Would you drop English? (1 Viewer)

[Erique]

English as an entirely subjective subject I feel is a massive misconception. There's a certain formula to English - one of which being clear-cut structure - that's common to most high band 6 essays. No, I'm not trying to shamelessly promote or dignify the subject to give my performance some actual worth.

Students anticipate that markers are looking for academic/esoteric concepts, obscure techniques, and unusual/unique critical theory. But then they fail to look at the smaller picture. Markers just want you to answer the question - reflect the key terms of the question, link it to textual evidence that reasonably connects to concepts from the rubric. Make your expression unique not with a shitload of big-ass words, but by rearranging your syntax every now and then. Something that I was always caught up on throughout my HSC was using words that an everyday person wouldn't use because they were jarring - so I only used them sparingly for effect.

The longer you bind yourself to the mentality that because English is subjective, the hard yards won't pay well in dividend, then it's true - you will likely under perform.

Just like to disagree with Ekman and everybody else (pretty sure a good chunk of the majority) who thinks English is a purely subjective subject. Tbh, it really isn't. If you look at the exemplar essay/ creative writing, you'll note that they all have more or less the same type of 'good' writing (generalising cos I don't wanna list all the features lolol.) As long as your writing is somewhat like theirs (that is, if you include the relevant information and proper structure ), there's no way you can't or won't achieve the top band.

Too often I see people operating on the mentality that to excel in a "subjective" subject, they will need to be naturally talented in it. Ironically, that way of thinking is what limits them. If you actually think about it, the subject needs to be grounded with something in order for it to be exam-able- and in doing so, it becomes objective. And just like every other subject, if you work hard and study smart you'll excel in it. Yes, good teaching does come into play, but it really isn't just for English. If you rely on your shitty math/ science/ history teacher for everything, you'll get shitty math/ science/ history results. If you rely on your shitty english teacher for everything, you'll get shitty english results. Doesn't mean you can't self-learn/ get external help.

I can't believe I didn't see this before I actually posted. +1

 

[dan964]

Just like to disagree with Ekman and everybody else (pretty sure a good chunk of the majority) who thinks English is a purely subjective subject. Tbh, it really isn't. If you look at the exemplar essay/ creative writing, you'll note that they all have more or less the same type of 'good' writing (generalising cos I don't wanna list all the features lolol.) As long as your writing is somewhat like theirs (that is, if you include the relevant information and proper structure ), there's no way you can't or won't achieve the top band.

Too often I see people operating on the mentality that to excel in a "subjective" subject, they will need to be naturally talented in it. Ironically, that way of thinking is what limits them. If you actually think about it, the subject needs to be grounded with something in order for it to be exam-able- and in doing so, it becomes objective. And just like every other subject, if you work hard and study smart you'll excel in it. Yes, good teaching does come into play, but it really isn't just for English. If you rely on your shitty math/ science/ history teacher for everything, you'll get shitty math/ science/ history results. If you rely on your shitty english teacher for everything, you'll get shitty english results. Doesn't mean you can't self-learn/ get external help.

NOPE,
English is definitely subjective not objective, otherwise there would only be one OBJECTIVE way to look at a text.
Unlike Maths or Science, where there is usually just one right answer (excluding the long response of course), English there is multiple ways you can get good marks. English is grounded in its subjectiveness, and it has to do with expressing opinion whether it be yours or others.
If you cannot do this, you won't do well at English.
For example one marker may think your essay is brilliant, one marker may think it is scum. That is why in some sections, English is tripled marked, for this reason.

Why I would drop English?
Technically HSC English is more literature studies than actual practical English. I think Year 10 English is of a sufficient standard.
HSC and Prelim English is a bit "wishy-washy" particularly Area of Study.

 

[Shadowdude]

Oh really? Because I invested a f**k-ton of effort in English at the expense of my other subjects (barring maths) because it obviously counts towards your ATAR. And what do I receive in return? Barely any dividends as the markers feedback would be like "okay, your essay is shit".

??????

I read exemplars, I try to include such expression in my essays, but no, clearly the marker favours those who are naturally gifted.

So tell me then mate, why do I have to be the many people who suffer in English if it's not our greatest subject? Why do I still get shit results even though I work my ass off?

I did a maths course at uni and I tried really, really, really, really hard, and I got 43. Just because you work hard doesn't mean you get the reward. Most times it does, but not always.

And have you talked to the markers about it? If you feel there's bias, go complain to a higher authority, the Head of Secondary or something. Get another English teacher at the school to read over it. Get feedback.

When I did Extension 2 English, my EX2 teacher basically said, "wtf is this first page, get rid of it". Then I went to my English teacher and they discussed it, and my EX1 teacher came back to me and said, "Don't worry about what she said, she didn't know what we were studying in Ext. 1, keep it, it's good". Point is, you get multiple opinions.

And you seemed to ignore the massive part that markers are human - they do have their preference for what they like. Hence, there are huge discrepancies. I suppose those who excel in English (like you) wouldn't be able to understand how others might feel about the subject. It's probably easy for you to think in that perspective that hard work = marks, but once again, as I've emphasised over and over, such rationale does not it fit in English. As such, it is the most subjective subject in the HSC.

Maybe I'm just bitter about this, but believe me, it's how I feel... I get my tutor to look over my essays 3 weeks in advance for assessments who says it's solid but then I get destroyed. As opposed to someone who just plagiarises stuff and receives a top mark and is not caught (this is why the course is flawed). I guess in most cases, people are either maths or English lovers. Rarely will you come across someone who's great at both.

ooh sounds like me

yay me

 

[Erique]

NOPE,
English is definitely subjective not objective, otherwise there would only be one OBJECTIVE way to look at a text.
Unlike Maths or Science, where there is usually just one right answer (excluding the long response of course), English there is multiple ways you can get good marks. English is grounded in its subjectiveness, and it has to do with expressing opinion whether it be yours or others.
If you cannot do this, you won't do well at English.
For example one marker may think your essay is brilliant, one marker may think it is scum. That is why in some sections, English is tripled marked, for this reason.

Why I would drop English?
Technically HSC English is more literature studies than actual practical English. I think Year 10 English is of a sufficient standard.
HSC and Prelim English is a bit "wishy-washy" particularly Area of Study.

He's disputing the mentality that English is purely subjective. It's obviously subjective, but there are ingredients essential to a good essay that are common to good essays, namely structure, clarity, relevant + sophisticated techniques (beyond alliteration, simile, first/third person pronouns, rhyme, "diction," and I think imagery is bordering on pedestrian), and for some modules, evaluation through what the composer invites audiences to think about. Of course there are multiple ways of looking at the text. But there are not as many ways of how you fundamentally write about it.

P.S Everything you do in life will invite conflicting perspectives. People will have differing perspectives on your lifestyle, your appearance, your identity - and these prejudices or biases have even greater ramifications than HSC English has for your ATAR. What are you gonna do? Delete them from your life? In stark reality, sometimes you have to gauge what the conflicting perspectives are and conform to the most desirable one from the marker's angle. I'm sure you'll find there are even worse instances of assimilation to come.

The problem is that teachers are teaching what they think English should be, and those disparate teaching styles have a greater effect on a qualitative subject than they would on a quantitative one, namely the mathematics/sciences.

 

[Shadowdude]

Again, have you talked to your teacher or higher person about it?

 

[Shadowdude]

It's your HSC, if your English department isn't helping you, then go higher - talk to the Principal.

 

[EarthSci34]

I wouldn't drop English (Considering I do 4 Units of it haha) I do agree with most of these posts- HSC English is too focused on literature analysis and lacks the more 'technical' aspects of English (grammar). However, learning to refine one's expression is the most important part of learning about English, which I think is best taught practising the language itself.

Studying English overseas is rudimentary- the focus is on the 'correct grammar' and not on individual perception and ideas. English is tested as multiple choice grammar questions and naming parts of speech of sentences. Although quite beneficial, it doesn't really encapsulate the entirety of the English language.

Sustained, analytical and critical minds that are fostered in the study of literature is very important for the very reason that there is much to learn in them. It is important to take note that the 'messages' (themes, motifs, lessons) that are present in various textual forms is a reminder that some issues of the human condition transcend time- Shakespeare is a prominent example.

Anyway, to cut things short- HSC English does suck in more ways that one. However, one has much to learn in English. Essay writing isn't a skill that many people are lucky to have- whether you believe it or not. Marks really can't determine how good you are- just take what you can from the experience and say 'Well, after the HSC I'm never writing an essay again!' (which I highly doubt, for various reasons).

 

[Hardworking Knt]

probably, marking is pretty dodgy. So far English has taught me that what you work hard on doesn't get you marks and what you bs on the day gets you the highest marks. Also my school had a 3 part english half yearly where one part was worth 15% and the other two was 2.5% each out of 20% internal mark.. wtf.

 

[Il Capitano3]

yeah i would drop it, purely because its my worst subject and no matter how much time you put into it, you can't guarantee a high mark, as opposed to other subjects where your mark is generally proportional to how much time you put in (and how much you understand the subject)

 

[Shadowdude]

probably, marking is pretty dodgy. So far English has taught me that what you work hard on doesn't get you marks and what you bs on the day gets you the highest marks. Also my school had a 3 part english half yearly where one part was worth 15% and the other two was 2.5% each out of 20% internal mark.. wtf.

yeah i would drop it, purely because its my worst subject and no matter how much time you put into it, you can't guarantee a high mark, as opposed to other subjects where your mark is generally proportional to how much time you put in (and how much you understand the subject)

Then you guys aren't studying properly for it then

 

[photastic]

probably, marking is pretty dodgy. So far English has taught me that what you work hard on doesn't get you marks and what you bs on the day gets you the highest marks. Also my school had a 3 part english half yearly where one part was worth 15% and the other two was 2.5% each out of 20% internal mark.. wtf.

Depends on your teacher. My teacher's marking was legitimate so I knew what I had to do to earn marks. Looking back, i'm glad english is compulsory otherwise my atar would've been much lower.

 

[Hardworking Knt]

lol hard to study properly for advanced english when each teacher gives conflicting information, playing lottery with which teacher to listen to

 

[Shadowdude]

lol hard to study properly for advanced english when each teacher gives conflicting information, playing lottery with which teacher to listen to

Then you talk to both and you relay back and forth between them, or you meet both at the same time and nut the issues out


When I did 4u English in high school, I went around to tons of teachers and asked if they'd like to read drafts of my story, so I could get as much feedback as possible

 

[pomsky]

So then tell me, mate: how on earth am I supposed to excel in English when it seems that the markers hate my guts? To be honest, I do invest a lot of time into English, more than my other subjects (barring maths for obvious reasons), purely because it counts towards my ATAR. And what does that amount to despite the diligence in my work? Little reward, which is the most annoying part. It's easy for you believe in the mindset of a b6'er that English can be improved dramatically if you put your mind into it. That may be so, but for students like me who find it hard - I don't think said English-inclined people consider how we feel (mostly anger and discontentment) and why we perceive English to be subjective. Indeed, I try to replicate the writing style of high-achievers in their essays, but I still get spat in the face with C range marks with such BS marking criteria. I even get my tutor to look over my scripts to check if anything needs to be amended, however my marks to say the least are consistently average. I would rather rely on facts and statistics that can be utilised to prove something objectively true so I know what I'm saying on paper, as opposed to being subjugated by vague statements and whether the ascertains I've made from X text actually exist or were simply pulled out of thin air.

I don't want to state the obvious Hawkie, but HSC markers cannot inherently 'hate your guts' if they don't know who you are. I can't speak for every school, but mine has a tendency to use student numbers for school assessments to enforce the idea of an 'unbiased' marker (certainly, said marker could simply look your number up, but I suppose we assume they won't bother to go into all that effort). Assuming all markers have different bias's (following the definition of 'subjectivity') then, if you consistently get less-than-anticipated marks for the subject, the problem wouldn't be so much as the marker's bias but perhaps something you're overlooking in your responses.
(also assuming that your assessments have not been marked by one person only.)

Tbh, I don't think anyone can quite tell you why the subject isn't 'clicking' for you apart from yourself (however cliche that may be). I know many, many people who have improved drastically in English- so it definitely can be done. Good luck!

ALSO
Since I feel like being pedantic (YOLO); going by Dan's definition: maths is objective because there's "only one OBJECTIVE way to look at [it]" then maths is actually "subjective" as there are many different ways to approach and solve a maths problem. It's just that in the HSC we're only taught a select few of these methods. If we look at it in that way then English is simply an extension of this, where we've been taught to approach a question in a few more ways than we are for the maths/ sciences.

Hence both are subjective to an extent. All subjects are a subjective/ objective mix. As Erique stated, there is no such thing as a 'purely' subjective subject. If you feel that you might be a victim of biased marking (and note that markers try to be as unbiased as possible AND that there are measure as Dan helpfully mentioned above, to minimize the risk of bias) then capitalise on the objective side of the subject (because there is one lol).

Again, considering everything (measure, nature of subject), I reckon English is relatively objective. At the end of the day it's your way of thinking that can either promote or limit your studying and subsequently, your marks.



And thanks to Erique for clarifying my point- I'm sorry I wasn't clear enough before xD

 

[teridax]

probably, marking is pretty dodgy. So far English has taught me that what you work hard on doesn't get you marks and what you bs on the day gets you the highest marks. Also my school had a 3 part english half yearly where one part was worth 15% and the other two was 2.5% each out of 20% internal mark.. wtf.

can confirm LOL

most bs'ed essay was my history & memory one as part of my prelim yearly which i got 18/20 lololol

as opposed to my AoS (our AoS was retarded; changing perspectives wtf m9) where i prepared heaps of quotes but got 8/15

 

[dan964]

He's disputing the mentality that English is purely subjective. It's obviously subjective, but there are ingredients essential to a good essay that are common to good essays, namely structure, clarity, relevant + sophisticated techniques (beyond alliteration, simile, first/third person pronouns, rhyme, "diction," and I think imagery is bordering on pedestrian), and for some modules, evaluation through what the composer invites audiences to think about. Of course there are multiple ways of looking at the text. But there are not as many ways of how you fundamentally write about it.

P.S Everything you do in life will invite conflicting perspectives. People will have differing perspectives on your lifestyle, your appearance, your identity - and these prejudices or biases have even greater ramifications than HSC English has for your ATAR. What are you gonna do? Delete them from your life? In stark reality, sometimes you have to gauge what the conflicting perspectives are and conform to the most desirable one from the marker's angle. I'm sure you'll find there are even worse instances of assimilation to come.

The problem is that teachers are teaching what they think English should be, and those disparate teaching styles have a greater effect on a qualitative subject than they would on a quantitative one, namely the mathematics/sciences.

those ingredients are qualitative measures so hence the marker determines how clear is a certain grade, which is subjective. look at the marker criteria, what defines a good understanding, depends on the mood of the marker.
basically I am not saying that english is purely subjective but I don't thing the presence of certain elements add any sense of objectivity nor actually nullify that it is purely subjective.

 

[dan964]

that said its still good to practice
so that your expression is better

 

[dan964]

to clarify by objectivity I meant that there is only one right answer typically not concerned about method. the marking criteria for maths is almost as flexible as english but the big difference is that
maths is a lot clearer if your method is wrong than in English
except in really obvious cases for English, because the marker could
read it and not get it. again, why is english triple marked?

English is very opinion based.

 

[Librah]

yes

 

[Librah]

Oh wait, i've already responded to this thread.