• Congratulations to the Class of 2024 on your results!
    Let us know how you went here
    Got a question about your uni preferences? Ask us here

English I got fked (2 Viewers)

Average Boreduser

Rising Renewal
Joined
Jun 28, 2022
Messages
3,198
Location
Somewhere
Gender
Female
HSC
2026
Bruh I just got 70% on my at2 due to poor handwriting which was weighted 20%. I’m not too sure what to do here. I know I am and was definately capable for more marks for that essay especially since I got 0 feedback for the formative which had nearly the exact same wording to the real thing. Seriously so disappointed about this. Am I not able to b6 English? We have ~36-48 b6s per yr, I know I am make a significant rank increase since my cohort overall is pretty lazy and most likely do not prepare and just fluff their exams so I will have the advantage of preparation for upcoming assessments

someone pls give me reassurance🙏
 

0cc2pus

New Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2024
Messages
6
Gender
Female
HSC
2027
bro what??? handwriting is weighed 20% in a written assessment?? thats insane. unless your handwriting is doctor level illegible, i don't think it should reflect on your essay marks 😭
 

Hehehe22

Active Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2024
Messages
208
Gender
Female
HSC
2025
Handwriting??? What kind of ridiculous marking criteria do you have? You should ask to get it remarked or smth
 

C2H6O

Active Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2024
Messages
166
Gender
Male
HSC
2025
ain't no way bruh why is handwriting even on the marking criteria??? one english session we were reading some state rank response and we only made it through the intro and halfway through the first paragraph in an hour bc the handwriting was that illegible idk how they got state rank
 

Average Boreduser

Rising Renewal
Joined
Jun 28, 2022
Messages
3,198
Location
Somewhere
Gender
Female
HSC
2026
Yeah exactly im legit unsure wtf they're on about.... I got literally 0 feedback...

My essay was this:

Texts insightfully explore the inner moral conflicts between individuals and collectives that drive the heterogeneous collage of human behavior and consequences arising from collective hysteria, inviting audiences to understand the fragility of individual morality in group dynamics.
The complexities of human nature are explored through Arthur Miller’s allegorical tragedy ‘The Crucible’ (1953), which perceptively reveals universal truths about how ideological extremism causes internal conflict between upholding social morality and a moral conscience. Consequently, the ignition of injustice arising from collective conformity and moral absolutism allows authoritarian pressures to privilege the endemically human tendency for corruption. Hence, through insightful investigation of the paradoxical nature of individual behavior and societal pressures, contemporary audiences are able to ascertain a deeper understanding of the complexities of the human experience.

Theocratic norms of morality that regard human desires as ‘evil’ and conformity as ‘good’ paradoxically create incongruity between one’s desires and their extrinsic behaviors, placing individuals into complex experiences of intense inner conflict. Miller’s authorial aside deems it “impossible for most men to conceive of a morality without sin as of an earth without ‘sky,’” using a simile to illustrate how the McCarthyist rigid binary of 'good versus evil' moral perspectives are inconsistent with the complex and often contradictory nature of human behavior, highlighting the inconsistency and diversity in individual responses. Miller comments on the “history of ideas” through violent imagery, suggesting that “the Devil” found it necessary to “whip men into a surrender to a particular church or church-state.” In doing so, he parallels his own McCarthyism political context to analogise the systems of polarized ideologies of ‘good’ vs ‘evil’ that have been challenged by individuals who disputed the collective consensus. Abigail’s condemnation in the emotive stage directions of “I look for John Proctor that took me from my sleep and put knowledge in my heart!” allows Miller to vicariously condemn a polarizing moral code in the complex conflict between Abigail’s outward behavior from the perspective of the court and her private vengeful intentions, highlighting the easily manipulatable nature of human behavior where individuals immorally uphold material gain. Abigail's decision to sacrifice her integrity for power within the moral system is marked by her progressively insolent and erratic behaviors which reflect the individual experiences of the ways in which personal traumas, insecurities, and desires can compel individuals to abandon a 'good' moral code and succumb to 'evil.’ These complex actions are underscored by the auditory imagery in the stage direction, '[Abigail, with a weird, wild, chilling cry, screams up to the ceiling],' which intensifies the tensions between moral binaries. The stage directions enhance the pathos of her performance, revealing the pretense underlying her behavior. Miller concludes his comments about the oppressing moral system in the coda of the play “[Proctor, with a cry of his soul]: because it is my name! … I have given you my soul; leave me my name!” where the symbolic meaning of a name as an individual’s identity is used as a tool to maintain self integrity at the sacrifice of one’s fate within the moral system.


Theocratic and authoritarian ideologies create a corrupt social environment where the glorification of one’s reputation within the collective, fueled by societal pressures, drives individuals to reject their integrity and values, leading to devastating personal and communal consequences. This is made evident in ‘The Crucible’ where its Manichean political system privileges the power of the collective as individuals are pressured to conform, consequently allowing fear and suspicion to override reason. Through the playwright’s commentary: “They believed, in short, that they held in their steady hands the candle that would light the world", Miller parallels the self-righteousness within his American's 50's context by revealing his complex attitude towards the prevailing political agenda of ‘anti-communist sentiments as the precursor to hysteria’ that perpetuated McCarthyist hysteria. Miller uses this dynamic to critique how collective ideologies, when unchecked, corrupt both individuals and institutions, encouraging responders to consider the consequences that arise from mass conformity and individual suppression from conformist pressures. This is further reflected throughout the play, as seen in Parris’s allusion to theocratic exceptionalism in “[in a fury]: We are not Quakers here yet, Mr Proctor”, which further mirrors the polarizing McCarthyist attitude and reveals the condemnation of all opposing ideologies. In the play’s climax, Miller showcases how authoritarian theology corrupts the integrity of the law, in Danforth's oxymoronic statement “But witchcraft is ipso facto, on its face and by its nature… Therefore, what is left for a lawyer to bring out?” By asserting that witchcraft defies legal scrutiny, Danforth reveals a disturbing consequence of societal pressures—the erosion of rational justice. Miller exemplifies how theocratic law dismisses evidence and silences dissent to preserve its own power, abandoning fair trial principles. Thus, Miller invites responders to consider the dangers of societal pressures that prioritize ideological conformity over justice, leading to the persecution of innocent individuals in the name of preserving societal order. Parris’ circulatory argument on conformity in that “All innocent and Christian people are happy for the courts in Salem! These people are gloomy about it,” conflates dissent with disloyalty, with the false dichotomy of “Christian people” and “these people” also exemplifying the polarizing nature of theocratic and authoritarian power structures who corrupt systems of civil discourse to maintain their own power, much like the “Red Scare” movement’s leaders.

In conclusion, the inconsistencies and unique nature of individuals is what informs their behavior when faced with the universal dilemmas of societal pressures which influence integrity and self-image. The Crucible represents the constant oscillation of human behavior, and consequences from societal pressures as a tool to mirror Miller’s opposition to McCarthyism while revealing universal paradoxical tensions within a human society built around reputation.
 

Average Boreduser

Rising Renewal
Joined
Jun 28, 2022
Messages
3,198
Location
Somewhere
Gender
Female
HSC
2026
My essay qn was: How does 'The Crucible' invite responders to reflect on the complexities of human behavior and the consequences of societal pressures?


but my handwritting was apparently illegible and therefore they only marked what they could read.
 

C2H6O

Active Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2024
Messages
166
Gender
Male
HSC
2025
wtf youre getting railed by the english department :frown2:. ig my advice would be just lock in, and dont worry about what you can no longer change or control. just work on fixing your handwriting by continuous practice and do your best for the rest of the assessments
 

jonolad69

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2023
Messages
572
Location
reforming....
Gender
Male
HSC
2026
yep mate your chances of a b6 are over after one single assessment task just might aswell give up!
 

Hehehe22

Active Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2024
Messages
208
Gender
Female
HSC
2025
Yeah exactly im legit unsure wtf they're on about.... I got literally 0 feedback...

My essay was this:

Texts insightfully explore the inner moral conflicts between individuals and collectives that drive the heterogeneous collage of human behavior and consequences arising from collective hysteria, inviting audiences to understand the fragility of individual morality in group dynamics.
The complexities of human nature are explored through Arthur Miller’s allegorical tragedy ‘The Crucible’ (1953), which perceptively reveals universal truths about how ideological extremism causes internal conflict between upholding social morality and a moral conscience. Consequently, the ignition of injustice arising from collective conformity and moral absolutism allows authoritarian pressures to privilege the endemically human tendency for corruption. Hence, through insightful investigation of the paradoxical nature of individual behavior and societal pressures, contemporary audiences are able to ascertain a deeper understanding of the complexities of the human experience.

Theocratic norms of morality that regard human desires as ‘evil’ and conformity as ‘good’ paradoxically create incongruity between one’s desires and their extrinsic behaviors, placing individuals into complex experiences of intense inner conflict. Miller’s authorial aside deems it “impossible for most men to conceive of a morality without sin as of an earth without ‘sky,’” using a simile to illustrate how the McCarthyist rigid binary of 'good versus evil' moral perspectives are inconsistent with the complex and often contradictory nature of human behavior, highlighting the inconsistency and diversity in individual responses. Miller comments on the “history of ideas” through violent imagery, suggesting that “the Devil” found it necessary to “whip men into a surrender to a particular church or church-state.” In doing so, he parallels his own McCarthyism political context to analogise the systems of polarized ideologies of ‘good’ vs ‘evil’ that have been challenged by individuals who disputed the collective consensus. Abigail’s condemnation in the emotive stage directions of “I look for John Proctor that took me from my sleep and put knowledge in my heart!” allows Miller to vicariously condemn a polarizing moral code in the complex conflict between Abigail’s outward behavior from the perspective of the court and her private vengeful intentions, highlighting the easily manipulatable nature of human behavior where individuals immorally uphold material gain. Abigail's decision to sacrifice her integrity for power within the moral system is marked by her progressively insolent and erratic behaviors which reflect the individual experiences of the ways in which personal traumas, insecurities, and desires can compel individuals to abandon a 'good' moral code and succumb to 'evil.’ These complex actions are underscored by the auditory imagery in the stage direction, '[Abigail, with a weird, wild, chilling cry, screams up to the ceiling],' which intensifies the tensions between moral binaries. The stage directions enhance the pathos of her performance, revealing the pretense underlying her behavior. Miller concludes his comments about the oppressing moral system in the coda of the play “[Proctor, with a cry of his soul]: because it is my name! … I have given you my soul; leave me my name!” where the symbolic meaning of a name as an individual’s identity is used as a tool to maintain self integrity at the sacrifice of one’s fate within the moral system.


Theocratic and authoritarian ideologies create a corrupt social environment where the glorification of one’s reputation within the collective, fueled by societal pressures, drives individuals to reject their integrity and values, leading to devastating personal and communal consequences. This is made evident in ‘The Crucible’ where its Manichean political system privileges the power of the collective as individuals are pressured to conform, consequently allowing fear and suspicion to override reason. Through the playwright’s commentary: “They believed, in short, that they held in their steady hands the candle that would light the world", Miller parallels the self-righteousness within his American's 50's context by revealing his complex attitude towards the prevailing political agenda of ‘anti-communist sentiments as the precursor to hysteria’ that perpetuated McCarthyist hysteria. Miller uses this dynamic to critique how collective ideologies, when unchecked, corrupt both individuals and institutions, encouraging responders to consider the consequences that arise from mass conformity and individual suppression from conformist pressures. This is further reflected throughout the play, as seen in Parris’s allusion to theocratic exceptionalism in “[in a fury]: We are not Quakers here yet, Mr Proctor”, which further mirrors the polarizing McCarthyist attitude and reveals the condemnation of all opposing ideologies. In the play’s climax, Miller showcases how authoritarian theology corrupts the integrity of the law, in Danforth's oxymoronic statement “But witchcraft is ipso facto, on its face and by its nature… Therefore, what is left for a lawyer to bring out?” By asserting that witchcraft defies legal scrutiny, Danforth reveals a disturbing consequence of societal pressures—the erosion of rational justice. Miller exemplifies how theocratic law dismisses evidence and silences dissent to preserve its own power, abandoning fair trial principles. Thus, Miller invites responders to consider the dangers of societal pressures that prioritize ideological conformity over justice, leading to the persecution of innocent individuals in the name of preserving societal order. Parris’ circulatory argument on conformity in that “All innocent and Christian people are happy for the courts in Salem! These people are gloomy about it,” conflates dissent with disloyalty, with the false dichotomy of “Christian people” and “these people” also exemplifying the polarizing nature of theocratic and authoritarian power structures who corrupt systems of civil discourse to maintain their own power, much like the “Red Scare” movement’s leaders.

In conclusion, the inconsistencies and unique nature of individuals is what informs their behavior when faced with the universal dilemmas of societal pressures which influence integrity and self-image. The Crucible represents the constant oscillation of human behavior, and consequences from societal pressures as a tool to mirror Miller’s opposition to McCarthyism while revealing universal paradoxical tensions within a human society built around reputation.
Your ideas and writing style are good. The only problem I see is that it's a lil short (were you told to do only 2 body paragraphs?) and you lack linking sentences at the end of paragraphs. However, I'm sure you can bring it back by working on your handwriting, because your mark would have been pretty high if not for the massive deduction. Just curious, can you send a pic of your written essay if you have it? If you don't want to, it's fine
 

Average Boreduser

Rising Renewal
Joined
Jun 28, 2022
Messages
3,198
Location
Somewhere
Gender
Female
HSC
2026
Your ideas and writing style are good. The only problem I see is that it's a lil short (were you told to do only 2 body paragraphs?) and you lack linking sentences at the end of paragraphs. However, I'm sure you can bring it back by working on your handwriting, because your mark would have been pretty high if not for the massive deduction. Just curious, can you send a pic of your written essay if you have it? If you don't want to, it's fine
yeah I was told by my teacher to write ab social pressures in one and behaviours in the other, hence the shortness. also its 950 wrods so i think its relatively close to how many words students used for 3 parras
 

Average Boreduser

Rising Renewal
Joined
Jun 28, 2022
Messages
3,198
Location
Somewhere
Gender
Female
HSC
2026
Your ideas and writing style are good. The only problem I see is that it's a lil short (were you told to do only 2 body paragraphs?) and you lack linking sentences at the end of paragraphs. However, I'm sure you can bring it back by working on your handwriting, because your mark would have been pretty high if not for the massive deduction. Just curious, can you send a pic of your written essay if you have it? If you don't want to, it's fine
lemme send it one sec
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)

Top