Comparative analysis (stage 2 English) LAURA BETTERIDGE Me, right now…

Teaching comparative analysis (external Assessment) stage two English

Who am I? My name is Laura Betteridge. Almost a decade of experience in teaching English. 8th year of Stage Two English. (100% pass rate, average grade of a B+) 8 years at Salisbury High School (5 as coordinator) Currently teaching at Glenunga International High School (but not actually teaching English this year…)

what are we doing here? Content of today’s workshop: The assessment task The fine print The performance standards Question design Text choices and comparison choices Scaffolding for students that need support Q&A

Change is scary!!!

The benefits of the new assessment type Larger word count for scope and depth of analysis. Text production can be notoriously difficult to achieve an A grade in. Combines elements of the Communication comparison and the Text Response (folio) from English Coms that we already know how to teach. (But this still raises a lot of questions – see previous slide re: change being scary)

The assessment Assessment Type 3: Comparative Analysis (30%) Students complete a written comparative analysis of two texts and evaluate how the language features, stylistic features, and conventions in these texts are used to represent ideas, perspectives, and/or aspects of culture, and to influence audiences. These texts can be selected from one or more of the following categories: extended texts poetry drama texts film texts media texts.

The fine print In completing their comparative analysis students may draw on learning from, but must not use, texts read or viewed in other parts of the assessment program. However, students may use texts that are similar in type and purpose. The comparative analysis must be a product of independent study, but it is appropriate for teachers to advise and support students in choosing texts to compare. Students must not complete the comparative analysis as a shared exercise. The comparative analysis should be a maximum of 2000 words. All specific features of the assessment design criteria for this subject may be assessed in the comparative analysis.

Knowledge and Understanding KU1 Knowledge and understanding of ideas and perspectives in texts. KU2 Knowledge and understanding of ways in which creators of texts use language features, stylistic features, and conventions to make meaning. KU3 Knowledge and understanding of ways in which texts are created for different purposes, audiences, and contexts.

Analysis An1 Analysis of ideas, perspectives, and/or aspects of culture represented in texts. An2 Analysis of language features, stylistic features, and conventions, and evaluation of how they influence audiences. An3 Analysis of similarities and differences when comparing texts.

Application Ap1 Use of language and stylistic features to create texts that address the purpose, audience, and context. Ap2 Use of evidence from texts to develop and support a response. Ap3 Use of clear, accurate, and fluent expression.

Key terminologies

Sample comparison The Big Bang Theory (2007-) Community (2009-2015)

Generating good questions “How successful are the creators of The Big Bang Theory and Community in utilising the language and stylistic conventions of the situation comedy to explore ideas and perspectives in order to appeal to their target audience?”

Sample questions How successful are the creators of Macbeth and Breaking Bad in utilising the language and stylistic conventions of their text type to explore ideas of greed and power in an appeal to their target audience? How successful are the creators of The Big Bang Theory and Community in their use of language and stylistic features to explore character stereotypes in an appeal to their target demographics? To what extent do the creators of The Big Bang Theory and Community use the language and style of the situation comedy to appeal to their target audience through an exploration of the idea of belonging?

Obstacles…

Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of ideas and perspectives in a range of texts. Thorough knowledge and understanding of ways in which creators of texts use a range of language features, stylistic features, and conventions to make meaning. Extensive knowledge and understanding of a wide range of ways in which texts are created for different purposes, audiences, and contexts. Complex analysis of ideas, perspectives, and/or aspects of culture represented in texts. Perceptive analysis of language features, stylistic features, and conventions used in texts, and thoughtful evaluation of how these influence audiences. Critical analysis of similarities and differences when comparing texts. Versatile and precise use of language and stylistic features to create a wide range of coherent texts that address the purpose, audience, and context. Fluently integrated use of evidence from texts to develop and support a response. Sophisticated use of accurate, clear, and fluent expression.

Sample comparison The Big Bang Theory (2007-) Community (2009-2015)

Suitable Texts Students cannot analyse something that they are enamoured with. Go above and beyond what is popular. Set limits if you need to. If in doubt, suggested texts for ELS are always recommended. Ensure that the texts are actually comparable.

Do the Texts Share One or More of the following? Ideas, themes, values, beliefs, perspectives or aspects of culture Language features, structural features, stylistic features, conventions or form Purpose, targeted demographic, socio-cultural context

What if I have one of ‘those’ classes? You can study a shared text TYPE. You cannot study a shared text. THIS CAN BE YOU!!!!!

Suggested structure Introduction (250 words) Contextual information (300 words) Target audience, purpose, socio-cultural context and form (similarities/differences) Major point one (structure based) (300 words) Major point two (style based) (300 words) Major point three (language based) (300 words) Major point four (evaluation of success) (300 words) Conclusion/reiteration of evaluation (250 words) Total 2000 words including evidence to support ideas DO include references (MLA is English preferred at most universities) No less that 1800 words, NO MORE THAN 2000

Planning for the year Check the submission dates (usually end of Term 3) and plan. (Start now. Seriously…) Use term one for students to pick their texts and refine their questions, term two for drafting and term three for polishing. Moderation IS a subjective process. There is no feedback. This task does have the potential to impact the entire end of year grade for students.

Questions? (Disclaimer – I am not an expert!)