Also it can’t be any prescribed texts from standard, adv, or ext even if your class isn’t studying it. For example it’s best to avoid the truman show, bright star and lost in translation
Probably a 48-50/50. I saw an interview with a girl who got a state rank and she got a 50/50 and was 4th or something, although she might have had a lower internal rank which would have affected it.
This is how my teacher explained it, he called it the funnel methodSomething I never understood is how many examples are we actually supposed to include for Section II? My teacher always banged on about how it wasn't about the technique-analysis loop that Adv is so hung up on but I don't actually know what that translates to
Your teacher is right, but it still helps to have a good structure to fall back on. I think since there’s 3 texts, doing an integrated structure with three paragraphs in this form is probably best in order to balance analysis with evidence:Something I never understood is how many examples are we actually supposed to include for Section II? My teacher always banged on about how it wasn't about the technique-analysis loop that Adv is so hung up on but I don't actually know what that translates to
I did a basic text1/text2/text 3 body paragraph structure which actually worked quite well. Some people in my class compared two texts at once per paragraph (so Texts 1&2, 1&3 then 2&3 for example) you can be creative with it (but I would definitely not change to the partially integrated structure this close to the exam)
I think once per paragraph is a good middle ground. That's what I do. I've always been told that literary quotes should be used sparingly and only to support your response. That is, you shouldn't be using them as your ideas, but use them to show the marker that what you're saying is actually true since critic blah blah also agrees with it.
Yes for sure, and it’s best to sprinkle it throughout your essay and relate ALL of it to your arguments - don’t just randomly say that “Romantics exalted natural beauty and childlike innocence, repudiating the relentless industrialisation accompanying the Industrial Revolution” without relating it to your text/argument
Nice, what texts? I did hamlet, dickinson and lost in translation, I loved the unit to be honest and I’ve seen some freudian psychoanalysis based responses to hamlet which were really interesting (but wacky)
Have some settings, plots and characters in hand for the day, though they could easily ask for discursive or persuasives as well (that’s what happened in my trial paper). So for example, maybe you’ve written about the beach in one of your pieces from ext, adv or before senior years, so you can touch on it in the exam (taking into account any feedback you got of course). I created a table of settings, plots and characters which allowed to mix and match! If you don’t want to do this much effort then just organise all of your pieces into a folder/portfolio and think about how you could use aspects from one/more texts to answer a question.
I also did Hamlet and Dickinson as prescribed texts! I chose The mark on the wall by virgina woolf as my related though, but honestly this unit heavily related with a lot of other really interesting texts as well, it was quite hard to choose.
I've personally got both a prepared discursive and imaginative which are basically my advanced pieces but elevated to extension level. And then I have a general plan of characters and plots for in case they give a weirdly specific stimulus. Other than that I still need to practice writing critically on the spot cause I've never once done that before...
Yeah this is probably one of the best units imo I’m glad I got to do mindscapes. My related text was one of Frida Kahlo’s artworks, there’s so much analysis gold there and it was genuinely interesting stuff. Her art is so visceral yet deep, reminiscent of how much she went through.
They will specify
