Belonging Paper 1 short responses! (1 Viewer)

[zhiying]

Hey guys, with trials coming up I have a few questions regarding the short responses section of the Belonging paper, since I'm not so great with it after I tried one...not that I am great in any aspect of English.

For the last question, usually 5-6 marker that requires analysing two texts, what are the best combinations? Like would you pick the visual? I thought visuals were hard to analyse extensively. Would you pick harder ones like poems?

Also how are we suppose to approach the 5 marker, do we analyse the idea about belonging in text one, then use techniques to show how it is done. Then repeat for text two? Is it okay to reuse some of the analysis I've done for the text in the parts before it cause I find that I want to talk about similar things.

Finally, does anyone have a good idea on how much we should write, or how many techniques to include, for 3,4,5,6 markers??

Thanks for any contributions

 

[Gigacube]

For techniques, it is usually 1 mark per technique. If you have time you should add 1 more technique just to be on the safe side.

My teacher said to never do poems as these are the hardest to analyse & people usually lose marks.

It is okay to reuse some of the analysis you have done for the text in the parts before. Markers mark one question at a time.

 

[zhiying]

thanks, I also considered 1 mark for each technique because I do sciences and when they ask you to evaluate/assess stuff its like a mark for each point.

I agree poems are harder to analyse, but one of my teachers who does HSC marking for this section told us that it might be advantageous to choose the poems, as its a chance to show to the markers what you can do. Although I don't think she took into account the levels of our abilities lol.

Btw the paper I just did was the 2010 one. Since image is out of the question, and the first narrative piece is pretty weak imo, I had no choice but to choose the poem and the second fictional piece.

 

[maxc16]

It's not one mark per question, its holistic. You need a cohesive and fluent response. Best to use long texts such as poetry, not images, as otherwise you will not have enough information to write about for 5/6 marks. Don't listen to previous responders ^

 

[Gigacube]

It's not one mark per question, its holistic. You need a cohesive and fluent response. Best to use long texts such as poetry, not images, as otherwise you will not have enough information to write about for 5/6 marks. Don't listen to previous responders ^

It's generally 1 technique per mark. Not 'one mark per question'.

Poetry is not necessarily the best to choose if you're better at analysing images. You can have enough information to gain full marks. People analyse things differently & can find analysing an image easier than analysing poetry. Just because it's a 'long text' doesn't mean it has more information for you to use. You also have to understand it which can be difficult.

Don't tell OP not to listen to previous responders. It's rude & we all get to voice our opinions & shouldn't be discouraged by people like you. There has only been one responder so I suggest you learn to count.

 

[x3Reii]

1 point per mark is okay in science but I find it a bit different for english. It's never 1 technique per mark. Let me explain why.

It really depends on the question on how many techniques you provide. Usually, in paper 1 section, the first question is a purpose question such as "what aspect of belonging does this text show?" which is usually for 2 marks. For questions like this you dont need to include any techniques. You get one mark for identifying the correct aspect and you get the other mark for using a quote or an example. Adding a technique would just be a waste of valuable time.

For the 3/4 markers which are usually how questions, you need at least 2 or 3 techniques explained thoroughly. That means you identify the technique, give an example (quote) of it. Explain the effect the technique has on the responder/audience and finally, how does the technique show belonging or not belonging. For the 5/6 markers, you need to be comparing TWO texts - and do it constantly. You must compare because in the criteria if you don't compare, you can not get higher than a 2/5 or 6 no matter how amazing your analysis is. Comparing means similarities AND differences. It should be around 400-600 words, again 2-3 techniques per text.

Personally, I'd use the visual because its quick and easy and the short story/extract because its easy to get techniques. But do the text you're the most comfortable with because theres no point of doing the visual when you have no idea what you're talking about. And yes, you can and should use your analysis from the previous question. Why waste time thinking up new phrases when you have them down already.

Finally, just remember WHAT = purpose, and HOW = techniques and you'll be fine. Sorry if this post was too long - I get carried away sometimes

 

[aphorae]

For the last question, usually 5-6 marker that requires analysing two texts, what are the best combinations? Like would you pick the visual? I thought visuals were hard to analyse extensively. Would you pick harder ones like poems?
Personally, there has only been one occasion where I picked the visual. I find it easier to pick the poem or the story for techniques, however, it really depends. Sometimes the visual might be a cartoon, which would put me off - even if I don't entirely understand the poem, at least I would be notice things such as the persona reminiscing about past relationships - therefore connections to people, the past, experiences, identity etc. It doesn't matter if you don't get all the references - many can be obscure and aren't 'essential' to understanding the idea of the text. I often don't yet I still manage to get full marks.

If you analyse a visual though, make sure you have sufficient visual techniques - don't just describe what's in the visual. Some visuals are very, very rich in use of diagonals, tone, contrast and very easy to talk about. I've seen a couple of visuals however that are quite vague - e.g. from some abstract picture book with text similar to poetry, which I would be hesitant to comment on.

Also how are we suppose to approach the 5 marker, do we analyse the idea about belonging in text one, then use techniques to show how it is done. Then repeat for text two? Is it okay to reuse some of the analysis I've done for the text in the parts before it cause I find that I want to talk about similar things. Finally, does anyone have a good idea on how much we should write, or how many techniques to include, for 3,4,5,6 markers??
In terms of trials/your own school, they might consider only 1 technique per mark. In the HSC, the general consensus is that you CAN only write two techniques for the 3 marker and get full marks, however you will have to EXPLAIN EACH OF THEM very well. To be safe, I would still write three, but you can find ways around it - for instance, "the combination of alliteration and enjambment...".

For a 4 marker, AT LEAST 3. I would not be doing 2. Since you say you are not so good in English, it would be better for you to do 4 (again, even if it's just "the combination of...", just so they can 'checklist' mark the question. Remember for each one you have to explain the meaning/purpose of the technique and link it to the concept of belonging, so if you only do three techniques but don't explain one of them properly, you will not get full marks (thus why it is safer to do 4 - remember they are looking to give you marks, not take them away, so as long as you end up answering the question/fulfilling the marking criteria it doesn't matter if something is vaguely 'wrong' or 'incomplete')

For the 5-6 marker, generally it is a 1-1.5 page response. Think about it - it's roughly 1/3 of the section in terms of marks, so you should be spending roughly 1/3 of your time on it (10-15mins). I ALWAYS reuse every piece of relevant analysis - markers in fact EXPECT you to reuse the analysis, but add two or three extra things (depending on how much depth the questions beforehand went into). In one paper (specifically Cranbrook trial 09) I simply copied everything I wrote down before as I had already 3 techniques per text, but linked it to the concept asked in the question ('happiness') and my teacher (HSC marker) said it was perfect.

They don't always ask for comparison, so you wouldn't have to compare if they didn't... such as the Cranbrook '09. Either way, your first statement should be like a thesis, then you should have your first text, then your second. You can also do thesis, T1, T2, link back to T1 or however, it doesn't really matter as long as you explore both logically. Linking/comparing/contrasting can simply be something like "T2 similarly explores the notion of identity through..." or "Whereas T1 explores the positive consequences of ---, T2 focuses on the negative ------ *insert T2 analysis*" so don't get too caught up Think of it is a 'mini-essay'.

/end