TASMANIAN QUALIFICATIONS AUTHORITY
T A S M A N I A N
English Writing
C E R T I F I C A T E
Subject Code: ENW5C
O F
2008 External Assessment Report
E D U C A T I O N
Teachers are to be congratulated for their imaginative teaching and clear commitment to
fostering their candidates’ creativity and mastery of language. However, a constant theme
from the markers was the need for teachers to include some more direct teaching of the
conventions of text and genre types. More attention needs to be paid to teaching the writing
conventions and demanding a higher standard of revision and proofreading.
Markers commented that this year there was pleasing variety in the choice of subject matter
and many candidates who opted for the perennial subjects found new, fresh ways to explore
them. The most competent writers took on challenging themes and ideas. They achieved
success by creating compelling characters, intriguing plots and verisimilitude in their settings.
They used dramatic structures, convincing diction, flowing sentences and the most effective
point of view. Their Reflective Statements showed that they knew how to improve their
earlier drafts by reflecting on their aims and themes and then selecting the best techniques to
express them.
The best poetry was very good indeed, showing maturity of thought and expertise in applying
poetic techniques. In 2008 the introduction of the 99 word story was a successful innovation.
The importance of wide reading was highlighted by many markers. From comments in the
Reflective Statement it appears some candidates are afraid that reading other writers’ work
will cause them to ‘lose’ their own individuality and personal style. They don’t seem to
understand that writing is a complex craft that they can only develop further if they regularly
encounter quality work and reflect on what they can learn from others. This includes
examples from the class. How else can writers become aware of the vast possibilities for
subjects, themes, genres and styles if they cut themselves off from expert examples?
To be successful it is important that candidates include their best work in the folio, not work
from earlier in the year to ‘show progress’. The candidate’s progress can be discussed in the
RS and a small example from an earlier draft of a folio piece can be included to illustrate a
point. Since there are only four pieces to be externally assessed for the whole year each piece
must be strong enough to earn its place in the folio. There are no ‘supporting pieces’. The
Writing Project has added weight in the assessment process, but only if markers find their
ratings are border-line.
The TQA Plagiarism Guidelines (2008) provide a detailed explanation of this important
subject. To ensure folios contain only work that can be verified all teachers must be vigilant
and thorough throughout the year. This year there were numerous cases where markers
suspected pieces were heavily dependent upon another work (not acknowledged in the RS),
or appeared to have been assignments in other subjects. Teachers must insist that candidates
complete the Record of Progress before they submit any work to be assessed. Candidates
must keep drafts of all assignments by printing and filing early drafts of all word processed
pieces. These drafts and Records of Progress may be called upon by TQA in any case of
suspected plagiarism. Teachers must not accept pieces done in other subjects unless the
subject teacher can formally verify it is the candidate’s own work and the piece has been
2008 External Assessment Report
English Writing
2
Subject Code: ENW5C
substantially re-worked. (TQA specifies that candidates may not ‘double-dip’ by using an
assignment from one subject as part of their assessment in another.) Markers must accept the
word of English Writing teachers that they have overseen and signed off all the contents of
the folio so it is important that we all adhere to the guidelines.
Dependent authorship is an extremely useful way to teach features of style. The best folio
examples were extra scenes or chapters from an extant work, but there were also separate
works utilising a nominated style and genre. If this type of text is included the candidate must
acknowledge the original source and writer in the RS and explain how the new piece draws
on the original. Candidates who included an example of the selected writer’s work with their
own made it easier for the marker to appreciate the skill required to adopt a set style and then
produce a piece that is interesting and engaging in its own right. Candidates who did not
clearly indicate that their writing was based on that of another writer were cited for
plagiarism and risked having their folio disallowed for assessment.
Presentation
Skill in polishing and proof reading work to a high standard is required at the pre-tertiary
level. The manuscript conventions aid the markers who must process many thousands of
words. Eye strain is a real possibility so the use of double line spacing, wide margins,
consistent paragraphing and a suitably large font size are essential. While the majority of
candidates presented competent folios there were still too many that fell below the standard
required for a ‘C’ rating on Criterion 2.
Candidates who studied via Flexible Delivery sometimes presented folios in draft form that
detracted from the quality of the writing. There are many challenges in preparing such
candidates but they must have access to the folio guidelines and examples of other folios so
they can prepare their own work correctly. Their teachers must insist that a draft copy is sent
to them for final comments before it is polished and submitted for external assessment.
There was still too much confusion concerning the prescribed word counts. Candidates have
a range of folio length of 5000- 8000 from which to select. They must adhere to this range or
be penalised on Criterion 2 and their teachers must enforce this requirement. While there
were fewer folios markedly over the limit this year, a significant number was still penalised
for including too much in the RS or the WP and then attempting to ‘make up’ for it by
including smaller pieces that were not strong enough to contribute fully to the ratings. A
more common problem in 2008 was the disturbing trend toward shorter folios that were
lightweight in content and depth of thought. Too many were under the 5000 word count,
often because the WP did not make 2500 words. Others included 30 line poems that consisted
of very short lines- too short to create viable imagery or explore a subject in any depth.
The most competent folios were consistent in the selection of font, paragraphing, position of
page numbers and punctuation. Poems in an anthology should be uniform in their position on
the page, font and spacing.
2008 External Assessment Report
English Writing
3
Subject Code: ENW5C
Reflective Statement
While a first draft can be flighty, inspired, unresolved and uneven, the piece presented to a
reader needs to be crafted according to two main principles: is it something worth saying
(theme, ideas) and is it said well (structure, techniques, diction, and syntax)? Candidates need
to explore what these two aspects mean throughout the year so they have a foundation for
improving their work. This means teachers conducting some formal, structured lessons to
discuss examples of techniques and their effects. In the best folios candidates addressed both
these aspects in detail.
The best candidates showed they had understood that the RS is different from a learning
journal in that it has an audience other than the writer (and a teacher). They showed
confident, sustained reflection about their learnings and insight into their own work. They
explained how the pieces were selected to showcase the writer’s skills and to address the
criteria. By using the full word allowance of up to 1000 words they were able to position
their readers to be interested in their work. Candidates who wrote over the word limit mainly
produced statements that were unnecessarily verbose and less effective.
Weaker statements often got off to a poor start because candidates provided a mere summary
of the main activities during the year and a reading list. They didn’t actually reflect upon their
learnings and progress. These statements included lengthy re-telling of plots and extraneous
information about the characters. They enthused about their teachers and their ‘svengali-like’
influence on their life. The names of writers who had influenced these candidates so much
were often misspelt. There was a lack of awareness of a tone that was appropriate for the
audience- some candidates came across as being arrogant, pompous or self-serving due to
comments such as: ‘this is a masterpiece’ and ‘ all my friends say this is the best thing they
read all year’ or even ‘ many readers have been too limited to be able to fully appreciate the
complexity of my work.’
There was some successful utilisation of different writing forms and styles in the RS to
engage and delight the reader including aspects of interview, detective fiction, poetry and
narrative. The best candidates still included detailed discussion of the purpose, theme,
audience and techniques used in each piece, but not in an overly formulaic way.
Writing Project
The Writing Project as a module requires candidates to pursue a large, individual project and
follow it through to its conclusion, learning about the challenges and joys of such writing
along the way. Sometimes these pieces don’t work out. Candidates take risks that fall flat.
Stories run out of steam. Scripts may lack a climax and resolution. In the folio candidates
may submit any sustained piece (or collage of pieces) that is of a high standard and nominate
that piece as the WP. It does not have to be the piece submitted for internal assessment.
Markers commented on many very effective single piece projects that showed sustained
control and development. Paired pieces that spoke to each other to increase the overall impact
2008 External Assessment Report
English Writing
4
Subject Code: ENW5C
were also successful. There was a high number of exceptional poets this year who used poetic
devices in a powerful way.
It is important that there is a clear, valid link between collage pieces in the project or it will
be marked down a rating on Criterion 5.
Criterion 1
In the best folios candidates used a variety of appropriate techniques to express their ideas.
There were some strong first person short stories where the narrator’s character was
developed through diction and voice. In these pieces the narrator was not simply a bland
observer of the action. Detailed, vivid description of setting was effectively used to create
atmosphere and anchor the action. There were fewer generic narratives set in America and
more home grown settings- a pleasing trend that we hope to see continue. These pieces
offered insight into contemporary Australian culture. There were also some very engaging
historical and imaginative narratives that explored aspects of past societies. Sensory detail in
both prose and poetry added to success.
In 2008 dialogue was a fairly weak element. Too often the dialogue was used to pad out a
narrative rather than being employed for an effect and all the voices were the same.
Candidates should be encouraged to read aloud their dialogue to test whether it sounds
credible, and to see if it contributes toward characterisation, plot or mood.
The use of some techniques led to the reader feeling disengaged and distanced from the
piece- if this is intentional it should be discussed in the RS. Some of these techniques include
the use of potentially offensive language and content, flat or disagreeable main characters,
and sometimes even the use of multiple points of view. If mishandled, this technique can
prevent the reader from becoming interested in the characters and their concerns.
Criterion 2
Competent, confident users of English ensured their folio was selectively edited, carefully
proofread and adhered to the writing and publishing conventions. Unfortunately, many
candidates expected markers to be so dazzled by the ‘originality’ of the work, that they would
overlook the many spelling and grammar errors. Markers commented that the prevalence of
poor editing appeared to indicate laziness or apathy rather than inability.
Some more direct, structured teaching of punctuation seems to be warranted. In particular,
poetry was poorly or inconsistently punctuated. A total lack of punctuation, or the occasional
use of a capital or a full stop, can be a personal choice but should be explained in the RSwhat effect is intended? Some candidates did not seem to appreciate that thoughtful
punctuation in poetry can enable the writer to control pace, emphasis and rhythm.
2008 External Assessment Report
English Writing
5
Subject Code: ENW5C
Semi-colons and dashes seemed to be in fashion this year but were often over-used in a single
piece. They lose their effectiveness if they are used too much.
Overall, the punctuation of titles was poor, not just in reference to the candidates’ own work
but also other works that had influenced their development. Candidates need to be reminded
that the usual rule in word processed work is to use italics for the titles of major pieces and
inverted commas for poem titles.
The incorrect punctuation of direct speech continued to distract markers. Here are some
typical examples of the most common errors concerning capitalisation and the full stop:
‘You’re late’. She said. ‘Yes’. He said. ‘Sorry’.
Candidates should check their indication of numbers- the general rule is to write numbers
under ten as words ( ‘She was in love with six young men’) but not to begin a sentence with a
number : ‘ One thousand soldiers held off the enemy,’ not ‘1,000 soldiers held off the
enemy.’
There was still considerable confusion about how to correctly indicate paragraph breaks.
Candidates may choose to open a narrative with a non- indented first sentence. This is
common practice in published works of fiction but it is not a requirement. Candidates may
not indent paragraph breaks and then use line breaks in the same piece. An exception is when
a longer break in a narrative is indicated by line spacing, such as the end of a section or a
change in point of view.
Most candidates selected diction to suit their text types and purpose and produced very
competent work. To gain the highest ratings for this criterion, candidates needed to show
some sophistication and artistry in their selection and application of language.
Criterion 3
All candidates need to question themselves about each of the pieces they select for their folio.
Have I said something worth saying? Have I provided a fresh image or a new angle or an
experience that will interest others? Why should this piece be included?
To rate higher than ‘C’, candidates needed to demonstrate some deep and complex
exploration of their selected themes and issues. Originality can sometimes stem from the
creation of novel plots or unexpected endings; fully rounded lively characters or imagery that
invites the reader to look at the world through a new perspective. But originality does not
only spring from the totally new- it can also be appreciated in a fresh angle on a perennial
subject; a cutting opinion about a well-worn issue or writing that is just so good that the
reader forgets there is a world outside the folio. The best folios this year demonstrated that
the candidates definitely had something worth saying and they had the requisite skills to
communicate it to the readers.
2008 External Assessment Report
English Writing
6
Subject Code: ENW5C
Markers commented that in 2008 there was some very good work based on art works. Many
candidates successfully used a piece of art as a stimulus and indicated in the RS that they had
used other works inspired by art as models for their own responses. It was useful for
candidates to attach the stimulus image to their own piece. This enabled the markers to
appreciate the originality of the new piece.
The exploration of issues such as peer group pressure, the drug/ alcohol culture and
environmental themes was often accomplished more effectively through fictional forms than
journalistic text types. Unless the candidate submits a very strong, well researched opinion
piece it is very difficult to rate the piece highly on this criterion.
It is important that teachers allow some candidate choice in the Theme/ Issues module. It was
noticeable that a number of folios in a marking batch featured exactly the same theme,
sometimes poorly handled. There needs to be variety in the class exercises that candidates
from the same class choose to submit. Unless they have substantially re-worked the exercise,
and included their own elements, it is hard to show originality if several other candidates
have written essentially the same thing. It is common for a marker to have between five and
ten folios from the same class in a marking batch.
Criterion 5
In the best folios each piece had its own internal structure to develop the points and create a
rounded, complete impression on the reader. Many thoughtful and intriguing titles were used.
In weaker folios the pieces lacked any progression toward a climax or resolution (in a
traditional narrative structure), or had an open- ended or ambiguous ending that needed to be
explained in the RS. Script writers needed to be familiar with dramatic structures to be
effective.
To rate well on this criterion candidates need to submit complete works in their folio- not just
a short character portrait or a description of a setting in isolation.
There were some common errors in structure. The use of multiple points of view without a
clear purpose, and/or the presentation of too many events or issues for the one piece,
frequently made them fail to be a coherent whole. It is recommended that ways to get the
balance right are discussed in class, perhaps through some short story theory. Unintentional
tense changes marred too many pieces. They can be hard to pick up if the writer returns to the
piece after a break, so time must be allowed for the writer and another reader to check each
piece.
Some candidates supplied part of a much longer work. While the first few chapters of a novel
can be powerful, they need to do more than just set the scene and introduce the characters for
a candidate to rate well on this criterion. It can be hard to show development and control of
the narrative. Candidates are advised to include a summary of the whole plot and to consider
selecting some chapters from different stages in the piece, not just the opening ones.
2008 External Assessment Report
English Writing
7
Subject Code: ENW5C
Sentence construction continued to be a major problem in many folios. The use of run on
sentences indicated that candidates lacked understanding of the most basic element of
writing. Some class lessons on the correct use of the full stop and conjunctions appear to be
warranted. Candidates also needed to avoid falling into the pattern of starting each sentence
in a paragraph in the same way, particularly in first person narratives. Another common flaw
was unintentionally repeating a word in consecutive sentences as this lessened the impact of
the prose.
Criterion 7
The best folios featured the standard text types, usually short story, monologue, memoir or
poetry. Within these standard types the best writers presented excellent examples of the form
that expressed challenging and engaging ideas.
With all genre writing there are basic questions. What can I write that is worth saying given
the conventions of the genre? How can my piece offer something fresh or engaging? Fantasy
and science fiction were often hard to manage because the writer had spent so much time
establishing the setting of the imagined world that character, plot and theme were left
wanting. Overall, crime fiction was well handled. In the horror genre, vampire stories that
built on existing conventions to create a twist or alternative point of view rated well. Song
lyrics were generally poor in quality and as a text type they are usually dependent upon the
music to work well. This is outside the parameters of this subject.
Poetry was a great medium for strong language users who were prepared to craft their work.
It was a trap for those candidates who saw it as an easy option compared to the effort of
making a short story ‘work’. Some candidates wrongly assumed that the intensity of their
emotions was sufficient for creating impact and for their writing to be effective. While there
was some engaging narrative verse (as popularised by Steven Herrick) there was also
unfortunately a surfeit of contrived doggerel. Too many poems technically satisfied the
requirement of 30 lines for a single poem but were ineffective as poetry.
Journalistic writing was often disappointing as there was little research conducted beyond a
basic internet search. Such writing was often verbose and narrative rather than focussed.
There were some weak articles about a disease or condition (such as anorexia/ autism/ sexual
assault) that had no purpose beyond explaining the condition. They lacked a sense of
audience or intended publication. Perhaps they arose from the ideas/ issues module?
Autobiographical writing rated well if it provided some insight or reflection and was not just
a summary of a life. Candidates should beware of presenting a biography taken direct from
interviews or transcripts. If such pieces lacked evidence of the candidate’s crafting or
providing a ‘frame’ to shape the facts they scored very poorly. Markers can only assess a
candidate’s own words.
2008 External Assessment Report
English Writing
8
Subject Code: ENW5C
Conclusion
It is clear from the number of candidates undertaking this subject, and their high level of
creativity and skill, that this subject successfully offers top level opportunities for language
use and text creation. These are in addition to what is offered in the other English subjects.
With the on-going development of the National Curriculum it is to be hoped that creative
writing does not fall back to being just an optional unit within a literature or general English
subject.
Thank you to the markers for their three week commitment to marking the folios and for
providing useful feedback to candidates in this report. It is highly recommended that all
teachers undertake to mark at the end of the year (not every year) as it promotes excellent
understanding of the criteria and standards and the best ways to prepare folios for success. It
also enables colleagues to have a rest or experience marking other subjects!
Overall, candidates in 2008 showed considerable depth of talent and skill. Many of them in
the RS commented on the opportunities they had had for personal growth due to presenting
their work, reflecting and responding to feedback. Their teachers have done a terrific job in
fostering this talent and encouraging candidates to consider new ways of reading and writing.
However, this enthusiasm must be balanced by candidates accepting more responsibility for
following the folio guidelines and improving their skill in applying the writing and publishing
conventions.
All correspondence should be addressed to:
Tasmanian Qualifications Authority
PO Box 147, Sandy Bay 7006
Ph: (03) 6233 6364 Fax: (03) 6224 0175
Email: [email protected]
Internet: http://www.tqa.tas.gov.au
2008 External Assessment Report