Paper 1, Question 1
Question 1.)
Hello everyone, today we are documenting the Olympics 100 meter race in which we will be focusing on the famous sprinter Usain Bolt. Pow! At the start of the race, it was Usain Bolt, Richard Tompson, and Trinidad all starting off neck and neck. So far it was an entertaining race, one that would be for the history books. But Usain Bolt started off stumbling on his own steps. But, he managed to recover rather quickly and remained calm but unfortunately it looks like he is falling rather behind Thompson. Then a sudden change happened, and Bolt took the lead and left Thompson in the dust. The finish line is coming rather close and it looked like Usain was gonna win. However, Usain kept looking over his shoulder throughout the race. Then towards the end, he was about ten meters from the line but decides to throw up his hands and act mad. His cockiness took over and he knew he had won and pounded his chest. All his hard work as a sprinter with his coach paid off! What an amazing race this was the witness.
The autobiography written by Usain Bolt, it focuses on his own viewpoint during the 100-meter race. It is written in first-person tense and uses phrases throughout like “I” and “Me.” Due to this, the writer’s viewpoint is very credible and gives first-hand information of what was going through his own mind. “How did he do that?’ “I can't see” “I made a bad step.” The sentences structure is very simple and short “Wow!” “He’s right there in front of you.” The structure feels all over the place and feels very chaotic while reading. The sentence structure talks from the start of the meter race from the finish and every single action and thought that went through his mind. The language used by Usain Bolt is informal and is personal to his own events. It is more casual and he is using it to communicate his thoughts and feelings.
In the newspaper report focusing on famous sprinter Usain Bolt and his performance in the 100-meter race, it is written in third person tense. It uses phrases throughout like “He” “His” and “Usain.” The journalist’s point of view can be described as credible and unbias because it is describing what went on in the race. In comparison to Usain’s which only offers one point of view. Throughout there are short phrases used like “Recover rather quickly” and “looked like Usain was going to win,” to describe what the race came off as. The structure is talking about the beginning of the race to the finish and how each sprinter performed. The sentence structure is long explanatory sentences that have descriptions “but unfortunately it looks like he is falling rather behind…” The language used is formal and much less personal and tries to describe the event.
Some similarities between the newspaper article and the autobiography are that they are both first-hand accounts of what occurred during the 100-meter race. The structure both starts from the beginning of the race to the end and how all the events unfolded. “What an amazing race this was to witness.” The sentence structure in the autobiography, however, was more simple and shorter sentences. “I made one, two, three steps…” Since the autobiography was first-person experiences they weren’t as descriptive as the newspaper article. The sentences are longer with more descriptions of what happened. The language in the autobiography is informal and focuses more first hand of what was going on. In comparison to the newspaper article which is more informal and a summary.
After reviewing these questions, I have given each section a score that I feel is best.
ReplyDeleteIn Question A for AO1, I would give you 3 marks considering your 'clear' use of understanding the text's meaning, context, and audience. Along with an apparent reference to characteristic features. You included the sentence, "The autobiography is written by Usain Bolt, it focuses on his own viewpoint during the 100-meter race." This helps display the meaning of this 100-meter race, and what it 'focuses' on. The context was discussed a lot in this blog and was made very ‘clear’. You made sure to include words and sentences formed in Usain Bolt’s writing. Some examples, “How did he do that?”, “I made a bad step.”, and “He’s right in front of you.” All these phrases narrator the events that are going on. This news report’s ‘audience’ pertains to anyone who may want to know about the events at the 100-meter run.
For AO2, I would give you 3 marks as well. Your expression was ‘clear,’ and your content is relevant to the audience and purpose. Each idea you made was developed evidently. Your writing was appropriate for everyone and a range of audiences.
In Question B for AO1, I would give you 3 marks considering your 'clear' use of understanding the text's meaning, context, and audience. This response highlighted a comparative understanding of all texts and their characteristic features. Your beginning quote, “Some similarities between the newspaper article and the autobiography are that they are both first-hand accounts of what occurred during the 100-meter race.”, showed your comparisons as well as your ending sentence, “In comparison to the newspaper article which is more informal and a summary.”
For AO3, I would give you 8 marks regarding your detailed analysis of form, structure, and language elements. This comparison includes structure, language, and some analyzing form. “The structure both starts from the beginning of the race to the end and how all the events unfolded.” This sentence included a clear and detailed understanding of what it was. Your use of examples adds to the ‘effectiveness’ it has. “The language in the autobiography is informal and focuses first hand of what was going on. In comparison to the newspaper article which is more informal and a summary.” Here, you showed a precise understanding of what language was used.
Good job!!
To Mallory,
ReplyDeleteQuestion 1(a)
AO1) I'm going to have to give you 1 mark for this because you have a basic and good understanding of the text. You go and do it and you explain the text very well but it's really only scraping the top of what you could be talking about. For example, “But Usain Bolt started off stumbling on his own steps.” Another thing that made you score a one on this is because when you're writing in journalism it's frowned upon to start your newspaper article by telling the readers what you're talking about, you're not supposed to do that even when you're writing an essay. When you write an essay you don't tell your reader what you're gonna be reading about. What I'm talking about in your newspaper article is “Hello everyone, today we are documenting the Olympics 100 meter race in which we will be focusing on the famous sprinter Usain Bolt.” The ‘minimal reference to characteristic features’ that it says in the rubric can't tell you how important it is that you separate your newspaper into short paragraphs and you didn't do that. That is a really big reason why you got one. When writing journalism you're supposed to have short paragraphs almost like bullet points unlike yours. You're all bunched up and so you did it hit the 5 W's correctly and that also goes into the minimal references to characteristic features.
AO2) for AO2 I have to give you 2 marks. The reason for that is because your paragraph doesn't flow easily whatsoever. What I mean by that is it's not broken up correctly or at all so it's really hard to read and follow. When reading this you do a really good job of developing the ideas but it's hard to follow along since it's not broken up into correct paragraphs and so that goes into what the rubric says “Expression is clear but May not flow easily…” You did a really good job with the content, and this piece could be really good and could get a really high score if you just broke it up into correct paragraphs. Paragraph 3 “What an amazing race this was to witness.” The sentence structure in the autobiography, however, was more simple and shorter sentences. ”
Question 1 (b)
AO1) For this part you have a clear understanding of the text and the reader can understand that because you keep repeating it, therefore I have to give you 3 marks. When talking about the autobiography and your newspaper that you wrote you do a good job of comparing both of them but I think you could've done a lot better if you were a little bit deeper, Meaning that in every paragraph you kind of repeat yourself again. Some examples are Paragraph 1 “The sentence structure is very simple and short “Wow!” “He’s right there in front of you.” Paragraph 2 “The sentence structure is long explanatory sentences that have descriptions “but unfortunately it looks like he is falling rather behind…”” In all three of these examples you keep talking about the sentence structure which should just be put into one paragraph together and not be talked about throughout the whole explanation in all three paragraphs. So although you did better on the structure the placement of a couple sentences was off so I do have to give you 3 marks for that. I think you did a good job on stating your understanding of the text.
AO3) For this section I had to give you 4 marks. The reason for that is because you had a limited structure and language in your response to the autobiography and the newspaper. You could have made your paper so good if you just set it up correctly, and that is a really big thing when grading and when going by the rubric, Although you did do better in part B and you separated your paragraphs you just didn't by putting the right sentences in the right paragraph. And I talk about that also in AO1. Also you did a better job of analyzing it and putting it into your own words and making it not so boring. Although it was better it was limited and it just didn't relate to the reader or audience. That is why I have to give you 4 marks.