Module A - essay<br />Marker’s Comments<br />
What did ‘A’ responses do?<br />
	Convinced me that they have a sophisticated understanding of the ways in which texts reflect their context (this was the ...
Skilfully compared the two texts in relation to form, themes, purpose, style and/or values<br />Include discussion of rele...
Well-selected and detailed textual references (quotes and/or description of scenes) that support the essay’s argument<br /...
Nominalisation was employed to draw reader’s attention to the KEY idea of EACH sentence<br />Connectives used to show rela...
Essay is structured to present a logical argument. Each paragraph opens with a topic sentence (statement) that engages wit...
What did a ‘B’ responses do?<br />
	Demonstrated effective understanding of the ways in which texts reflect their context<br />	Effective= fulfils the purpos...
Compares texts through discussion of form, themes, purpose, style or values<br />Links each text to its context by mention...
Quotes supported argument however were often obvious quotes – not enough in some paragraphs<br />Sometimes they simply ran...
More frequent errors in spelling, punctuation and grammar. <br />Written expression was often too simplistic/descriptive o...
What did a ‘C’ response do?<br />
Needed to treat texts as a specific form e.g. Bladerunner and Looking For Richard as films – not poems or novels. E.g. loo...
ran out of time – hadn’t practised writing under exam conditions <br />analysis of texts was weak – need to show an unders...
sentence structure is an issue for most<br />key nouns must drive a sentence<br />e.g. Throughout both texts there is a ch...
spelling and punctuation become an issue in these responses<br />use capital letters and possessive apostrophes correctly<...
lack of textual evidence included to support ideas <br />quotes were incorrect<br />sometimes only one quote per paragraph...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Module A marker comments

915 views

Published on

Marker comments from essays during the 1/2 Yearly examination.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
915
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
24
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
15
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Module A marker comments

  1. 1. Module A - essay<br />Marker’s Comments<br />
  2. 2. What did ‘A’ responses do?<br />
  3. 3. Convinced me that they have a sophisticated understanding of the ways in which texts reflect their context (this was the essay question).<br /> Sophisticated= original, complex, well-considered, refined, appealing to the intellect of the reader, coherent, logical<br />
  4. 4. Skilfully compared the two texts in relation to form, themes, purpose, style and/or values<br />Include discussion of relevant contextual detail influenced the composition of the text – its form, style, content<br />Contextual detail = events, ideas, intellectual/artistic/religious/philosophical movements, people <br />
  5. 5. Well-selected and detailed textual references (quotes and/or description of scenes) that support the essay’s argument<br />Language is clear, concise and sophisticated (complex vocabulary especially metalanguage specific to each text type; correct spelling of complex words; correct punctuation)<br />
  6. 6. Nominalisation was employed to draw reader’s attention to the KEY idea of EACH sentence<br />Connectives used to show relationships between sentences and/or paragraphs <br />Verbs-of-doing used to introduce the purpose and effect of film/dramatic/narrative techniques<br />
  7. 7. Essay is structured to present a logical argument. Each paragraph opens with a topic sentence (statement) that engages with the student’s response to the essay question. This remains the focus of the paragraph and all evidence is introduced to support this statement.<br />
  8. 8. What did a ‘B’ responses do?<br />
  9. 9. Demonstrated effective understanding of the ways in which texts reflect their context<br /> Effective= fulfils the purpose – the intended result was met, knows what is required and does it but lacks ‘flair’, is too short or has mistakes<br />
  10. 10. Compares texts through discussion of form, themes, purpose, style or values<br />Links each text to its context by mentioning events, ideas, intellectual/artistic/religious/philosophical movements and/or people that influenced the text’s themes or values – very few discuss influence on form or style.<br />Sometimes only passing references to context are made.<br />
  11. 11. Quotes supported argument however were often obvious quotes – not enough in some paragraphs<br />Sometimes they simply ran out of time or did not sustain their discussion (sustain = not long enough or not enough support for ideas drawn from texts)<br />
  12. 12. More frequent errors in spelling, punctuation and grammar. <br />Written expression was often too simplistic/descriptive or jumbled/confused<br />
  13. 13. What did a ‘C’ response do?<br />
  14. 14. Needed to treat texts as a specific form e.g. Bladerunner and Looking For Richard as films – not poems or novels. E.g. look at visual and auditory codes when analysing the texts, not similes, metaphors, alliteration. <br />
  15. 15. ran out of time – hadn’t practised writing under exam conditions <br />analysis of texts was weak – need to show an understanding of HOW the composers uses the structural and language features of their chosen form (drama, novel, film) to communicate ideas and reflect her/his context?<br />
  16. 16. sentence structure is an issue for most<br />key nouns must drive a sentence<br />e.g. Throughout both texts there is a challenging of social norms.<br /> BECOMES<br />A challenging of social norms is central to both texts.<br />
  17. 17. spelling and punctuation become an issue in these responses<br />use capital letters and possessive apostrophes correctly<br />students didn’t have a clear understanding of the essay ideas being discussed therefore the essay lacked fluency and clarity<br />
  18. 18. lack of textual evidence included to support ideas <br />quotes were incorrect<br />sometimes only one quote per paragraph<br />contextual detail was superficial, missing or incorrect and did not support a discussion of the ways texts reflect their contexts<br />

×