English Extension 1 2019 HSC exam pack

General feedback

Students should:

• ensure they address all components of the question
• demonstrate a strong conceptual understanding of why Literary Worlds are constructed and how they interact with the reader
• demonstrate control of language and form for both critical and imaginative responses
• communicate clearly, taking care with syntax, grammar, paragraphing and punctuation.

Question 1(a)

In better responses, students were able to:

• establish an effective and sophisticated thesis
• synthesise and make connections between stimulus texts in response to the question
• evaluate the extent to which the stimulus text aligned with their understanding of Literary Worlds
• provide relevant textual evidence
• construct concept-driven responses that used the texts to support their insights about the purpose of Literary Worlds
• write precisely and concisely
• sustain control of language.

Areas for students to improve include:

• using the texts to develop a thesis in response to the purpose of Literary Worlds rather than simply listing literary devices
• sustaining their focus on the question
• referencing the texts in a purposeful way
• demonstrating control of language and effective communication of ideas in response to the questions.

Question 1(b)

In better responses, students were able to:

• address all aspects of the question
• use the stimulus to develop an engaging and authentic voice
• consider their imaginative form and use of language
• demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of the ideas and values of Literary Worlds in an imaginative way.

Areas for students to improve include:

• engaging with the stimulus beyond superficial references to elements within the stimulus
• avoiding clichéd responses to the question and stimulus
• using their story as evidence of their understanding of the module and the ideas and values of Literary Worlds
• demonstrating a consideration of the imaginative form and language
• demonstrating effective control of language, including punctuation, syntax, sentence structure and dialogue.

General feedback

Students should:

• ensure they are familiar with the module and elective descriptions and that this informs their conceptual understanding of the Elective
• develop an understanding of the conceptual connections between the author’s purpose and the module and elective descriptions
• consider the contextual circumstances that inform the construction of each of the texts studied
• examine the conceptual bridges between and among the texts studied.

In better responses, students were able to:

• construct thoughtful thesis statements that engaged explicitly with the terms of the question
• provide evidence from throughout the text, displaying a holistic textual understanding
• judiciously select textual evidence that aligned explicitly with the line of argument
• use concluding paragraphs with meaningful evaluative comments that enhanced the cohesiveness of the response.

Elective 1: Literary homelands

Students should:

• develop a thorough knowledge of the texts beyond plot and characterisation
• familiarise themselves with the metalanguage of the literary lenses and avoid tokenistic terms and expressions.

In better responses, students were able to:

• deal directly with the ideas of the question and the relationship between the two key terms, ‘marginalisation’ and ‘empowerment’
• demonstrate close engagement with the core texts, for example Eilis Lacey’s marginalisation in a new country and her eventual empowerment through reclaiming and reforming her identity
• consider the ways in which form and content are interrelated, such as the development of character and concepts through the narrative form, or for example Chong’s use of metaphor in Burning Rice to explore her ancestry and modern identity
• provide a clear conceptual outline for each body paragraph argument in focused topic sentences that resonated with the terms of the thesis statement
• sustain the line of argument established in a concise introduction throughout the essay
• provide thoughtful evaluations of the function and purpose of forms and features contained in the textual evidence (quotes) provided.

Areas for students to improve include:

• ensuring the introduction maintains a clear and consistent through-line
• referencing concepts in the texts within the Elective and showing how these align with the terms of the question
• understanding how the conceptual focus of individual texts sits within the overall conceptual focus of the Elective
• demonstrating knowledge of textual form and style
• demonstrating conceptual knowledge of each text and the aspects of similarity and difference between them as a platform to explore the texts beyond the scope of compartmentalised textual analysis, and consider the thesis throughout the argument
• limiting general textual summary by identifying specific examples that align with the overarching paragraph argument
• considering a text through the lens of one character as evidence of the author’s intent. For example, Forster’s postcolonial treatment of the Raj is not adequately explored by considering only Adela’s experiences
• analyse textual details in a manner that is consistent with the body paragraph focus
• balancing the arguments across the essay.

Elective 2: Worlds of upheaval

Students should:

• engage directly with the precise terms of the question
• consider the texts in terms of the composer’s purpose so they engage with the values of a given context – this should prevent simplistic answers that are limited to a consideration of character and theme
• consider the composer’s choice of form in achieving their purpose
• read the question not only in terms of theme, but also in terms of form
• synthesise via argument, rather than by including three texts in one paragraph
• choose related texts wisely, ensuring they enhance overall analysis of the Elective rather than focusing narrowly on one of the prescribed texts.

In better responses, students were able to:

• engage directly with the precise terms of the question throughout the whole essay, not just in the introduction and conclusion
• frame the argument in terms of the values of the text and then interrogate the way that value sat with or against the values of the context
• analyse the form of the text in terms of the composer’s purpose
• write clearly and precisely
• be precise when referring to context and acknowledge its significance in shaping the way a composer represents an idea, for example the effects of the Tiananmen Square massacre in Do Not Say We Have Nothing, or Modernist industrialisation in Metropolis.
• synthesise the texts conceptually and show evidence of deep thinking on the similarities and differences between the texts.

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding writing an Area of Study-style essay on Worlds of Upheaval
• writing about the text’s construction rather than its characterisation
• creating a considered argument on how composers writing in Worlds of Upheaval construct their texts for a purpose rather than writing three separate mini-essays
• making limited or general reference to context and values
• when writing on Metropolis and Frankenstein, broadening responses to discussions of concerns other than technology and change.

Elective 3: Reimagined worlds

Students should:

• respond explicitly to the question, ensuring that they address all its components
• be judicious in their selection of related text(s)
• adopt a clear and coherent structure
• provide close textual analysis of the texts discussed and demonstrate a holistic understanding of each text’s context and values
• carefully plan their response.

In better responses, students were able to:

• construct a balanced argument
• engage with all aspects of the question so that there was a specific exploration of the relationship between insight and wonder
• illustrate deep knowledge of the concept of a reimagined world and the composer’s purpose in constructing such a literary world, for example Le Guin’s exploration of gender in The Left Hand of Darkness or Swift’s satire of political machinations in Gulliver’s Travels
• provide close textual analysis by using a wide range of textual examples to support their ideas and arguments
• consider the impact of context and form in the construction of a text
• demonstrate a highly developed control of language
• formulate a structured and cohesive response.

Areas for students to improve include:

• establishing an effective and sophisticated thesis, and maintaining this throughout their response
• writing clearly and precisely with a demonstrated control of language
• revealing a holistic understanding of each text rather than relying on predictable examples or only drawing from the early stages of a text such as the opening line/page
• treating the Elective as something other than a simple thematic study by considering integral aspects of a text’s construction such as purpose, form, context and values
• approaching the elective through the lens of science fiction or genre as this encouraged a simplistic approach to some texts, for example  treatment of Pan’s Labyrinth as a fairytale world marred some responses
• selecting sophisticated related texts that allow students to examine the key ideas of the elective in depth
• crafting a cohesive response that avoids the limiting structure of three/four separate mini-essay.

Elective 4: Literary mindscapes

Students should:

• make careful selections of related texts that allow for extended analysis or discussion and which clearly reflect the concerns of the Elective
• ensure that all of the demands of the question are reflected in their response.

In better responses, students were able to:

• sustain and develop a clear personal position in response to the question which then formed the basis of exploring both ‘being and yearning’ and the ‘ideas and values in Literary Mindscapes’
• carefully choose and effectively synthesise references to relevant philosophical considerations, literary movements and aspects of context that demonstrated a sophisticated understanding of ideas and values in relation to the texts and Elective
• select a related text (or texts) that explores the interior world of others and which allows students to choose appropriate examples to support their personal response to the question
• demonstrate a deep understanding of the elective through the discussion of prescribed texts – underpinned by judicious textual references – which supported the arguments being made and demonstrated an insightful knowledge of the concerns explored in the text.

Areas for students to improve include:

• maintaining a focus on the demands of the question throughout the response
• differentiating between different conceptions of identity as expressed through the textsensuring that there is a balanced and sustained focus on each of the texts discussed in the response, particularly in relation to the use of related texts
• selecting related texts that address the broad concerns of the Elective and allow for critical evaluation rather than a text that has narrow or specific links to the Elective or a specific aspect of a prescribed text.

Elective 5: Intersecting worlds

Students should:

• ensure they are familiar with the Elective description to enable relevant and extensive investigation
• give extensive consideration to how ‘diverse conceptualisations of nature’ are apparent in all of their texts (prescribed and related) to avoid generalisations and overly broad interpretations of the Elective framework
• consider the ways in which their prescribed texts fall into particular patterns of inquiry or conceptual frameworks to enable cohesion and discernment in their responses
• consider texts of their own choosing that add meaningful and well-considered (rather than arbitrary or poorly considered) dimensions to their responses.

In better responses, students were able to:

• develop a clear, authentic voice that showed a capacity to think deeply and/or intuitively about the terms of the question and its possibilities
• acknowledge all parts of the question throughout their response including ‘To what extent…’, ‘ideas and values’ and ‘the relationship between beauty and necessity’ in order to provide, as necessary, either balanced or differentiated treatment of these key phrases
• provide extensive, highly evidenced analysis of their prescribed texts while using evidence judiciously and discerningly to support a central argument
• select evidence that drew widely and extensively from each prescribed text
• select related texts that were conceptually compatible with their prescribed texts to enable a cohesive integration of the suite of texts presented in the response
• capture, throughout their response, particular contextual, conceptual and/or paradigmatic threads, for example Jamesonian late-capitalism and/or Darwinian theory that are able to bind the texts together into a cohesive line of argument.

Areas for students to improve include:

• developing ways of responding authentically to the terms of the question rather than relying on overly rehearsed responses
• considering the broader possibilities of the question and avoiding the temptation to oversimplify it such as setting up a binary opposition between the conservationist and miners in Journey to the Stone Country, or global and local forces in The Shipping News
• using the details of prescribed texts thoughtfully and strategically to provide richness and diversity of argument rather than using limited textual elements from complex texts such as those by Wordsworth and Winton
• giving more thought and consideration to the choice and use of related texts as there was clear evidence that some related texts had a very narrow compatibility with either the NESA Elective statement or the accompanying prescribed texts
• considering some of the broader contextual or conceptual possibilities of their texts as a way of ‘packaging’ their overall argument more cohesively. For example, there was a consideration of ‘beauty’ as evident in the coastline in Island Home or Tintern Abbey or ‘necessity’ in the forces of gentrification in Clay, but little consideration of the relationship between the two concepts.