Notes from Class – 5/4/07
We examined two sample responses – One high-scoring and one mid-scoring response.
Aspects we discussed about the two responses were:
They both address the form – they are speeches and contain features of that text. They both contained clears thesis statements (arguments) – each kept returning to the argument that was set up in the first paragraph.
Think about this in light of your assessment which requires you to examine “One person’s truth is another person’s …” in relation to a idea that is explored through Frontline and your related text.
The higher band response was considerably longer (40%) and used more sophisticated language. The composer used examples and then showed how they supported their argument. They explore how the ideas are presented. One aspect to consider: How does language present the ideas? For example, Mike Moore uses overly sophisticated language in informal situations. His attempts to appear sophisticated reveal how socially inept he is.
Another example is the constant use of reductionism (the oversimplification of complex ideas or data) in the text. Complex ideas and situations are reduced to a single “grab”. Every story is reduced to a rhyming couplet, a clichéd headline, a few sensationalised words,
MOST IMPORTANT TIP: Be analytical not descriptive. Focus on the HOW and WHY, technique-effect .
An effective technique used in the high scoring response was emotive verbs.
Eg. From the high scoring response:“[In Frontline] truth is a subjective commodity (something we can buy or sell), capable of being sensationalised, manipulated, sacrificed or fabricated.”
Explore the rest of the statement:
One person’s truth is another’s persons … lie/manipulation of image/excuse to make money/totalitarian regime/propaganda/ etc.