enough detail of the text/s chosen is included to support their understandings, and also to provide evidence of being able to move across texts and genres to make comparisons
• the ability to choose relevant and appropriate texts for reference and discussion
• an understanding of how language works and writer’s purpose
• the ability to argue convincingly.

Candidates who did NOT achieve scholarship lacked some or all of the skills and knowledge above and in addition they:

In general:

• lacked the ability to pace themselves across the whole paper, spending too much time on A and C
• too often failed to respond to the actual topic / question and redirected materials to pre-worked arguments and essays
• did not show breadth and depth in synthesising comments
• did not develop a consistent thesis or evaluative response, choosing instead to “dump information” about their texts in an uncritical response to the question
• failed to demonstrate independent thinking and resorted to description when argument was required

In Section A:

• focused too much on spotting effects and their absence rather than considering the general ideas of both passages
• were not comfortable with unfamiliar texts and resorted to paraphrased commentaries rather than integrated analysis
• were unable to develop and structure a coherent discussion when dealing with reference and close analysis rather than recollected knowledge
• did not compare the two passages, making points uncritically in a linear way, and could provide only literal details from the texts

In Section B:

• pieced together passages of pre-worked materials rather than adapting / responding to the given question
• did not consider the actual wording of the question closely enough
• wrote poorly

In Section C:

• reproduced their “universal / timeless” ideas approach regardless of the actual question asked
• did not keep an argument central, thereby delivering to markers “a pile of bricks with no connecting mortar”.

Stuck

Why the video?

Well, it made me think of some of you. I have just marked the exams and it is not good news for a minority of students. I believe it is time for some of you to start drawing on your own resources. You are stuck! You didn’t study and seem to be hoping for some sort of divine intervention to get you through the NCEA exams. Wake up!  It isn’t going to happen! You need to have a wee think, as the time has come for you to put some serious time into revision!

It is not all doom and gloom though – I am absolutely thrilled with the quality of many of your papers. I congratulate those of you who put real time and effort into preparing for the exams. It has really paid off.

I will see you on Monday, when all will be revealed!

Rote-learning Essays

I know many students memorise essays to use in their exams. This is not a good idea as excessive reliance on memorisation, or perhaps memorising the wrong things, can lead you astray in NCEA English where flexibility, unpredictability, and critical thinking are highly rewarded. The English exams are written in such a way that if you use a prepared essay it is likely to be obvious and you will be marked down.

So what is the answer?

1. Develop efficient question analysis.

 You need to know exactly what the question is asking you to do. There is some great advice on how to do that on the University of Worchester site. It is really important to understand the requirements of the question so that you can write an essay with relevance to the question. If you memorise answers beforehand this tends to cut you out of this vital first step.

2. Work on writing relevant answers.

Use lots of questions for practice. You may get them from past papers, your teachers, or even make up your own. When you are sure exactly what a particular question requires, go through your notes, your texts, any material that you may have memorised and decide what main points will be needed to answer this question and no other. Jot down those points. Think about any quotes, examples, and elaborations that you might use in developing each point. The next step is to write an introduction in the register and style appropriate to the task. Then skip the body of the essay and write a conclusion. This exercise can be done in five or ten minutes, and frequently done with many different questions makes your work very adaptable. Make sure that you do lots of these. Another technique is to write the full essay, not worrying about time, but just trying to get the ideas sequenced correctly. Then put it away, and take it out again a few days later. Now look at your answer again and decide what needs to be changed. You could also write the full essay in 40 or 50 minutes (For Levels Two and Three) to simulate exam conditions. This is important as timing is often part of the problem, and the more automatic it becomes the better.

3. So what about memorisation?

Of course it is a very useful skill to possess. Just be careful what you choose to memorise. Useful things might include:

•  Quotations from the text you are studying, related texts, or critics. Always acknowledge them when you use them, and never use them just because you know them. There has to be a reason to use them.
•  Basic facts that could prove useful. Again, never use them unless they really are relevant to the question.
•  Some carefully crafted passages of your own, argument or exposition for example, may be useful but there is a big danger. Anything you use has to fit neatly into the style and content of the answer you are writing.

Remember, you learn to write by writing, you improve by doing; you gain confidence by writing revision essays. Your teachers will be pleased to give feedback when you do this. If your teacher gives you the opportunity to revise, grab it! Don’t say: Is this assessed? Does it count? The answer to that is actually “Yes”. It will be assessed when you do the “real” task much more effectively as a result of this practice!

Thanks to Neil Whitford for ideas used in this post.

How Scholarship works

I have had a few questions from students about how Scholarship works, you may find the material below helpful.

Scholarship is an external examination for top secondary students. Candidates usually enter in year 13. Scholarship examines course material related to level 3 standards derived from up to level 8 of the New Zealand Curriculum that students study in year 13. However, the skills and understanding required to meet Scholarship criteria are considerably more advanced. Scholarship requires students to demonstrate high-level critical thinking:

• Scholarship requires high-level abstract thinking and the application of knowledge and ideas to complex situations. It is for the most able students in each of the 27 Scholarship subjects.
• The intention is that 3 per cent of the total number of Year 13 level 3 students in each subject studying for 14 credits or more will get Scholarship, as long as Scholarship standards are met.
• Scholarship results will be released in February.

Changes to NCEA

I am sure that you have caught up with the changes to NCEA announced last
Tuesday but here is the link to the TV3 report for those who haven’t. I have also included a news article that gives the main changes. 

Education Minister Steve Maharey

Students will be encouraged to strive for top results and their exams marks should be more consistent, under changes unveiled in NCEA.

Education Minister Steve Maharey has made the changes following 191 recommendations from reviews of the system in 2005.

From this year, Excellence and Merit marks will be introduced to NCEA certificates, and in a big change, Not Achieved marks will be put on both internally and externally assessed standards from 2008.

And up to 10 percent of internally assessed units will be moderated by full-time NZQA appointed officers.

NCEA has been dogged by problems since it started five years ago but after a major review and 191 recommendations the Government has made a number of changes.

Steve Maharey admitted NCEA has failed in parts since being introduced.

“(The changes) mean for an employer they know where the strengths don’t lie with the person they have got in front of them, so that they have a record not only of what they can do and how well they can do it but they know they cant do some things so well,” he said.

39 of the country’s top schools have criticised NCEA and opted for other international assessments, but most 3 news spoke to say the changes are positive.

The way internally assessed standards are moderated is also under scrutiny.

Currently only three percent of work is randomly selected, that will rise to ten percent and have full time moderators from next year.

The minister says all of this is to give NCEA better credibility.

2007 Scholarship Exam Specifications

Candidates will answer three questions, writing at least 800 words for each.

Format of the assessment : There will be three sections:

Section A : Close Reading of Unfamiliar Texts will require a technical comparison of two written texts, one prose and one poetry, with an emphasis on aspects of content and crafting. There will be a single question for this section.

Section B : Response to Literature and Language will require a response to literature and/or language studied. Candidates will be required to select one question from a number of options.

Section C : Exploring Issues in Literature and Language will require an exploration of issues in literature and/or language studied. Candidates will be required to select one question from a number of options.
Candidates should demonstrate wide knowledge and wide reading, and an appreciation of aspects of intertextuality.

Marking: Each essay will be marked out of 8 to give a total of 24 marks.

Comments from the 2006 Examiner

Candidates found the paper challenging and candidates need to be made explicitly aware of examination requirements, especially the requirement to write coherent essays of a minimum of 800 words. They need to possess critical and evaluative skills to a high level. Those with facility and skill in using the English language generally perform well; they possess clever and original ways of expressing themselves – often with wit and humour – and show thinking about their texts, about literary theory and reader response. They present their own ideas about the world they live in, its relationship to the past and how the present transcends that past, and how modern media and literary texts can engage / provoke / challenge / enthuse. The best candidates invariably produce legible scripts allowing markers to focus on the response.
The best performing candidates most commonly demonstrated the following skills and / or knowledge:

• the ability to write engaging structured essays with strong introductions and conclusions which often left the reader with something to think about.
• the ability to use and control the conventions of academic writing to high levels
• the ability to pace their work across the whole paper.
• the ability to make judicious question choices and follow the directions given
• the ability to analyse texts and the ways in which they are crafted
•the ability to “think on their feet”
•the ability to demonstrate critical knowledge and evident enjoyment of a wide range of texts.
Candidates who did NOT achieve scholarship lacked some or all of the skills and knowledge above and in addition they:
• lacked the ability to pace themselves across the whole paper, spending too much time on A and C
• too often failed to respond to the actual topic / question and redirected materials to pre-worked arguments and essays
• did not show breadth and depth in synthesising comments
• did not develop a consistent thesis or evaluative response, choosing instead to “dump information” about their texts in an uncritical response to the question
• failed to demonstrate independent thinking and resorted to description when argument was required.

Scholarship Section C

Section C will require the exploration of issues in literature. You need to be able to integrate your discussion to demonstrate a sustained critical response across a range of texts.

You will have a range of questions to choose from in this section. The questions are designed to test your ability to present a reasoned and organised argument on a literary topic for which you have not been explicitly prepared, but which provide occasion for a display of the range and depth of your reading as a student of English.

Try to answer the following Scholarship question:

“If students are to see literature as capable of informing them about any of the aspects of life, they must become convinced that literature is more than just an historical record: that it can in fact be a force for revolutionary change.”
Discuss.

Behind the quotation lies the very basic question “why do we read and study literature?” You need to be able to answer this in various pertinent and thoughtful ways. Really focus on “aspects of life” and do not see “revolutionary change” as the most promising phrase. Try to write 1000 to 1500 words.