SMH article on how shit is HSC English (2 Viewers)

[emilyo]

people put alot of shit on prepared essays which i fully understand but my point is this, 40 minutes is not alot of time to prove your english abilities that is shape an entire text with planning and then writing. Particularly creative writing how many writers can produce their best work in such a time frame after being randomly thrown an abstract idea? Isnt english writing a process of editing and re-shaping? Do journalists throw together articles in 40 minutes?

Plus people who have written exemporary responses have put considerable time and effort into them, they have 'prepared'. Its the really smart students who practice alot of prepared responses (this does aide in learning the material) and then shape them to the question. Alot of people dont shape to question and that is where they get caught out. Besides these 'prepared responses' are just practice of learning how to write good sentences and considering different stuctures. I dont think there is anything wrong with prepared responses as they are just 'practice'. Besides every student has the same oppotunities to 'practice' and refine throughout the year. And every student is in the same position in the exam room when they take their response and re shape it to the question. If they arent smart enough to change/adapt thats tough for them.

 

[hosay]

prepared responses ftw!
i haven't even opened hamlet, and i wrote a descent essay on it (from memory
really its the only easy way out of doing something you really don't like and think is a waste of time.
and again, English is shit-not a real subject

 

[copeys]

HSC english is horrible. I am glad I never have to look at a novel and analyse it again. So many different texts were destroyed by that class.

13 years of education, and over the past 6yrs of learning english at high school, I still have no idea what an adjective/verb/noun is. Or those pre and pro verbs etc.

But on the issue of prepared responses, I practised and practised HSC style questions on essays (I would write the intro, then map the paragraphs and send it away to the teacher for suggestions), but I planned and knew my creative writing. Only reason is I wrote it so I could adapt it to anything thrown at me. Plus, I SUCK at creative writing.

In the wise words of my ol' english teacher

"You all practically SUCK at creative writing"​

God he was a laugh

 

[Continuum]

Comment by an English teacher:


Adele Horin

don't really agree with the teacher comment about the extension english part - much of it is still about memorising an essay. sure its alot more conceptual, but there's still the focus on spamming techniques.

 

[Riffy Raffy]

I actually like English.

Is there something wrong with me?

 

[Methalos]

There's a very simple solution to all of this. Don't learn the prepared essays. Don't learn the subject the way the syllabus encourages but in such a way that you will enjoy the texts. Guess what happens? When you actually enjoy the texts and you get to know them, writing essays on them is a breeze. And you don't need to worry about obscure exam questions because you will be in the best place of anyone to answer them.

 

[clintmyster]

There's a very simple solution to all of this. Don't learn the prepared essays. Don't learn the subject the way the syllabus encourages but in such a way that you will enjoy the texts. Guess what happens? When you actually enjoy the texts and you get to know them, writing essays on them is a breeze. And you don't need to worry about obscure exam questions because you will be in the best place of anyone to answer them.

If you tell people to enjoy the texts then I wouldn't be surprised if people go on a tangent and not actually answer the question. We're not trying to write an essay on why we enjoy the text, perhaps more so how it has shaped our thoughts/views which mod B and AOS does.
Also, if you don't learn your prepared essays and everyone else does, lets face it you're going to be left behind. There are very few people that just go with quotes memorised as opposed to an essay and get the best mark.
I think if you want people to stop memorising essays well you got to change the text types. Conversations will make people think somewhat differently but at least its not about just memorising an essay.
Then again, whats wrong with adapting a memorised essay to questions? Thats a skill in itself that is darn hard to master at first. Provided that the question has some element of a personal response, I don't see much of an issue with that.

 

[Hagaren]

I actually like English.

Is there something wrong with me?

unless you have a hot teacher... yes

 

[Clifford]

To be honest, I think the best part of english advanced is the creative writing because it's the only part where you needn't regurgitate techniques.

I think that's the simple pinpoint problem with HSC english: Techniques. We twist meaning into them that simply doesn't exist. More often than not, alliteration/assonance/images even are about the aesthetic, and have little to do with 'linking ideas' or 'responding to socio-economic conundrums' of the day.

Personally, I did 4 unit. I hated english advanced - the only good module was Bladerunner/Frankenstein because you were talking about THEMES. I think texts are written around themes, deep, personal thought from the composer - not little specific examples of a metaphor etc. to encompass a whole text.

If they simply moved away from technique based/quote vomiting, the whole course would be much more tolerable. There would be less need for memorising and more for taking a question as it comes with a deep knowledge of the text. I love reading, writing and language, but HSC english really does crucify it. Just look at 'Conflicting Perspectives' - I've never inferred so much that wasn't there in my life.

Honestly, to those who only do advanced and despise it, you should have done 4 unit, then just allowed advanced not to count. Both extension 1 english and especially, especially extension 2 (although the marking's a little po-mo) allow you much more free reign to think and respond to a question. It enabled you to appreciate the texts, most of which are actually quite good (except for Peter Skryznecki poetry; how is it fair that some suffer through that, whilst others get Dickinson?)

TO THE BOARD OF STUDIES - Throw out techniques, get us to respond to themes/ideas and actual thought!

 

[absorber]

No Jim, if there was something to be found in english that is enjoyable, more than a tiny minority of the people who do english would have found it already and mr coombes wouldnt have bothered apologising to us about having to do hsc english.

And it also doesnt explain why so many optomistic people hate english. And Jim, you are one of the most pessimistic people i know.

I am a fundamentally optimistic person. If my arguing makes you think otherwise, it is merely my passion to argue anything, including Devil's Advocate.

I do have to admit I find it amusing that Coombes apologised though

 

[murphyad]

I actually wrote a letter in to the SMH about this (not sure if they'll publish it though). I completely agree that writing decent responses 'off the cuff' is more or less impossible due to the time constraints involved.

If I had 15 minutes, I would probably be fine to write a spontaneous essay. However, I don't have 15 minutes - I have more like 3 in the reading time. That is not enough to concoct something that is going to be of quality and will reflect the bitchload of work I have done. Under exam conditions, with the pressure of the circumstances, it is just too much to ask.

This year I started off not pre-learning essays, but decided before the trials a new approach was in order. I memorised two-thirds of my essays - the analysis parts - and then changed the other third (the validations) in there to suit the question. That seems to be the happy medium for me, and I'd recommend it to others as well. In comparison, a spontaneous response will usually not give you the same control of language (because you're making it up as you go), your ideas will be less coherent and so on.

 

[annabackwards]

To be honest, I think the best part of english advanced is the creative writing because it's the only part where you needn't regurgitate techniques.

I think that's the simple pinpoint problem with HSC english: Techniques. We twist meaning into them that simply doesn't exist. More often than not, alliteration/assonance/images even are about the aesthetic, and have little to do with 'linking ideas' or 'responding to socio-economic conundrums' of the day.

Personally, I did 4 unit. I hated english advanced - the only good module was Bladerunner/Frankenstein because you were talking about THEMES. I think texts are written around themes, deep, personal thought from the composer - not little specific examples of a metaphor etc. to encompass a whole text.

If they simply moved away from technique based/quote vomiting, the whole course would be much more tolerable. There would be less need for memorising and more for taking a question as it comes with a deep knowledge of the text. I love reading, writing and language, but HSC english really does crucify it. Just look at 'Conflicting Perspectives' - I've never inferred so much that wasn't there in my life.

Honestly, to those who only do advanced and despise it, you should have done 4 unit, then just allowed advanced not to count. Both extension 1 english and especially, especially extension 2 (although the marking's a little po-mo) allow you much more free reign to think and respond to a question. It enabled you to appreciate the texts, most of which are actually quite good (except for Peter Skryznecki poetry; how is it fair that some suffer through that, whilst others get Dickinson?)

TO THE BOARD OF STUDIES - Throw out techniques, get us to respond to themes/ideas and actual thought!

I couldn't have put it better myself

 

[evilflic]

I actually wrote a letter in to the SMH about this (not sure if they'll publish it though). I completely agree that writing decent responses 'off the cuff' is more or less impossible due to the time constraints involved.

If I had 15 minutes, I would probably be fine to write a spontaneous essay. However, I don't have 15 minutes - I have more like 3 in the reading time. That is not enough to concoct something that is going to be of quality and will reflect the bitchload of work I have done. Under exam conditions, with the pressure of the circumstances, it is just too much to ask.

I have to say that I strongly disagree. I'm no genius, and I don't even have an english folder because I've done no work for it all year, but whilst cramming before the trials and actual HSC english exams, I wrote out a few practice essays.
My internal school mark is currently 96/100 and if I don't get above 95 for Advanced in the HSC, I'll be seriously disappointed. That's not because I'm a stuck-up bitch who sets unrealistic expectations. It's because I can confidently say that I've nailed getting an essay plan etc. down in less than the allocated time - a bit of practice is all it takes. It's not impossible.
When you say it's "just too much to ask" - okay, maybe you found it challenging, but there is a good percentage of the state who've practiced effectively enough to be able to write something "of quality".

 

[TAC]

I actually like English.

Is there something wrong with me?

No.

 

[evilflic]

to be honest, i think the best part of english advanced is the creative writing because it's the only part where you needn't regurgitate techniques.

I think that's the simple pinpoint problem with hsc english: Techniques. We twist meaning into them that simply doesn't exist. More often than not, alliteration/assonance/images even are about the aesthetic, and have little to do with 'linking ideas' or 'responding to socio-economic conundrums' of the day.

Personally, i did 4 unit. I hated english advanced - the only good module was bladerunner/frankenstein because you were talking about themes. I think texts are written around themes, deep, personal thought from the composer - not little specific examples of a metaphor etc. To encompass a whole text.

If they simply moved away from technique based/quote vomiting, the whole course would be much more tolerable. There would be less need for memorising and more for taking a question as it comes with a deep knowledge of the text. I love reading, writing and language, but hsc english really does crucify it. Just look at 'conflicting perspectives' - i've never inferred so much that wasn't there in my life.

Honestly, to those who only do advanced and despise it, you should have done 4 unit, then just allowed advanced not to count. Both extension 1 english and especially, especially extension 2 (although the marking's a little po-mo) allow you much more free reign to think and respond to a question. It enabled you to appreciate the texts, most of which are actually quite good (except for peter skryznecki poetry; how is it fair that some suffer through that, whilst others get dickinson?)

to the board of studies - throw out techniques, get us to respond to themes/ideas and actual thought!

+1

 

[Deer]

I love english, but I have a brilliant teacher. It makes all the difference.

If your teacher isn't passionate about a subject, (any subject), then you won't enjoy it as much, you won't be as motivated to do well for them. I think students with apathetic teachers are severely disadvantaged, and it's the one (huge) disadvantage that you can do nothing about.

 

[JessicaCaroline]

I reaaallly disagree with the view that people in the belonging exam ‘simply reproduced their prepared essays regardless, using two additional texts.’
Most people who wrote about two additional texts instead of one did NOT simply rote-learn an essay, then decide they couldn't bear to depart from this upon seeing the ONE text stipulation.
While not fully reading the question is hardly something to be proud of, it is this that a lot us are guilty of, not an over-reliance on memorised essays.
In the nervous haste of the exam situation, I admit I did not check the part of the question I had believed always remained constant: the number of additional texts required.
Obviously, I would have LOVED to have known it was just one text. I now know my essay could have been less rushed, that I had the opportunity to complete a much more in-depth analysis and that I needn’t have tried so hard to construe a second text to fit a question it really didn’t relate to.
Yes, we were laughably foolish for not reading the whole question (and are marks will suffer accordingly), but at least clear us from the charge of some sort of dependence on pre-prepared essays.
Personally, I have never had reason to assume that a question would be SO generic it would even allow for such regurgitation.

 

[murphyad]

I have to say that I strongly disagree. I'm no genius, and I don't even have an english folder because I've done no work for it all year, but whilst cramming before the trials and actual HSC english exams, I wrote out a few practice essays.
My internal school mark is currently 96/100 and if I don't get above 95 for Advanced in the HSC, I'll be seriously disappointed. That's not because I'm a stuck-up bitch who sets unrealistic expectations. It's because I can confidently say that I've nailed getting an essay plan etc. down in less than the allocated time - a bit of practice is all it takes. It's not impossible.
When you say it's "just too much to ask" - okay, maybe you found it challenging, but there is a good percentage of the state who've practiced effectively enough to be able to write something "of quality".

That's fair enough, and I should probably have said that there are certainly people out there who can manage it - you are a case in point. However, from my experience at school - which (not meaning to be snobby or anything) is a top 20 school, so our cohort is pretty strong - these people are the exception to the rule. Furthermore, its not as though all the people who do write 'spontaneous' essays are topping the year by any measure. Instead, these people are spread randomly throughout. Also as an aside, how can you be sure whether having prepared essay structures would not bring you higher marks in exams?

Also, as you implied, 'quality' is a subjective term, although I meant to apply it relatively. I'd say that for the vast majority of students, an essay structure that they have prepared and to some degree memorised will be more cohesive than one written entirely off the cuff. This was certainly the case for me - sure, I could write on the spot, but if I had a structured thing ready to go I would invariably receive better marks.

Basically, as I said before, people I know generally fare the best with a 'mixed approach' - part prepared, part spontaneous.

 

[GT03]

I agree with most people in this thread. HSC english just doesn't make sense, we're better off having a mix of skills for daily english and some textual analysis stuff incorporated as others have suggested earlier. I'm just glad we're finished with this technique crap after 6 years.

I have to say that I strongly disagree. I'm no genius, and I don't even have an english folder because I've done no work for it all year, but whilst cramming before the trials and actual HSC english exams, I wrote out a few practice essays.
My internal school mark is currently 96/100 and if I don't get above 95 for Advanced in the HSC, I'll be seriously disappointed. That's not because I'm a stuck-up bitch who sets unrealistic expectations. It's because I can confidently say that I've nailed getting an essay plan etc. down in less than the allocated time - a bit of practice is all it takes. It's not impossible.
When you say it's "just too much to ask" - okay, maybe you found it challenging, but there is a good percentage of the state who've practiced effectively enough to be able to write something "of quality".

Just wanted to remind you that you don't know your internal school marks until BOS releases them in Dec, and depends on how your externals went as well as your cohort strength. But seeing as you said you nailed your essay, best of luck 95+ in Adv English deserves respect on all levels xD

 

[puffiijamii]

HAHA, love the article!