english & literature extension general senior syllabus

2100

03

English & Literature Extension General Senior Syllabus 2020 v1.1 Subject report 2020 February 2021

https://www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/copyright

ISBN Electronic version: 978-1-74378-122-7

© State of Queensland (QCAA) 2021 Licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 | Copyright notice: www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/copyright — lists the full terms and conditions, which specify certain exceptions to the licence. | Attribution: ‘© State of Queensland (QCAA) 2021’ — please include the link to our copyright notice.

Other copyright material in this publication is listed below.

1. Student responses in this report are excluded from the CC BY 4.0 licence.

Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority PO Box 307 Spring Hill QLD 4004 Australia 154 Melbourne Street, South Brisbane

Phone: (07) 3864 0299 Email: [email protected] Website: www.qcaa.qld.edu.au

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0



mailto:[email protected]


Contents

Introduction ______________________________________________ 1

Background ______________________________________________ 2 Purpose ....................................................................................................................... 2 Audience and use ........................................................................................................ 2 Report preparation ....................................................................................................... 2

Subject data summary _____________________________________ 3 Subject enrolments ...................................................................................................... 3 Units 3 and 4 internal assessment results ................................................................... 3

Total results for internal assessment ..................................................................................... 3 IA1 results .............................................................................................................................. 4 IA2 results .............................................................................................................................. 5 IA3 results .............................................................................................................................. 6

External assessment results ........................................................................................ 7 Final standards allocation ............................................................................................ 7 Grade boundaries ........................................................................................................ 7

Internal assessment _______________________________________ 8 Endorsement ......................................................................................................................... 8 Confirmation .......................................................................................................................... 8

Internal assessment 1 (IA1) ......................................................................................... 9 Reading and defence — extended written response (20%) ........................................ 9

Assessment design ............................................................................................................... 9 Assessment decisions ......................................................................................................... 11

Internal assessment 2 (IA2) ....................................................................................... 18 Complex transformation and spoken defence — extended response (20%) ............. 18

Assessment design ............................................................................................................. 18 Assessment decisions ......................................................................................................... 20

Internal assessment 3 (IA3) ....................................................................................... 23 Academic research paper — Extended written response (35%) ............................... 23


External assessment ______________________________________ 32 Extended response (35 marks) — theorised exploration of unseen text (25%) ......... 32


English & Literature Extension General Senior Syllabus 2020 v1.1 Subject report 2020

Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority February 2021

Page 1 of 42

Introduction The first summative year for the new Queensland Certificate of Education (QCE) system was unexpectedly challenging. The demands of delivering new assessment requirements and processes were amplified by disruptions to senior schooling arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. This meant the new system was forced to adapt before it had been introduced — the number of summative internal assessments was reduced from three to two in all General subjects. Schools and the QCAA worked together to implement the new assessment processes and the 2020 Year 12 cohort received accurate and reliable subject results.

Queensland’s innovative new senior assessment system combines the flexibility and authenticity of school-based assessment, developed and marked by classroom teachers, with the rigour and consistency of external assessment set and marked by QCAA-trained assessment writers and markers. The system does not privilege one form of assessment over another, and both teachers and QCAA assessors share the role of making high-stakes judgments about the achievement of students. Our commitment to rigorous external quality assurance guarantees the reliability of both internal and external assessment outcomes.

Using evidence of student learning to make judgments on student achievement is just one purpose of assessment. In a sophisticated assessment system, it is also used by teachers to inform pedagogy and by students to monitor and reflect on their progress.

This post-cycle report on the summative assessment program is not simply being produced as a matter of record. It is intended that it will play an active role in future assessment cycles by providing observations and findings in a way that is meaningful and helpful to support the teaching and learning process, provide future students with guidance to support their preparations for summative assessment, and promote transparency and accountability in the broader education community. Reflection and research are necessary for the new system to achieve stability and to continue to evolve. The annual subject report is a key medium for making it accessible to schools and others.



Page 2 of 42

Background

Purpose The annual subject report is an analysis of the previous year’s full summative assessment cycle. This includes endorsement of summative internal assessment instruments, confirmation of internal assessment marks and external assessment.

The report provides an overview of the key outcomes of one full teaching, learning and assessment cycle for each subject, including:

• information about the application of the syllabus objectives through the design and marking of internal and external assessments

• information about the patterns of student achievement in each subject for the assessment cycle.

It also provides advice to schools to promote continuous improvement, including:

• identification of effective practices in the design and marking of valid, accessible and reliable assessments

• identification of areas for improvement and recommendations to enhance the design and marking of valid, accessible and reliable assessment instruments

• provision of tangible examples of best practice where relevant, possible and appropriate.

Audience and use This report should be read by school leaders, subject leaders and teachers to inform teaching and learning and assessment preparation. The report is to be used by schools and teachers to assist in assessment design practice, in making assessment decisions and in preparing students for external assessment.

The report is publicly available to promote transparency and accountability. Students, parents, community members and other education stakeholders can learn about the assessment practices and outcomes for General subjects (including alternative sequences and Senior External Examination subjects, where relevant) and General (Extension) subjects.

Report preparation The report includes analyses of data and other information from the processes of endorsement, confirmation and external assessment, and advice from the chief confirmer, chief endorser and chief marker, developed in consultation with and support from QCAA subject matter experts.



Page 3 of 42

Subject data summary

Subject enrolments • Number of schools offering the subject: 65.

Completion of units Unit 1 Unit 2 Units 3 and 4* Number of students completed

0 0 604

*Units 3 and 4 figure includes students who were not rated.

Units 3 and 4 internal assessment results 2020 COVID-19 adjustments To support Queensland schools, teachers and students to manage learning and assessment during the evolving COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the QCAA Board approved the removal of one internal assessment for students completing Units 3 and 4 in General and Applied subjects. In General subjects, students completed two internal assessments and an external assessment. Schools made decisions based on QCAA advice and their school context. Therefore, across the state some instruments were completed by most schools, some completed by fewer schools and others completed by few or no schools. In the case of the latter, the data and information for these instruments has not been included.

Total results for internal assessment



Page 4 of 42

IA1 results IA1 total

IA1 Criterion 1 IA1 Criterion 2




Page 5 of 42






Page 6 of 42






Page 7 of 42

External assessment results

Final standards allocation The number of students awarded each standard across the state are as follows.

Standard A B C D E Number of students

337 198 50 12 0

Grade boundaries The grade boundaries are determined using a process to compare results on a numeric scale to the reporting standards.

Standard A B C D E Marks achieved

100–82 81–63 62–45 44–16 15–0



Page 8 of 42

Internal assessment The following information and advice pertain to the assessment design and assessment decisions for each IA in Units 3 and 4. These instruments have undergone quality assurance processes informed by the attributes of quality assessment (validity, accessibility and reliability).

Endorsement Endorsement is the quality assurance process based on the attributes of validity and accessibility. These attributes are categorised further as priorities for assessment and each priority can be further broken down into assessment practices. Data presented in the assessment design sections identifies the reasons why IA instruments were not endorsed at Application 1, by the priority for assessments. An IA may have been identified more than once for a priority for assessment, e.g. it may have demonstrated a misalignment to both subject matter and to the assessment objective. Refer to the quality assurance tools for detailed information about the assessment practices for each assessment instrument.

Total number of items endorsed in Application 1

Number of items submitted each event IA1 IA2 IA3 Total number of instruments 70 70 70

Confirmation Confirmation is the quality assurance process based on the attribute of reliability. Teachers make judgments about the evidence in students’ responses using the instrument-specific marking guide (ISMG) to indicate the alignment of students’ work with performance-level descriptors and determine a mark for each criterion. These are provisional criterion marks. The QCAA makes the final decision about student results through the confirmation processes. Data presented in the assessment decisions section identifies the level of agreement between provisional and final results.

Number of samples reviewed at initial, supplementary and extraordinary review IA Number of

schools Number of samples requested

Supplementary samples requested

Extraordinary review

School review

Percentage agreement with provisional

1 65 304 10 1 1 98.53 2 8 39 0 0 0 99.4 3 58 269 17 0 1 96.55



Page 9 of 42

Internal assessment 1 (IA1)

Reading and defence — extended written response (20%) The focus of IA1 is to develop the two central skills of the English & Literature Extension syllabus:

• the skills of close reading

• the capacity to theoretically defend a close reading.

The content focus is to introduce students to the reading approaches framework — specifically author-centred reading practices and reader-centred reading practices (Syllabus section 2.5.1).

Assessment design

Validity Validity in assessment design considers the extent to which an assessment item accurately measures what it is intended to measure and that the evidence of student learning collected from an assessment can be legitimately used for the purpose specified in the syllabus.

Reasons for non-endorsement by priority of assessment — validity practices

Validity priority Number of times priority was identified in decisions* Alignment 9 Authentication 5 Authenticity 9 Item construction 7 Scope and scale 1

*Total number of submissions: 70. Each priority might contain up to four assessment practices.

Effective practices

Validity priorities were effectively demonstrated in assessment instruments that featured:

• alignment — appropriate cognitions in the task description and the scaffolding. An explanation of the theoretical intent of the task, and the option to select either an author-centred or reader-centred approach

• authenticity — the provision of an appropriate context to help students identify audience and write in consideration of audience

• authentication — alignment with the duration of the task specifications of the need for referencing, bibliographies and citations

• item construction — clear scaffolding that gives steps for approaching the task and does not repeat or redefine the task requirements

• scope and scale — no specification of any requirements beyond the particulars of the task as outlined in the syllabus.



Page 10 of 42

Practices to strengthen

It is recommended that assessment instruments:

• specify the assessable cognitions, specifically ‘analyse, in the reading, how the genre, structure and textual features of the selected complex literary text support a valid interpretation’

• specify that two types of analysis and evaluation are required

of their reading

of the theoretical approach used

• specify a realistic context for IA1 for both the reading and defence (these may have the same or different audiences)

• have checkpoints that align with the mandatory conditions of the task

• are not a replication of the QCAA exemplar so that unique student responses can be guaranteed

• do not include scaffolding that repeats or redefines the task.

Accessibility Accessibility in assessment design ensures that no student or group of students is disadvantaged in their capacity to access an assessment.

Reasons for non-endorsement by priority of assessment — accessibility practices

Accessibility priority Number of times priority was identified in decisions* Transparency 3 Language 1 Layout 0 Bias avoidance 0


Effective practices

Accessibility priorities were effectively demonstrated in assessment instruments that featured:

• a task description that describes the purpose of readings and defences — cueing that students will approach each section differently

• clear, effective layout — in IA1, assessment instruments tended to separate the conceptual demands of the reading and the defence. This indicates to students that the task has two distinct parts (which can have two audiences).



• use simple, clear, accessible language that is free from textual errors. It is particularly important that students be provided with correctly spelled names of theorists

• give enough clear instructions and do not simply repeat the task description from the syllabus. This is the purpose of the scaffolding — to provide clear steps to complete the task, which is an unfamiliar text type for students



Page 11 of 42

• use bullets point and headings to help guide students through the processes related to readings and defences.

Additional advice

• When schools nominate to have only one text for IA1, students may not develop effective or discerning interpretations, e.g. a student who finds it difficult to connect to the text may struggle to develop a valid reader-centred interpretation that will allow them to demonstrate effective or discerning analysis.

• If schools decide to have one text for IA1, it should be a text that has suitable scope for students to develop a range of both reader-centred and author-centred interpretations. A preselected text should not limit a student’s ability to respond. Schools should consider whether the text prompts a range of diverse responses that will allow equal opportunity to both reader-centred and author-centred approaches.

• Analysis of the film adaptations of literary texts should recognise the director as a significant authorial presence. Students should not interpret a film adaptation with solely the original text’s author in mind.

• Schools should ensure that the author is relevant to the text type and that the author is seen as a complex presence within the text, with recognition of the difficulties in assigning a ‘sole author’, particularly within the film medium.

Assessment decisions

Reliability Reliability is a judgment about the measurements of assessment. It refers to the extent to which the results of assessments are consistent, replicable and free from error.

Agreement trends between provisional and final results

Criterion number

Criterion name Percentage agreement with provisional

Percentage less than provisional

Percentage greater than provisional

1 Understanding and analysis of literary texts

99.18 0.33 0.49

2 Understanding and application of theories

98.2 1.47 0.33

3 Evaluation and synthesis

98.04 1.64 0.33

4 Controlling textual features and conventions

98.69 0.16 0.15

Effective practices

Accuracy and consistency of the application of the ISMG for this IA was most effective when:

• readings featured specific analysis of the focus text using the author-centred or reader-centred approach. Assessment objectives 1 and 5 require students to ‘develop a valid interpretation in the reading’ and ‘analyse, in the reading, how the genre, structure and textual features of the selected complex literary text support a valid interpretation’. Responses that used both direct



Page 12 of 42

and indirect evidence from the text to support a valid interpretation were able to meet these objectives successfully

• readings featured a clear ‘interpretation’ of the text, as a result of analysing the text within either the reader-centred or author-centred approach. Responses could demonstrate this interpretation in a range of ways. Some responses established a thesis in the reading and subsequently developed it through arguments. Other responses arrived at a more specific interpretation or thesis towards the end of the reading, as a result of their exploration and analysis of the text. When responses could articulate their interpretation of the text and link this to their analysis, they were more successful in their demonstration of Assessment objectives 1 and 5

• reader-centred readings articulated how interpretations of the text were linked to student/reader and their context

• author-centred readings articulated how interpretations of the text were linked to the author and their context

• responses recognised the nuances of author-centred or reader-centred approaches, and how both are reliant on contextual factors, e.g. responses that recognised the subjectivity present within the author-centred approach, or the ideological context of interpretations in the reader-centred approach, were able to demonstrate a more effective or discerning understanding of the relationships within relevant aspects of the approach (Assessment objective 3)

• defences evaluate the theoretical approach and reading practices that have been used to create meaning in the reading. In doing so, effective and discerning responses will make an appraisal of the approach by weighing up or assessing the strengths, implications and limitations of reading within the author or reader-centred approaches. Responses might demonstrate this in a variety of ways, e.g. they might explain how authorial presence was based on assumptions about the ‘implied author’ and that these constrained possible interpretations. For reader-centred, they might explain how the perceived ‘individual’ interpretation in the reading was also discursively produced, therefore problematising the notion of purely individual interpretations. In doing so, effective responses link to the relevant theoretical underpinnings of their reading and explain the inherent strengths, weaknesses and implications of reading in this way

• defences are written in first person, in order to help students be specific about their own reading practices and the theoretical concepts that underpin them.

Samples of effective practices

The following are excerpts from a response that illustrates the characteristics for the criteria at the performance level indicated. The samples may provide evidence of more than one criterion. The characteristics highlighted may not be the only time the characteristics have occurred throughout the response.



Page 13 of 42

Understanding and analysis of literary texts (5 marks) This response demonstrates: • discerning

understanding of the selected complex literary text to develop a discriminating interpretation in the reading

• discerning analysis, in the reading, of the genre, structure and textual features of the selected complex literary text in order to support a discriminating interpretation.

Controlling textual features and conventions (4 marks) This response demonstrates: • discerning use of

appropriate patterns and conventions of academic genres and communication, including correct terminology, citation and referencing conventions

• discerning use of textual features to create a theorised, extended analytical response for an academic audience.

Excerpt 1



Page 14 of 42

Understanding and application of theories (6 marks) This response demonstrates: • discerning

understanding of relevant aspects of the reader-centred or author-centred theoretical approach in order to generate a reading of the selected complex literary text and then systematically explore this theorised reading in the defence

• discerning understanding of the relationships within relevant aspects of the reader-centred or author-centred theoretical approach in order to develop a systematic exploration of the reading of the selected complex literary text

• discerning application of appropriate aspects of the reader-centred or author-centred theoretical approach in order to generate an interpretation of the complex literary text in the reading and to develop a theorised examination of this reading in the defence.

Excerpt 2



Page 15 of 42

Evaluation and synthesis (5 marks) This response demonstrates: • discerning evaluation,

in the defence, of those aspects of the reader-centred or author-centred theoretical approach that were used to explore the reading of the complex literary text

• discerning evaluation, in the defence, of the reading of the selected complex literary text, making explicit the aspects of the theoretical approach that underpin it

• discerning synthesis of analysis of the selected complex literary text, the applied theoretical approach and resultant interpretation with supporting evidence.




Excerpt 3



Page 16 of 42


To further ensure accuracy and consistency of the application of the ISMG in this IA, it is recommended that:

• responses develop a distinct reading and defence. These two parts of the assessment should be separate and should not blend together

• readings feature both indirect and direct references to the focus text, with analysis of how genre, structure and textual features support a valid interpretation. An overreliance on general or indirect evidence in a reading can prevent students from being able to support their interpretation at effective or discerning performance levels

• readings feature a clear ‘interpretation’ of the text. This can be in the form of a thesis that is stated in the introduction and subsequently developed within arguments, or an overall interpretation that is arrived at as a result of the analysis within arguments

• readings within the reader-centred approach be specific and clear about how the interpretation of the text links to the individual student (reader). Responses should use first-person in their reader-centred reading and make personal connections. They should avoid discussion of a generic and ambiguous ‘reader’, or using third person, as this prevents them from demonstrating the theoretical approach at effective or discerning performance levels

• responses avoid reader-centred readings with heavy reliance on more surface-level opinions, e.g. like, dislike, can relate to, cannot relate to. While personal opinion is a relevant aspect of the reader-centred approach, it should be used to develop a valid ‘interpretation’ of the text. A student should explore why they have these reactions to the text and link these to meaning

• readings within the author-centred approach should go beyond identifying the author within the text and should ensure that a valid interpretation of the text is developed through analysis

• responses are careful to make sure that their defence is not a duplication of their reading. A defence should not analyse the text, but instead analyse reading practices used in producing the reading. The defence requires students to ‘analyse the reading they have produced, applying and evaluating aspects and strategies of the theoretical approach and explaining how the theoretical approach used has allowed them to make meaning of the text in particular ways’. This means that students must analyse reading practices and the theoretical approach they have chosen, in a ‘theorised examination of the reading’ (Assessment objective 4). They are not required to analyse the text again. Their references to the text should be framed within their analysis of the reading approach, e.g. by directly quoting or indirectly referencing key parts of their reading and aligning these to theory

• schools use the Approaches to reading practice: A resource for English & Literature Extension document as part of the teaching and learning preparing students for IA1. By understanding the interconnectedness between approaches and the differences between historical and contemporary versions of the approaches, students can develop their understanding of the theoretical approach and its complexities. This can assist students in evaluating the strengths, weaknesses, limitations and implications of the reading approach when they analyse their reading within their defence, e.g. they might recognise

that their reading took a fundamentally historical approach to the author when interpreting their selected text, and recognise the limitations of this on the creation of meaning

that their reading applied a contemporary understanding of the author, recognising multiple authorship and the problems associated with relying on biographical ‘extratextual’ information



Page 17 of 42

how their reader-centred reading of a selected text was largely based on a re-negotiation of meaning through their current interpretive communities, and recognise how this allowed them to interpret the text in varied ways that change over time

how their reader-centred reading of a selected text was predominantly focused on emotional interpretations based on recent experiences within their life, explaining how this meaning is fluid and subject to change

• schools support students with the use of appropriate patterns and conventions of academic genres. Both the defence and the reading should be written in an ‘academic’ genre, e.g. analytical exposition or essay

• schools develop and follow a policy for managing response length. It is important to note that the word length indicated in the syllabus is a total word range. Rules such as ‘excluding quotations’ do not apply.

Additional advice

Use preparation tasks such as reading journals to determine an overall interpretation of the text (for author-centred and/or reader-centred approaches). In doing this, students can synthesise and determine their overall interpretation to help develop a more synthesised reading.



Page 18 of 42


Complex transformation and spoken defence — extended response (20%) The IA2 is an extended response comprised of two parts: a complex transformation and a spoken defence. While there needs to be a clear relationship between the complex transformation and defence, the complex transformation is simply the catalyst for the theorised defence, and it is only the spoken defence that is marked. The focus in this task is the continued development of both the skills of close reading and writing theoretical defences. The content focus is text-centred and world-context-centred reading approaches. Students learn how to use theory to read against texts and produce work that subverts a text’s dominant ideologies (Syllabus section 2.5.2).

Assessment design





Effective practices


• alignment — appropriate cognitions in the task description and the scaffolding. A clear direction specifying the need for the transformation to intervene in the base text and produce a discursive shift

• authenticity — an appropriate context to help students identify audience and present in consideration of that audience

• authentication — alignment with the duration of the task specification of the need for referencing, bibliographies and citations


• scope and scale — instructions that guided students away from intervening in a large text, such as an entire novel. No specification of any requirements beyond the particulars of the task as outlined in the syllabus.



Page 19 of 42



• mention all assessable cognitions — specifically Assessment objectives 5, 8, 9 and 10. At times, tasks were asking students to explain rather than analyse

• specify a realistic context for the complex transformation and the defence

• meet the mandatory conditions of the task, specifically the notice of task timeframe


• do not identify the base text and/or theories to be used as this may lead students to a predetermined response

• do not identify theories to apply and evaluate as this narrows the scope of the task.





Effective practices


• specification in the task description that the complex transformation is not the focus of the task. This helps clarify the demands of the task

• clarity in the language that is used to cue the student to complete all aspects of the task, e.g. some tasks specified that the defence should analyse aspects of the base text that were the motivation for the complex transformation, as well as the textual features of the complex transformation and the strategies used to offer readers alternative positions

• clear, effective layout to separate the conceptual demands of the complex transformation and the defence. This indicates to students that the task has two distinct parts.



• use simple, clear, accessible language free from textual errors.

• give clear instructions and do not simply repeat the task description provided in the syllabus. This is the purpose of the scaffolding — to provide clear steps to complete the task

• use bullets points and headings to help guide students through the processes related to readings and defences.



Page 20 of 42

Additional advice

• Where schools have focused their IA2 in response to fairy tales or fables that have had multiple retellings and publications, which they subsequently analyse and transform, using the generic story without a specific publication can prevent students from analysing specific textual features and making specific changes to these within their transformation.

• It is important that students are directed to select a specific publication as their ‘base text’, rather than a generic storyline. This becomes especially important for texts where there have been multiple retellings, e.g. fairy tales and fables.




Criterion number





100 0 0


98.81 0 1.19


100 0 0


98.81 0 1.19

Effective practices


• responses determined and articulated a clear purpose for their complex transformation, motivated by aspects of the base text and their theoretical approaches

• defences specifically identified and analysed the key assumptions and values underpinning the base text, using specific examples. Responses that used both direct and indirect evidence from the base text to support a valid interpretation were able to meet the requirements of Assessment objectives 1 and 5 more successfully. This allowed students to analyse aspects of the base text that were the ‘motivation’ for the complex transformation

• complex transformations had a distinct theoretical basis to allow responses to demonstrate a clear relationship between the complex transformation and its defence. Responses needed to ensure that their complex transformation ‘rewrote’ the base text using specific textual features and interventions that were motivated by their chosen text-centred and world-context-centred theoretical approaches

• defences articulated how the complex transformation invited a repositioning of audiences in relation to the base text. Responses that did this successfully were able to determine the



Page 21 of 42

invited reading of the base text, then evaluate how the complex transformation repositioned readers to adopt an alternative reading through theorised analysis and specific comparison

• defences were specific about the ‘ideological shift’ that their complex transformation prompted, with specific connection to their chosen world-context-centred theoretical approach and its ideological perspectives.



• defences are written in first person, in order to help students be specific about their own reading practices, textual changes to the base text and the theoretical concepts that underpin these

• responses ensure that their complex transformation makes an ideological shift that moves beyond mere inversion, e.g. a transformation that merely inverts gender roles within a traditional fairy tale is not suitably complex, as it maintains the gender power imbalance seen within the base text and does not reposition readers to reconsider gender roles in a purposeful way that aligns with gender theory or feminist criticism

• defences analyse both the base text and complex transformation using both direct and indirect references. An overreliance on general or indirect evidence from the base text and transformation can prevent responses from being discerning or effective

• responses use and apply specific theoretical concepts that relate to their chosen text-centred approach/es. A lack of specifically theorised analysis (e.g. through explicit references to concepts within structuralism, post-structuralism, psychoanalytic criticism or other theoretical text-centred approaches) can hinder a response’s ability to demonstrate Assessment objectives 2, 3, 4, 9 and 10 at discerning or effective performance levels. While their analysis of the base text and subsequent complex transformation might be motivated by an ideological purpose (and therefore their world-context-centred theoretical perspective), responses should ensure that the text-centred theoretical approach is utilised substantially within their defence as well

• responses use and apply specific theoretical concepts that relate to their chosen world-context-centred approach/es. An overreliance on the general ideological purpose of their chosen approach without subsequent analysis of specific theoretical concepts within this approach can prevent responses from demonstrating effective or discerning analysis and evaluation

• schools use the Approaches to reading practice: A resource for English & Literature Extension document as part of the teaching and learning preparing students for IA2. By understanding the interconnectedness between approaches and the differences between historical and contemporary versions of the approaches, students can develop their understanding of the theoretical approach and its complexities. Specifically, schools should refer to the sections of this document that outline the nexus between text-centred and world-context-centred approaches. This can assist students in evaluating the strengths, weaknesses, limitations and implications of the theoretical approach in both interpreting the base text and underpinning their complex transformation



Page 22 of 42

• in order to prompt students to move beyond mere inversion and subvert a text through a complex transformation, schools use preparation tasks that prompt students to analyse inherent contradictions within shorter texts. These contradictions can often be a ‘way in’ for specific analysis of the invited reading and can allow students to problematise the unstable invited reading through a transformation. They can also provide students with specific opportunities to apply post-structuralist criticism, e.g. schools could prepare students by:

analysing pop songs that purport to promote female empowerment but still define women only through their relationship with men

analysing ‘working class’, ‘rags-to-riches’ or ‘kitchen sink drama’ texts that celebrate the underdog while inherently promoting the economic systems that oppress them

analysing texts that superficially seem to celebrate colonised cultures through a Western perspective, but ultimately reinforce Eurocentric power structures by making the culture ‘exotic’ in nature, therefore trivialising colonisation.

• opportunities are provided to students to understand how specific changes to texts are aligned to specific theoretical concepts and approaches, and can be ideologically driven to reposition readers, e.g.:

structuralist changes

keeping signifiers from the base text, but changing their denotations

keeping the signifiers and their denotations, but changing their connotations

replacing signifiers with binary oppositions

creating further difference to add specific meaning

keeping the same signified meaning, but manipulating the signifier to alter connotations

using intertextual signifiers to manipulate meaning

post-structuralist changes

removing difference between signifiers in the base text to develop an ideological shift

exploiting ‘trace’ signifiers within the base text

exploiting a disunity within the original text — where does the text contradict itself and what can be done to foreground this in a transformation to prompt a reposition in readers?

creating further disunities to exacerbate the underlying problem within the base text in order to reposition readers

deferring meaning within the transformation for specific ideological purpose

manipulating and exploiting the multiplicity of meaning within a specific signifier, to reposition readers

world-context-centred changes

after determining the ‘problem’ within the base text, manipulating this to reposition readers — for example, by exaggerating or exacerbating the problem to bring it to the foreground and therefore prompt readers to reject the ideologies within the base text; by removing the problem gradually through the transformation, e.g. by having a character fight against it or become aware of it; by allocating blame more specifically within the transformation, especially in cases where the base text deems the problem to be ‘just the way things are’; or by deliberately juxtaposing the dominant and oppressed characters.



Page 23 of 42


Academic research paper — Extended written response (35%) The IA3 is an extended written analytical response in the form of an academic research paper. Students are required to develop a focus question that guides a close reading of a self-selected complex text/s. The close reading requires the application of two theories. The focus question must allow for both the evaluation of theory and the evaluation of reading practices to take place (Syllabus section 3.5.1).

Assessment design





Effective practices


• alignment — appropriate cognitions in the task description and the scaffolding, i.e. evaluation is mentioned when specifying the purpose of the focus question

• specification of the need to analyse genre, structure and textual features, and how these are used to make a close reading

• authenticity — an appropriate context to help students identify audience and present in consideration of that audience

• authentication — alignment with the duration of the task

• specification of the need for referencing, bibliographies and citations


• scaffolding that explains the iterative process of developing a focus question



Page 24 of 42

• no specification of any requirements beyond the particulars of the task as outlined in the syllabus

• instructions to manage scope by being discerning when selecting texts and theoretical approaches to explore the focus question.



• specify that students must select a text other than one used in IA1 and IA2

• require students to analyse how the genre, structure and textual features of the selected complex literary text support a valid interpretation

• specify a realistic context for the academic research paper

• meet the mandatory conditions of the task, specifically the notice of task timeframe


• do not specify the text, or a choice of texts, for exploration as the nature of this unit and task is to allow for independence.





Effective practices


• a small number of steps in the task description, using the scaffolding to more specifically communicate the processes required to undertake the task

• clear language that is used to cue the student to complete the specifics of the task, e.g. some scaffolding specified that a focus question requires refining

• bullet points in the scaffolding to clearly step students through the processes required for IA3.



Page 25 of 42



• use simple, clear, accessible language that is free from textual errors

• give clear instructions and do not simply repeat the task description provided in the syllabus. This is the purpose of the scaffolding — to provide clear steps to complete the task

• use bullet points and headings to help guide students through the processes related to producing an academic research paper that evaluates the theoretical approaches used in exploring a close reading.

Additional advice

• It is important for schools to note the syllabus reference that ‘to control the scope of their response, students should be discerning when selecting texts and theoretical approaches’.

• Ensure that students are discerning in their selection of at least two theories or aspects of theories in accordance with the syllabus task specifications.

• When choosing film texts, it is important that students still produce a ‘close reading’ by making specific and frequent references to specific genre, structure and textual features of the complex literary text. As film is a different medium, these features may differ from a novel analysis (e.g. to include audio or visual features), but a ‘close reading’ must still be produced.

• Ensure that students develop a ‘close reading’ by producing theorised analysis of a wide range of frequent generic, structural and textual features from the complex literary text.




Criterion number





96.5 0.39 3.11


96.12 0.58 3.3


96.31 0.39 3.3


97.28 0 2.72



Page 26 of 42

Effective practices


• responses communicated a clear focus question, which was complex in nature and required the application of the selected theoretical approaches to the literary text in order to answer or explore it

• responses used the focus question to synthesise ideas and facilitate the evaluation of the close readings produced by applying their theory to the text. Successful responses were articulate and explicit when referring back to their focus question and how the theorised analysis of the text within each of their approaches produced strengths, insights, limitations and/or implications

• responses produced a ‘close reading’ by analysing frequent and relevant generic, structural and textual features from their chosen literary text, and applying specific theoretical concepts to this direct evidence

• responses were articulate when comparing, contrasting or complementing their chosen theoretical approaches. Assessment objective 3 requires that students demonstrate understanding of the relationships ‘among and within aspects of the selected theories’ to develop and explore their focus question and close reading. Successful responses were able to communicate the specific differences, similarities or relationships between the chosen theoretical approaches, and how these blend or clash to provide specific understandings of the literary text that either answer or partially answer the focus question.

Samples of effective practices

The following is an excerpt from a response that illustrates the characteristics for the criteria at the performance level indicated. The sample may provide evidence of more than one criterion. The characteristics highlighted may not be the only time the characteristics have occurred throughout the response.



Page 27 of 42

Understanding and analysis of literary texts (9–10 marks) This response demonstrates: • discerning

understanding of at least one selected complex literary text to develop discriminating close reading/s

• discerning understanding of ways of reading the selected complex literary text/s to develop discriminating interpretations

• discerning analysis of the genre, structure and textual features of the selected complex literary text/s to support discriminating interpretations.

Understanding and application of theories (9–10 marks) This response demonstrates: • discerning

understanding of relevant aspects of at least two selected theories in order to explore a focus question and to develop and explore close reading/s of the selected complex literary text/s

• discerning understanding of relationships among and within aspects of the selected theories in order to develop and explore a focus question and the associated close reading/s of the selected complex literary text/s

• discerning application of appropriate aspects of at least two theories to a selected complex literary text/s to produce a close reading, or readings, of that text, or texts, and to explore a focus question.



Page 28 of 42

Evaluation and synthesis (9–10 marks) This response demonstrates: • discerning evaluation

of the strengths and limitations of those aspects of the selected theories that were used to produce close reading/s of complex literary text/s and to explore a focus question

• discerning evaluation of the close reading/s of the selected complex literary text/s, making explicit the aspects of the theories that underpin these

• discerning synthesis of analysis of the selected complex literary text/s, the applied theories and resultant interpretation/s with supporting evidence.






Page 29 of 42



Page 30 of 42



• schools apply Assessment objectives 6 and 7 of the ISMG with a focus on what responses have demonstrated, as opposed to what they have not demonstrated

• Assessment objectives 6 and 7 not be simplified or reduced to concerns about citation and referencing. It is also important to note that very minor, infrequent errors or ‘typos’ do not automatically disqualify a response from being ‘discerning’ in these objectives. The entire objective should be considered when applying the ISMG to a response. This includes ‘use of



Page 31 of 42

appropriate patterns and conventions of academic genres and communication, including correct terminology’. It is important to note the syllabus glossary definition of uneven. The appearance of grammatical lapses does not preclude a response from being ‘suitable’ or ‘effective’. Consideration must be given both to their frequency and to their impact on the ability to communicate and develop a theorised analysis

Additional advice

It is recommended that:

• teachers encourage students to produce responses that develop and explicitly communicate a clear focus question. As the focus question is a prominent part of each assessment objective, it is important that responses are explicit and articulate about what the focus question is. Responses should synthesise ideas in relation to this question, evaluating how effective the theoretical approaches are in producing a close reading that answers or explores the question

• teachers encourage students to ensure the question they develop as a focus question is complex in nature and requires them to apply their chosen theoretical approaches to the literary text to either answer or explore it. If the focus question can be answered without theorised analysis (e.g. it is self-evident in the text and does not require theory to answer), then students may need to reconsider and revise their question when developing their response

• teachers encourage students to ensure their responses develop a close reading through frequent analysis of textual features in the focus text. When writing their response, students should be familiar with the syllabus definition of ‘close reading’, which ‘involves focusing on specific details of texts’ and ‘deliberate effort to read a text with as much care and attention as possible to what the words on the page are doing’. This requires frequent and direct references to the text and rich referencing to the stylistic and formal aspects of the literary work. An overreliance on indirect evidence related to plot or characterisation without frequent analysis of specific quotations can prevent a student from developing a ‘close reading’

• teachers emphasise to students that responses should not focus on explaining theory more than applying it, e.g. a lengthy, textbook-like introduction to the history of particular theoretical approaches is not required. Responses should be succinct in their introduction of theoretical approaches and concepts, and ensure that they are using the theory to apply this to texts through theorised analysis and exploration



Page 32 of 42

External assessment

Extended response (35 marks) — theorised exploration of unseen text (25%) Assessment design

Assessment specifications and conditions The external assessment is based on the subject matter of Unit 4 (Area of study: Theorised exploration of texts). Students use their knowledge of text-centred and world-context-centred reading practices and interpretive strategies to construct a theorised exploration of an unseen short literary text.

Conditions

Time: 2.5 hours, which includes 30 minutes for reading and annotations

Length: 800–1000 words (excluding quotations)

Other: selection of three unseen short texts of comparable complexity provided in the examination

The assessment instrument consisted of one item. Questions were derived from the context of Unit 4 area of study. This assessment was used to determine student achievement in the following assessment objectives:

1. demonstrate understanding of one short literary text and ways of reading this text

2. demonstrate understanding of relevant aspects of text-centred and world-context-centred theoretical approaches to explore the unseen short text and generate an interpretation

3. apply appropriate aspects of the text-centred and world-context-centred theoretical approaches to an unseen short literary text to explore the text and generate an interpretation

4. analyse how the genre, structure and textual features of the unseen text support an interpretation

5. use correct terminology and appropriate referencing conventions to create a theorised exploration

6. use textual features (including spelling, grammar and punctuation) to create a theorised exploration

7. synthesise analysis of a short unseen text, aspects of text-centred and world-context-centred theoretical approaches applied to this text, and the resultant interpretation with supporting evidence.

Note: Objectives 3, 8 and 9 are not assessed in this instrument.

The stimulus comprised three original short texts of comparable complexity. These texts were written for the examination, and were designed to elicit a unique student response that is a theorised close reading. Students used their knowledge of text-centred and world-context-centred reading practices and interpretive strategies to construct a theorised exploration of an unseen short literary text.



Page 33 of 42

Assessment decisions Overall, students responded well to the following assessment aspects:

• understanding and analysis of literary texts AND understanding and application of theories, divided into the following assessable elements

understanding of literary texts

analysis of literary texts

applying theory to explore meaning

understanding theoretical approaches

• synthesis, divided into the following assessable elements

development

selection and synthesis

• controlling textual features and conventions, divided into the following assessable elements

grammar and sentence structure

language choices

punctuation.

Effective practices The following samples were selected to illustrate highly effective student responses in some of the assessment objectives of the syllabus.

Extended response

Criteria: Understanding and analysis of literary texts AND understanding and application of theories; Synthesis; Controlling textual features and conventions

Effective student responses:

• provided a defensible interpretation of how the writer’s generic style, structure and language features shape the text. They provided interpretations and defended these with analysis of textual features and the writer’s generic style. They provided discriminating ways of reading the complexities of the chosen stimulus.

• examined narration, juxtaposition, metaphor, and textual structure and explained how these were used to shape meaning

• provided a discriminating, perceptive and judicious thesis that was substantiated across the response

• developed arguments to support the thesis across the reading, with each argument analysing an aspect of the story and how it supported the thesis

• provided defensible conclusions, based on the arguments, which were arrived at through explicit argument and analysis

• provided a well-considered selection of evidence from the stimulus, selecting examples to defend their interpretations and using evidence explicitly to support their arguments

• used grammatically accurate sentence structures throughout

• used vocabulary with discrimination, including correct terminology, to develop ideas with perception



Page 34 of 42

• used punctuation accurately and purposefully

• used simple and complex words that could be understood in context.

Student sample of effective responses

Criterion: Understanding and analysis of literary texts AND understanding and application of theories

This excerpt has been included to:

• demonstrate how a response achieves higher marks in this criterion

• show a discriminating interpretation of the stimulus text ‘Justice in the City’, by arriving at the theorised interpretation that ‘the only criminality that matters is the immoral greed and self-promotion perpetuated by the capitalist upper class’. This is a perceptive and judicious interpretation of the stimulus text through the lens of a Marxist criticism theoretical approach. This interpretation is developed throughout the response in arguments, e.g. at the end of paragraph 2, the response states that ‘the text appears to support and uphold the hegemonic representation of the criminal being immoral and powerless’. The end of paragraph 3 states ‘The inhumanity and depersonalisation abounding in the capitalist world … ultimately assists in breaking down the binary opposition between common ‘justice’ and ‘criminality’’.

• show a discerning application of aspects of text-centred and world-context-centred approaches to the stimulus. The response makes thoughtful and astute choices in its alignment of aspects of structuralist and Marxist literary criticism with the stimulus text, e.g. it discusses how the binary opposition between justice and criminality has been ‘destabilise[d]’ by Sergeant Carraway. The discussion of personal identity, inhumanity and depersonalisation found within the end of paragraph 3 demonstrates a discerning application of aspects of Marxist theory — in this case alienation. The response uses a complex range of relevant strategies for a theorised exploration.



Page 35 of 42

Synthesis (7 marks) This response: • provides a

discriminating thesis that is to be substantiated

• develops arguments to support the thesis across the reading

• provides defensible conclusions based on the arguments

• provides a well-considered selection of evidence from the stimulus

• uses evidence explicitly to support arguments.

Understanding and analysis of literary texts AND understanding and application of theories (18 marks) This response: • provides a

discriminating interpretation of the stimulus text

• uses discerning application of aspects of text-centred and world-context-centred approaches to the stimulus

• uses a complex range of relevant strategies for a theorised exploration.



Page 36 of 42

Understanding and analysis of literary texts AND understanding and application of theories (18 marks) This response: • examines how the

writer’s generic style, structure, and/or textual features shape the text

• provides a defensible interpretation of how the writer’s generic style, structure, and/or textual features shape the text

• provides discriminating ways of reading the complexities of the chosen stimulus.



Page 37 of 42

Synthesis (7 marks) This response: • provides a

discriminating thesis that is to be substantiated

• develops arguments to support the thesis across the reading

• provides defensible conclusions based on the arguments

• provides a well-considered selection of evidence from the stimulus

• uses evidence explicitly to support arguments.



Page 38 of 42

Understanding and analysis of literary texts AND understanding and application of theories (18 marks) This response: • provides a

discriminating interpretation of the stimulus text

• uses discerning application of aspects of text-centred and world-context-centred approaches to the stimulus

• uses a complex range of relevant strategies for a theorised exploration

• examines how the writer’s generic style, structure, and/or textual features shape the text

• provides a defensible interpretation of how the writer’s generic style, structure, and/or textual features shape the text

• provides discriminating ways of reading the complexities of the chosen stimulus.



Page 39 of 42



Page 40 of 42



Page 41 of 42

Controlling textual features and conventions (10 marks) This response uses: • grammatically

accurate sentence structures

• vocabulary with discrimination to develop ideas, including correct terminology

• register appropriate to a literary analysis with discrimination

• punctuation accurately and purposefully

• simple and complex words that can be understood in context.


It is recommended that when preparing students for external assessment, teachers consider:

• assisting students to develop their skills at using precise vocabulary, which allows them to develop a literary analysis with clarity and detail. Students who achieved full marks in Language choices were able to use theoretical vocabulary (correct terminology) which was relevant to their analysis and had appropriate register

• assisting students to improve their skills in developing and communicating a clear and explicit thesis statement, which is then substantiated in later arguments. In many cases, this thesis statement can provide evidence for markers of an overall interpretation of the stimulus text. Responses that did not provide a clear thesis and instead produced an unfocused reading were not able to gain high marks in the assessable element of development



Page 42 of 42

• assisting students to improve their skills in providing conclusions based on arguments. These conclusions often expand upon, develop or substantiate the thesis statement. Conclusions can be drawn within arguments, and within the conclusion of the overall essay. Responses that explored the stimulus but did not provide conclusions based on this exploration were not able to achieve higher than a mark of 1 for this assessable element

• assisting students to improve their skills in developing a theorised interpretation of the stimulus text. This interpretation should be formed as a result of an exploration of the stimulus text through aspects of text-centred and world-context-centred approaches

• explicitly teaching the syllabus glossary definition of interpretation, and how this is contextually relevant to the subject and the external assessment. While many students provided interpretations of the literary text, these were not always theorised, showing an understanding of theoretical approaches. An example of an interpretation of a text that is not theorised would be the summation that ‘Reclaiming’ is communicating the narrator’s appreciation for nature. This is not a suitable theorised interpretation, because it does not demonstrate an understanding of theoretical approaches. To improve this and demonstrate an understanding of relevant theoretical approaches, a response could instead develop a more effective theorised interpretation that nature is only valued through an anthropocentric worldview, something the artist both condemns but also upholds. A suitable theorised interpretation of ‘Justice in the City’ would be that the justice system upholds social hierarchies. This interpretation draws upon aspects of Marxist theory to show an understanding of theoretical approaches

• encouraging students to ensure they apply aspects of relevant theoretical approaches to the stimulus. Responses that attempted to apply theoretical approaches that could not be aligned to explicit evidence within the stimulus texts often struggled to achieve ‘appropriate’ or ‘effective’ application.

english & literature extension general senior syllabus

Documents