Belonging - 2 supp texts okay! (4 Viewers)

[jassono]

^ ahahahahaha

 

[anagram-]

nah, i meant in the same way they say AT LEAST one, they should say ONLY one

i did NOT mean saying ONLY one = saying AT LEAST one.

context plz

 

[greatgreeks2]

whats done is done now we cant do anything.

i think the board should mark all essays properly but those who di 1 related get an extra 2 marks and that would be fine

 

[greatgreeks2]

anagram u have some nural problem.

y did u write 2 related anyway. this is ur hsc y did u intend on answering the question wrong. i mean in other subjects like chem if u just miss one word in ur explanation you lose a mark let alone missinterpret the question.

 

[Mas1991]

Even if half of the state wrote about 2 texts as an above poster suggested, that DOES NOT make them right, it just means they were inflexible under pressure. I don't think the people that did 2 should be punished, but the second text should not be marked.


THE QUESTION WAS NOT AMBIGUOUS IT SAID USE 1 F**KING TEXT.....lol

but seriously it's the truth, you can not just disregard the question and hope you will get the same marks.

the question wasn't disregarded, only a narrow minded person would believe that the question was straightforward. you write about ONE, then another ONE, you've still answered the question as they didnt say you couldn't write more as they didn't have an ONLY before the ONE.

and also, Chevalier sucks, Oxley's better

 

[annabackwards]

Gah why are people still arguing over this? I really shouldn't encourage it but it annoys me when people are in the wrong and are just making excuses to make them feel better ><"

it's CLEARLY not that fucking obvious when half the state has done one thing and half the state did the other. all of the hardline "one related text" people will obviously argue your case but then the people who wrote two will argue theirs.

i.e. ambiguous

It could just be that 1/2 of the state are morons and don't understand what the simple 3 letter word "one" means.

it is obvious as people just went in with their pre-prepared responses! and there was NOTHING ambiguous about that question. it said ONE text. not 'at least one', but ONE. it, in no way, asked for any extra material apart from your set text and ONE related text. by year twelve you would assume you'd be able to differentiate between the two

+1

the question wasn't disregarded, only a narrow minded person would believe that the question was straightforward. you write about ONE, then another ONE, you've still answered the question as they didnt say you couldn't write more as they didn't have an ONLY before the ONE.

Nope, the question was clearly disregarded because anyone who wrote more than 1 did not answer the requirements of the question.

Let me ask you this seeing as you guys don't seem to understand. If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take one, how many lollies would you take?

 

[epicmel]

so the moral of the story is:

don't answer the question given. you won't be punished. who cares.
just spit out your prepared essay.


not.

 

[Mas1991]

Let me ask you this seeing as you guys don't seem to understand. If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take one, how many lollies would you take?

If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take at least one, how many lollies would you take? take more then one if you want

If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take only one, how many lollies would you take? only take one

If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take one, how many lollies would you take? i could take one, or more then one, i still did what they asked

like i said before its all semantics and how one interprets the question. i interpreted differently to you. doesn't make either of us wrong as the wording of the question left it open to interpretation.

 

[greatgreeks2]

If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take at least one, how many lollies would you take? take more then one if you want

If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take only one, how many lollies would you take? only take one

If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take one, how many lollies would you take? i could take one, or more then one, i still did what they asked

like i said before its all semantics and how one interprets the question. i interpreted differently to you. doesn't make either of us wrong as the wording of the question left it open to interpretation.

If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take one, how many lollies would you take? i could throw the jar in their face. and yes that would be WRONG

 

[kenshinx77]

Thats fucking bullshit sif i cudve wrote more if i had two texts that is soo fucked

 

[jassono]

Inject one dose of medicine

Also, its not like in maths (i recall maths cos maybe thats how some of you people work) they ask you to integrate some shit
then you start integrating more functions cos youre at least answering one
they should just ignore anything else except for one

 

[annabackwards]

If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take at least one, how many lollies would you take? take more then one if you want

If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take only one, how many lollies would you take? only take one

If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take one, how many lollies would you take? i could take one, or more then one, i still did what they asked

like i said before its all semantics and how one interprets the question. i interpreted differently to you. doesn't make either of us wrong as the wording of the question left it open to interpretation.

Good now we're getting somewhere. See the word "could"? Was that in the question?

"Demonstrate how your prescribed text and ONE other related text of your own choosing represent this interpretation of belonging."

Do you see the word could anywhere at all? How on earth can there be more than one way to interpret the question? There are no words such as "could", "may" or "can" that could possibly give anyone a premise to think they could pick more than one.

Now let's use that lolly example again because it seems to make things easier to understand somehow.

How many lollies would you take if your mum told you to take one lolly out from the jar?

Do you now see how a 3 year old would be able to do that simple task?

 

[Mas1991]

Now let's use that lolly example again because it seems to make things easier to understand somehow.

How many lollies would you take if your mum told you to take one lolly out from the jar?

Do you now see how a 3 year old would be able to do that simple task?

well a three year old wouldn't necessarily have the intelligence or the capability to question. see im not three so i can see more then one interpretation. say if i took two lollies, did i go against what this mum has asked?

 

[anagram-]

at the end of the day, the sole debate, imo, is whether merely exceeding the specific parameters of the question means you should get marked down. In other subjects, exceeding the parameters is useless, doesn't get you extra marks, doesn't get you a penalty - just wastes your time. This is the same standard that should be applied to english. Half the people who prepared essays wrote about 1 text anyway, they just chopped out part of it - so there's no defined line between those who memorised, and those who didn't.

+1

exactly. they definitely shouldn't get marked up, and they definitely shouldn't be penalised. that's all.

 

[chantszhin]

Before: People that wrote one text will have answers more "in depth"
Now: People that wrote one text are disadvantaged because they wrote one text. Even though it's "in depth" haha.
Geez what disadvantage. People with one text have an indepth answer. While people that wrote two texts have two "not indepth" answers. Ino this doesn't really apply to everyone, and it's a broad thought.. wteva

 

[greatgreeks2]

mass u have no logic.

i hope u fail and thebn u will undersand that u are wrong

 

[annabackwards]

well a three year old wouldn't necessarily have the intelligence or the capability to question. see im not three so i can see more then one interpretation. say if i took two lollies, did i go against what this mum has asked?

I beg to differ. Most 3 year olds would be able to completely understand the question and be smart enough to question - at the very least all of the many 3 year olds i have encountered.

Yes, you went against what your mum asked you to do because she clearly asked that you only take one.

 

[LChia]

well a three year old wouldn't necessarily have the intelligence or the capability to question. see im not three so i can see more then one interpretation. say if i took two lollies, did i go against what this mum has asked?

Yes.

 

[Fluorescent]

well a three year old wouldn't necessarily have the intelligence or the capability to question. see im not three so i can see more then one interpretation. say if i took two lollies, did i go against what this mum has asked?

OMFG
I have read your post over the last 2 pages and you make me want to rip my hair out and eat it

YOU CAN'T INTERPRET A QUESTION THAT WAS DESIGNED TO BE INTERPRETED IN ONE WAY AND ONE WAY ONLY

NO FUCKING PUN INTENDED

BoS even admitted it was designed to break the 'habit' and by habit I mean:
1- Over-preparation based on memorised essays
2- over-preparation based on past papers

It was designed to make you think on the spot - now why the fuck would BoS make a question that allowed you to write about more than one text if they admitted they wanted you to think on your feet!

This isn't a damn metaphor or an art work that people have differing opinions on

Its as simple as AnnaBackwards put it: you are just coming up with excuses to shelter your complete stupidity

JUST ADMIT IT - you made a dumb mistake along with 1/3 of the state. No big fucking deal. Move on!

 

[Mas1991]

I beg to differ. Most 3 year olds would be able to completely understand the question and be smart enough to question - at the very least all of the many 3 year olds i have encountered.

Yes, you went against what your mum asked you to do because she clearly asked that you only take one.

but she placed no parameters or limits on how many. i take one, then i take another one. i did what she asked. i took one. but she didn't place an adverb specifically stating the desired amount. because no, she didn't say only. hence i can take more without going against her command.