Pros + Cons of memorising essays (1 Viewer)

[AtlasX]

What are the positive and negative aspects of memorising essays?

 

[laura-jayne14]

Con: it won't be the same essay that's in your exam

 

[faisalabdul16]

You should only memorise an essay if you're able to mend it to answer any question.

Other than that, memorise techniques and examples better suited to any question.

 

[faisalabdul16]

Plus memorising essays is not recommended because one can fall victim to writing a pre-prepared essay, not answering the question which is easily spotted by markers.

 

[seventhroot]

pros: gets you through HSC English

 

[faisalabdul16]

pros: gets you through HSC English

LOOOL sig worthy

 

[astroman]

pros: you pass english
cons: brain damage.

 

[faisalabdul16]

English is the worst subject

 

[seventhroot]

English is the worst subject

hear, hear

 

[dinomyte]

Your memorised essay is probably thoroughly edited and more comprehensive than if you were to write an essay for the first time, on the exam day, in time conditions. Memorising an essay might make you feel more prepared.

But it won't prepare you for the unseen question on the day. Answering the specifics of the question is crucially important and you probably won't get in the A-range if you don't answer the question.

If you memorise an essay, make sure it's easily adaptable to any question. This can mean changing your whole thesis, intro, topic statements and analysis of technique as well. Also it's going to be hard if you just memorise techniques and examples and hope it works out in the exam (unless you're a genius) because we only get 40mins average for each essay and you don't want to spend too much time organising your structure. But really, the ideal way to study for English is to know your content well enough and to practice it many times.

Although I hope you're not talking about humanities essays because memorising really won't work lol

 

[seventhroot]

Although I hope you're not talking about humanities essays because that really won't work lol

true, but humanities such as legal studies can be made up on the spot.

 

[faisalabdul16]

true, but humanities such as legal studies can be made up on the spot.

Humanities is easier than English apparently

 

[seventhroot]

Humanities is easier than English apparently

yes definitely. I understood what I had to write in the legal ones and I did a half decent job but when I came to english, gg

 

[faisalabdul16]

yes definitely. I understood what I had to write in the legal ones and I did a half decent job but when I came to english, gg

Why do we even need to study random novels and blah blah from like 300 years ago and try to figure out what the author's purpose was

 

[seventhroot]

Why do we even need to study random novels and blah blah from like 300 years ago and try to figure out what the author's purpose was

ikr, whereas contemporary legal issues are more relevant to us. Don't get me wrong; we should be learning English but rather the more "useful" kind like grammar, speaking, writing a proper argument, resumes, and all that stuff

continue the derail: http://tinyurl.com/qfkasql

 

[Smooth Operator]

Pros: You've done some practice.
Cons: Probably won't be the question, waste of time - which could be used more productively on doing practice essays to learn how to apply yourself to more questions. I also think memorising essays would leave yourself with a too narrow margin for what the question could be, therefore adapting an essay would generally be less effective than actually answering the question that's being asked.

Don't try memorise 'base' essays, do some practice ones and know your texts/you techniques and what the syllabus of each module requires and you'll be sweet, just answer the question.

 

[enoilgam]

ikr, whereas contemporary legal issues are more relevant to us. Don't get me wrong; we should be learning English but rather the more "useful" kind like grammar, speaking, writing a proper argument, resumes, and all that stuff

This is roughly related to the topic, so we would allow some leeway on this.

 

[faisalabdul16]

ikr, whereas contemporary legal issues are more relevant to us. Don't get me wrong; we should be learning English but rather the more "useful" kind like grammar, speaking, writing a proper argument, resumes, and all that stuff

continue the derail: http://tinyurl.com/qfkasql

Exactly!

 

[screwuhsc]

AGREED

 

[faisalabdul16]

+1

And as for the bolded, yeah, you can't really apply the technique to the humanities simply because they're so fatloaded with content, so it's more feasible to know your stuff well and elaborate.



It's only a 'waste of time' if you either a) if you're an idiot for not considering the syllabus which has the key words to adhere to or/and b) do not know your texts in their entirety. That's why you have to make sure your generic essays cover all areas of the rubric to ensure flexibility so you can adapt to the question on the day (if it's a curveball, then say for instance, belonging, you can make links because obviously the AOS is heavily interrelated).

The problem with the bolded part is this - you may find that method of study works for you and if it does, then great. But the thing is, not everyone is adept with the perfect English skills. Everyone learns differently, and so you can’t expect everyone to be able to answer directly to a response. Some people can’t do this. There are people that aren’t natural writers. There are people all though they have tried to become fluent writers, are still yet to grasp the skills. Some people are naturally good at English. There is a giant imbalance in the English skills of everyone.
I think the whole concept of examinations is rigged. Everyone has a different learning style. How can one accurately test the knowledge of one’s abilities if everyone thinks differently?

I wish I was bothered to read all that. Seems good lol