Hi All,
Wanting to have a conversation about the new exam structure for the extended answer section – is it just me or are others finding that the statement/bullet points confuses students, muddies the water, and means their mark is lower than when we had the old style of question?
Possibly I have been teaching the old style of exam for too long and am simply finding this new way counter-initiative.
Do your kiddos struggle with this style of question or find it easier? If they find it easier, what strategies have you put in place to help them?
Warm regards,
L
Hey L,
I’m one of the lucky ones who got to stress test the new format with 11’s last year and sort of bang into things and figure out the some of the pain points.
Like Thom I direct the students to hew pretty close to the dot points in terms of structure (this was something that came out of the PD about the new format at the start of the year). This year I’ve found that the prescriptive nature of the question is relatively balanced out by the help that more explicit instruction offers the students. I’ve found that if I’m following the letter of the marking keys (which I very tediously walk the students through before hand) then they are actually doing quite well. But that’s after a year of fudging in year 11 and a semester of very explicit instruction around responses this year.
I will admit to it being a pretty significant mental adjustment for me last year though. After a decade of countless 3 body paragraph media essays – it took a little time to let go of. Not to mention wrapping one’s head around writing questions for the new format…
I’ll also admit to being a little worried about what will happen with WACE marking at the end of the year though, given that everyone else (who is marking) is also going to need to adjust their ideas of what a media essay is ‘supposed’ to be.
B
Hi all,
I can see the benefit of the new format (though like others said, it took me a while to wrap my head around the thinking as opposed to the three paragraph structure).
One flaw I feel that should be addressed is that if students don’t use the subheadings, technically if they are answering dot points 2-4 with textual examples, they should get 4/4 marks for the first dot point (“construct” section).
I’ve told students pretty much what Tom has said, but have added my alterations in red (thanks Tom for breaking it down):
I’ve told students to address each dot point separately under a sub-heading. As there is overlap sometimes between dot points 2 and 3, I’ve told them to repeat themselves if needed, as they will address each dot point as though they are answering a separate new question.
Sub-question 1 - Overview: Students must ‘unpack’ the statement and, ideally, explain the connection between the three (or occasionally two) key topics that it’s made up of. They also need to explain why the text(s) they’ve chosen are a good choice for the statement by linking its components/features to the statement. (1 paragraph)
Sub-question 2 - Summary: As these questions are often about summarising a concept of the question, I’ve told students to write down everything they know about the concept generically (e.g. define, how the concept is created (e.g. if the question is about representation, how representations are made, what codes could be used to create it, maybe hinting on stereotyping), evidence optional but preferred. (1 paragraph)
Sub-question 3 – Discussion: Again, just answer the sub-question using the text(s), but this time, use concrete evidence and go into more depth (2 paragraphs)
Sub-question 4 – Analysis: Again, just answer the sub-question using the text(s), but this time, use concrete evidence and go into even more depth (2 paragraphs)
I crossed out the “more” and “even more”, as I’ve found dot points 3+4 are normally separate ideas, so students should go into as much depth for each sub-question.
Hope that makes sense!
J
I think that is a good point about the overview section. Even if they do use a heading for it, as long as they are meeting the requirements somewhere in the response, they really should get 100% for that section. Which makes things a bit tricky in the way that is structured.
I think it is also worth being reminded that there was no requirement for a 3 paragraph essay structure. I have always taught it this way.
There are no marks for structure...
There are no marks for structure...
The marking key has always had the concepts separated. Students have always been able to use tables and dot points etc. It was never specifically an 'essay'. With that reminder out of the way, students can absolutely write an essay style structure if that is their preference. I think SCSA just wanted to make it clearer upfront that it was not (and never was) a requirement, because seemingly most subscribed to the essay (only) model.
So, with that in mind, it has barely changed. There is essentially a slight reshuffling of the marking key priorities. Additionally, by providing the clear dot points alongside the topic statement (rather than just having a topic statement like we used to), it provides students guidance around what specific syllabus points it wants addressing. In the past there were issues forming a topic while also informing / directing to the syllabus points that needed addressing. This allows us to do both more easily.
Saying that, they are taking me 3 times as long to mark!
M
Thank you everyone for your comments.
I do not think it has ‘barely changed’, I know it has substantially changed. The problem is the cross-over in concepts between dot points and then trying to show horn these concepts into the statement is making this a process fraught with problems.
I do not see how this is benefitting the course, or the students, or the teachers.
Thank you again for your comments (and putting up with my vent).
Warm regards,
L
Hi L,
I started trialling the new question structure last year for our mid-year Year 11 exam. The girls have not found the approach very straight forward and the very wordy questions in section two quite overwhelming. To me It seemed odd to include bullet point style questions in section two when bullet point style questions were removed from Section One in the exam around 2013 which was great and made the questions in section one straight forward. It takes them quite a bit of time to unpack each question out of the question choices, then select the best two questions, then the text/s and then plan out an argument. However, there is a bit more time to do this now with the removal of the stimulus and only having two questions to answer in section one. So there is an a silver lining there 😊
Ive encouraged them to approach the new style by ensuring they address the points and explicitly weave them into their argument/s and response paragraphs (many still preferring an essay format). My hope is that students will not be disadvantaged if they choose not to use headings and subheadings (dictated by the bullet points) in their extended responses when examiners are marking the papers and that their responses “are not limited to conventional essay format; answers can use lists and dot points if they are appropriate to your answer”….
Hope my rambling makes sense 😊
B
Hi B,
That is my concern as well. If the 4 dot points are answered, but woven into a traditional essay format, therefore harder for a marker to easily find than say someone who uses subheadings, will they ultimately lose marks?
My kiddos are not fans of this structure, it basically asks them to throw salt over their shoulder, turn around three times and then join the dots of disparate parts of a statement/dot point.
But…we are stuck with it. Need to figure out how (with the help of my learned colleagues’ responses) how to really nail down this incoherent beast of a thing.
Warm regards,
L
Hi all,
It almost feels like they should address each dot point as a separate question and the marker should too, as there is often overlap between dot points, or the concepts for the dot points sometimes have tenuous links between each other when compared to how I have taught a text. For example, I might teach auteur, aesthetics and production context, but then use a different text for controls and constraints. If the question then asks for auteur, aesthetics and controls and constraints, my students have chosen not to answer it as they can’t use the same text for all dot points.
My biggest issue (repeating myself, I know) is still just about how it seems impossible not to get 4/4 for the first dot point if adopting essay structure.
Thanks,
J
Hi J,
I do agree that it can be hard to strike that balance with covering all the aspects within the syllabus within a single media work. There are some ways we can assist the students in preparing for the examinations post-assessments.
I create a retrieval chart that focuses on all of the syllabus dot points for each media work that we study. These will be used for assessments, and I encourage the students to fill out the sections relevant to that current assessment and then go back to the chart afterwards and fill out the other sections for their own personal revision leading up to the WACE.
I've attached a copy of one I use, this one is for Grand Budapest Hotel (they are essentially all the same, I just changed the name for the media work and often colour code the tables to visually represent the media work so that it can be easier to find amongst the other documents), feel free to adapt this. I often may have slight tweaks to each chart dependent on the film (in this one I added "Wes Anderson Trends" in the trends section as that is specific to that media work).
Hopefully this is of some help.
C
Hi all,
A really good, helpful discussion re the new Ext Response structure.
Having some time to breathe after marking and feeding back on both 11 and 12 exams, I’ve noticed a few things (not sure if these have been mentioned previously):
If students respond using the new bullet point structure. it lends itself to covering 1 text in detail. Using 2 or 3 texts is problematic as the bullet points/questions build up detail and evidence (EG: narrative to themes, context to subcultures, etc). Chopping and changing between texts within key terms is difficult (even chaotic) using this structure.
However, I have noticed that students who follow the essay structure can use multiple texts effectively. And whether they’ve used multiple texts or not, they tend to score higher than the bullet point structure. Has anyone else noticed this?
If using 1 text if preferrable in the new structure, then the flow on effect is teaching less texts overall (but in more detail). Not sure this is good for students, as they will not be exposed to a variety of pop culture / media art texts / auteurs / styles, etc.
Would it be beneficial to use the same structure (but, say, 2 bullet points) for the short response? Would this not help students practice and perfect the structure, leading into the Ext Response.
Overall, I think the new structure is more challenging for students, and by the sounds of it, for teachers too.
Nonetheless, wishing all happy holidays coming up!
S