Just had my English exam..

[Cavalli]

So I just had my year 11 English exam. I received 43% - the same as last semester. I still got a C (due to the rest of the semester's work) so I don't really care that I didn't do too well on the exam..

I do however have some criticism for the markers, and I want to know whether or not you guys think I'm right by saying the following...

1. If I finish early (which I did) it's written on my exam paper. I saw it being written down on the paper. So, why did you write 'it's a shame you ran out of time' on one of my essays? Whoever marked it obviously didn't read the paper very well if they missed the massive red letters saying I finished early and what time it was that I finished.

2. If I'm given a quote to write about, with zero context, as far as I'm concerned it should be up to me to interpret that as I see fit. If I want to interpret it in one way, that's fine as long as I can back it up. Why am I being criticised for 'interpreting the quote wrong'?

3. Finally, why was there a comment saying 'do you explain this later on in the essay?' Is it not your job to read the whole essay and determine whether or not I did? I didn't - because it wasn't the point of my essay, however that's not the point. The point is you, as a marker, shouldn't be asking me whether I explain it later on. You should be reading my essay, determining whether I did or didn't and then giving me feedback as appropriate (i.e. you need to explain this, or you don't need to worry about explaining this).


Now, I do understand that these teachers have a lot of exams to mark, and sometimes they miss some minor things - that's cool, it's not like it's messed up my entire life or stopped me getting into uni or whatever, it's entirely non-consequential.

I just feel that things such as these - all of them being pretty big things, not exactly little slip ups made by the marker - shouldn't be happening.

Thoughts?

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Points:
1.Your work was checked mechanically, people usually ignore details and just repeat the pattern until they are done with the stack.

2.There is a "key" to writing your essay or other written exam-type. Usually there is a list of interpretations that are provided for the students that are considered "mature", "intelligible" etc. I had two teachers in my life that ignored this key and they helped me develop my style after they praised my fresh ideas or flexibility.

3. Hard to say what this person meant. Sometimes comments that really don't make sense at first glance are very interesting and help you improve.

Little slips and ignorances add up to the end result. I think you shouldn't totally act as if this was inconsequential. This means that if a teacher cannot assess your exam well, you should work so much harder to be able to assess yourself or work out what is indeed wrong. Unless it doesn't matter to you.

Yes it shouldn't be happening but it does. You should aim a bit over the top to hit the spot etc. Predict a standard failure and make up for it beforehand.

 

[Cavalli]

Like I said, it doesn't matter at this stage because I know where I went wrong. As long as I pass I'm happy. I still don't think it's an excuse. This is what they're paid for.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

1. Sounds like a misplaced criticism on their part. You might be able to badger them about this one a bit.

2. I'd normally agree with you on the principle, but I don't know what your exact instructions were, so I can't really say.

3. These types of comments are generally intended to make you think about the writing process itself; meant in a purely rhetorical sense. Now, the fact that you didn't explain it yet turned it in early might hint at the problem being in your outlining process. Always make at least a quick skeleton of an outline and make sure it's cohesive, the first thing you do.

 

[EditorOne]

2. If I'm given a quote to write about, with zero context, as far as I'm concerned it should be up to me to interpret that as I see fit.

Was it a quote from covered material you were assumed to have known about? What was the quote, anyway? And what did you say about it? Just curious.


"I just feel that things such as these - all of them being pretty big things, not exactly little slip ups made by the marker - shouldn't be happening.

Thoughts?"

Well, what you propose to do about it? Again, just curious.

 

[Cavalli]

Was it a quote from covered material you were assumed to have known about? What was the quote, anyway? And what did you say about it? Just curious.


"I just feel that things such as these - all of them being pretty big things, not exactly little slip ups made by the marker - shouldn't be happening.

Thoughts?"

Well, what you propose to do about it? Again, just curious.

The quote was just a random quote, I think it had something to do with saying things online, with a vague reference to cyber bullying.. It was like 'imagine everything you say online is put on a big billboard' with your face next to it or whatever. Basically it was saying imagine it's out there where everyone can see it with your face next to it, because that's what it's like when you post something on the internet. At least that's how I interpreted it. I remember saying how some people simply don't care about that, even in regard to cyber bullying and stuff. I for one, have frequently enough said cruel things to people on Facebook or other internet sites, however only when I mean them. I used this in my essay as an example that for some people, e.g. myself, it's just another form of communication and I don't draw a line between it and face-to-face interaction. For example, saying something to someone online is the same as saying it to their face. Either of which I'm happy to do. Thus, for me knowing that it's effectively as if it's on a big billboard publicised for the world to see has no affect on me, as I'm not exactly ashamed of it all. It's thought out and calculated; I say what I mean.

It was in no way related to material we'd studied in class - it was part of the 'writing' section of the exam. Basically you're just marked on your essay writing abilities in this section, so you would think your interpretation of the quote wouldn't really come into it anyway (not the point though, just an afterthought).


What do I propose be done about it? Well, I'm not the one marking these things. First of all I don't believe it should be my problem and I don't believe I should have to be the one even thinking about these things.

However, if I had to think of something then I'd say that perhaps the teacher that marked it should spend a little more time on it and actually try to mark it like she gives a damn - after all I've never had problems with marked work from other teachers.

I am going to be talking to her about it next year though, if I remember to lol.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Did you use arguments with counter arguments? Implication? Maybe the method you selected was not appropriate to the task.

It was in no way related to material we'd studied in class - it was part of the 'writing' section of the exam. Basically you're just marked on your essay writing abilities in this section, so you would think your interpretation of the quote wouldn't really come into it anyway (not the point though, just an afterthought).

Maybe you used very little stylistic complexity, sophisticated language etc? Do they mark you on how interesting was it to read?

What do I propose be done about it? Well, I'm not the one marking these things. First of all I don't believe it should be my problem and I don't believe I should have to be the one even thinking about these things.

You shouldn't be the one to think that you are not the one to think. Any new situation you consider is an opportunity to learn something.

However, if I had to think of something then I'd say that perhaps the teacher that marked it should spend a little more time on it and actually try to mark it like she gives a damn - after all I've never had problems with marked work from other teachers.

If you really see no fault in your reasoning, then there is no need to bother yourself with this situation. Asking what was this about can be useful, good luck.

 

[Minuend]

The quote was just a random quote, I think it had something to do with saying things online, with a vague reference to cyber bullying.. It was like 'imagine everything you say online is put on a big billboard' with your face next to it or whatever. Basically it was saying imagine it's out there where everyone can see it with your face next to it, because that's what it's like when you post something on the internet. At least that's how I interpreted it. I remember saying how some people simply don't care about that, even in regard to cyber bullying and stuff. I for one, have frequently enough said cruel things to people on Facebook or other internet sites, however only when I mean them. I used this in my essay as an example that for some people, e.g. myself, it's just another form of communication and I don't draw a line between it and face-to-face interaction. For example, saying something to someone online is the same as saying it to their face. Either of which I'm happy to do.

You have as crudely offended someone to their face as on ze web?
With the same frequency?

The quote was probably about the fact that people do hide behind anonymity and will behave much worse in cyberspace compared to face-to-face interaction. And there is a different to most people, because when you say something to them RL you are somewhat forced to observe their reaction in real time and own up to what you do. Compared to the webz where you write something and forget about it the next minute. Neither do you know much if anything about the person and it's overall less personal. Quite a few don't understand that in some cases, the targets can be pained from their insults.

it's out there where everyone can see it with your face next to it, because that's what it's like when you post something on the internet

That's what it's usually not. Youtube comments, forums, chatrooms.

I did see this documentary where a few women were harassed and threatened to get raped via text. When confronted, the males in question said they didn't really mean it, it was just "stuff people say" and that they didn't think it would matter much. Of course with various degrees of self-justification and what not.

If you threaten to rape various people to their face, then there is a fair chance of police involvement.

There's also the thing where you can be ostracized for certain opinions and behavior in RL which will have a stronger impact than if you are banned from a site.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Well, if you rage on facebook you can go to jail. So i guess Cavalli mentioned this social part of the internet, while he might have not adressed the whole issue of trolling, hate etc.
http://rt.com/usa/teen-facebook-arrested-prison-628/

This is a great example of a taboo.
He just suggested killing everyone in school and was confined without evidence.

 

[Minuend]

Yes, but it wasn't really about internet behavior that could be tied to your person, so talking about fb wouldn't be particularly relevant other than a side note example of bad behavior where you could be identified. Though, most of the fb cases would probably be people like himself who would also insult in a face to face situation compared to the main issue about people who don't behave as bad RL do behave bad or badler onweb.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Oh, so it's more like the task was to adress the broad spectrum. Classification and examples.

 

[Minuend]

Erm, not quite. I meant that the topic was something like "internet mouthoffs and anonymity". The FB example OP made was not of the anonymous kind and thus largely irrelevant.

 

[Cavalli]

Did you use arguments with counter arguments? Implication? Maybe the method you selected was not appropriate to the task.

Maybe you used very little stylistic complexity, sophisticated language etc? Do they mark you on how interesting was it to read?

You misunderstand, I'm not fussed about the mark. What bothers me is that the criticism was the I didn't interpret the quote correctly, when I'm not being marked on the interpretation of the quote; I'm being marked on my essay writing ability.

You shouldn't be the one to think that you are not the one to think. Any new situation you consider is an opportunity to learn something.

Disagree. I'm not payed for that. I pay the teachers to figure that out. I would rather spend my time studying for said exams then wasting it figuring out how to solve their inability to mark correctly.

If you really see no fault in your reasoning, then there is no need to bother yourself with this situation. Asking what was this about can be useful, good luck.

I disagree again. If they don't stop marking me poorly, it could affect my grades next year when these tiny details could stop me getting into uni.

You have as crudely offended someone to their face as on ze web?
With the same frequency?

Yeah man, if I interact socially with someone you can guarantee I'm saying what's on my mind - whether it's politically correct or not (unless I'm scheming something, then I'm bullshitting).

The quote was probably about the fact that people do hide behind anonymity and will behave much worse in cyberspace compared to face-to-face interaction. And there is a different to most people, because when you say something to them RL you are somewhat forced to observe their reaction in real time and own up to what you do. Compared to the webz where you write something and forget about it the next minute. Neither do you know much if anything about the person and it's overall less personal. Quite a few don't understand that in some cases, the targets can be pained from their insults.

Probably, the point is without context I am still able to interpret the quote any way I want to. If I choose to interpret it how I did, all the more power to me. I should never be marked down for it.

Yes, but it wasn't really about internet behavior that could be tied to your person, so talking about fb wouldn't be particularly relevant other than a side note example of bad behavior where you could be identified. Though, most of the fb cases would probably be people like himself who would also insult in a face to face situation compared to the main issue about people who don't behave as bad RL do behave bad or badler onweb.

It was relevant to my interpretation of the quote. Like I said, no context = I can interpret it how I like - especially in the writing section of the exam.

Erm, not quite. I meant that the topic was something like "internet mouthoffs and anonymity". The FB example OP made was not of the anonymous kind and thus largely irrelevant.

See above.