Speeches - knowledge of all 12 (1 Viewer)

[I-Love-Jesus]

I just wanted to know if anyone has collated a list of which speeches have been specified in exam questions before?
For example, I know that Lincoln's "Gettysburg Address" was specifically asked for in 2002, but I'm not sure about any of the others.
I would say that if any of the following speeches were specified in our paper, I wouldn't be in an enviable position. I have an inadequate knowledge of the speeches by:
- McAleese,
- Kyi,
- Levertov,
- Pearson,
- Socrates, and
- Cicero
So especially if any of these have previously been specified, it would be great to know that I don't need to study them!

Thanks in advance!

 

[u-borat]

I only know three- King Socrates and Levertov.

Might take a look at Lincoln the morning before; what else is famous enough that they could concievably specify?

possibly keating?

 

[I-Love-Jesus]

Well technically they could specify any of the 12.
But since I know that they've already specified Lincoln's, I doubt they'd do that again.
It just seems like we're in line for having them specify one, because they haven't done that since 2002. And there's no way I can prepare sufficiently for all of them! =/
Good luck!

 

[u-borat]

yeah you too.

if they were to specify, it wouldn't be someone like mcaleese or sunkyi imo, because they're rather obscure.

it'd have to be king/keating/socrates is my best guess.

btw, do you know if we're meant to write about 2 or 3 speeches?

 

[Azreil]

I don't see it being Socrates. I had a freak out at my teacher because I really dislike Cicero, and she said there would be a lot of complaints if they specified Socrates or Cicero.

It could be either 2 or 3. It depends on the question. Me, I'm preparing Goldman and Socrates in depth, and having 3 paragraphs I can write on each of the other speeches--just in case they specify one or say to use 3.

 

[I-Love-Jesus]

Wow. 3 paragraphs for all 12? That's a lot! I'm pretty sure you're going to ace the exam!

So the verdict is: I shouldn't revise Socrates, Cicero, McAleese or Kyi in as much depth as the others? I think that sounds much better than doing all 12.
And for the record - I'm doing Lincoln and King like 90% of the participants of this course, + Havel. =]

Also, how are you structuring your essay? Are you doing thematic paragraphs? e.g. a paragraph for King, then a paragraph for Lincoln, etc. Or speech-based paragraphs? e.g. a paragraph for freedom, then a paragraph for equality, etc.

 

[Azreil]

If I haven't overloaded myself with information heehee. Advanced has been one of my best subjects this year, so I hope I do :/ Speeches is the module I'm most worried about, because we did it last, and while we didn't rush it, I was more worried about trials than learning in depth.

I try, as with everything, to integrate it, though in the case of Goldman and Socrates they have so much in common if you try to write thematically -- say, a paragraph on how savage they are at times -- you end up with page long paragraphs. So in that essay, I write a speech on tone which incorporates both speeches, then trade off on a paragraph each. For my trial, I wrote about Keating and Lincoln and most of my paragraphs were comparing the two on the basis of different things. It depends on the speeches for me, really.

 

[L i L O]

Man, speeches is a bitch.


I only know Socrates and Levertov, two of the most common choices.
I'm fucked

 

[old.skool.kid]

So how many speeches are you guys planning to write on in depth?
I only know two as well; MLK and Lincoln. Iv'e seen questions where they have asked for three. So itd be best to know at least three right?

 

[dp624]

Unlikely to be 3, cos last time they did it the responses were poor, and BOS likes to show Australia that students are actually OK at english

 

[Matt1120]

I know
Lincoln
Keating
Socrates
King

If they ask anything else i'm stuffed...dont particularly care any more though...

 

[Marinatos]

If they do specify, you just do like one paragraph on that speech and then move on to the ones you actually want to talk about. My problem is I don;t actually know which ones I want to do! Anyone they do specify will, more than likely, be one of the more common ones, with values that are common to all of them (except Atwood because she is crazy xD) I'd like to see them ask for Havel. That would be epic win, as it is the one I probably know best and it conects with all the others.

 

[iluvGG]

I'm only learning three in detail : socrates, goldman and keating. so if they specify, i hope its one of them .
having a basic idea of the rest, a few techniques and make sure i know the context and exigence of each speech.
they're not going to specify lincoln again. that would be weird. i hope they don't specify any. its just mean. no other option has TWELVE texts to learn! but if they do, just write a paragraph and then go onto the ones you know really well and hopefully that will make up for it?! haha hopefully.

 

[DomHarris]

hey meister.

 

[I-Love-Jesus]

Haha, salutations Dominic!
What do you think? I think I'm just going to know a little bit about Atwood, Levertov and Keating, with a deep knowledge of Lincoln, King and Havel. Does this sound sensible? Would any others have a plausible chance of being specified?

 

[Cerry]

Our teacher told us that if they're going to specify it's most likely to be Pearson (very PC, since he's Australin and not white), Keating or King. She also thinks that given that it's the last year of these texts, and they've got a buttload of teachers up in arms about the proposed syllabus changes at the moment, they're probably going to try not to rock the boat, it's not as likely that they'll specify as in previous years (but she still said to have an overview of everything, because the BOS aren't very nice, and sometimes they're not really smart, either)

 

[DomHarris]

im only going to know about six as well... but i have no idea about how likely it is they specify a :-( this is probably my weakest module but im just going to do what i can and hope to make up for it a bit in the others :-S

 

[Ebatchelor]

My teacher said that if they do specify they will most like ask you to 'reference' it meaning you can just make vague connections with the ones your already doing. However i dont think its going to happen beacsue
a) they havent done it since 2002 showing it was way to hard (you reckon)
b) because next year they are still studing speeches even though everything is changing but they are only studying 6 meaning the bos has realised how stupid it is to sudy 12 and therefore will not specify for that would be cruel
*since they didnt do it for coleridge im hoping they really do have a heart and wont do it....
but these are the notes from the marking centre 2002:
Speeches
Most candidates were comfortable with the compulsory inclusion of the Abraham Lincoln speech.
This indicated the importance of studying every set speech as presented in the HSC Prescription
list. Candidates also appeared generally comfortable with the process of close critical analysis and
could quote extensively from their selected speeches.
please dont do it again! it would have to be king or keating surely?