In this part of the series, Unpacking the A Level Syllabus (Part 1), we will simplify of the "policy-speak" in the H1 (8832) and H2 (9509) A Level Literature syllabus documents, and understand what the examiner is looking for in a Paper 1 unseen essay.
While the syllabus documents give us an idea of the characteristics of a "good essay" in the eyes of the examiner, it may feel like you are overloaded with information and meaningless jargon. So let's simplify things for you, and make meaning to these documents, instead of merely repeating the contents within them to you.
H1 and H2 Paper 1 Section A: Shared Components of Marking Rubrics
For H1 and H2 Unseen Components, there are three common components to the marking rubrics that the examiners look out for: Quality of Response, Analysis/Study of Literary Features, and Use of Evidence.
These categories constitute the marking rubric and each contribute to your 25 marks.
Rubric A. Quality of Response
Let us consider the language of the examiners first, before unpacking it for you. In the words of the examiners, they describe the top band for Quality of Response as:
"Work in this band responds sensitively, perceptively and personally to the poems; it is often subtle, concise and sophisticated, with a style that is fluent and gives economic expression to complex ideas; at the upper end this work may be elegant and allusive."
"Develops a seamless, coherent response to the question."
"Very good work, showing discrimination and sometimes originality, in making an informed personal and critical response to the poems."
In other words, the examiners are looking out for three things for Quality of Response:
1. Your insight to and grasp of the subject matter/s: Emotional and observational sensitivity to the poets' concerns. How well are you able to identify the poets' thematic concerns and identify with the emotional quality of the poems?
2. Your use of language: Say more with less and say it elegantly.
Often, this involves using the active voice, and succinct phrases to convey concepts. Avoid furnishing the texts with excessive details, especially without making meaning or analyses to these details.
Sometimes, this also involves coining your own phrases to capture your perspective, attitude and opinion of the subject matter (of course, no awkward expressions). For example, some people argue that life is unfair, and the privileged leisure class have "struck the generic lottery". Isn't this an interesting and succinct expression to convey that such privilege is often not worked for but inherited ? Do you notice that the words, "privilege", "inheritance" and "unfairness", do not appear in the expression above, but can be quickly understood? Now that is what clarity of expression and having a personal voice means: Interesting, and valid expressions that convey ideas without superfluous words.
Elegant does not mean "convoluted" or "pedantic. It means achieving depth with straightforward, clear, and possibly, stylish language. Who said simple language cannot be deep? You can be "cheem" (Singlish for deep or complex), but remember that complexity and painful convolution are two different things.
3. Coherence of the essay: Inter-connection of comparative ideas/arguments.
We can define coherence two ways. One, logical and consistent. Two, unified as a whole.
For Definition One: There are no logical contradictions in the grand scheme of the argument.
For Definition Two: Does each topic sentence link up and give a fluid, complete line of argument?
Rubric B. Analysis of Literary Features
The examiners' idea of analysis that is worthy of the top band is one that "[e]ngages with the poems through detailed close analysis." The candidate "[a]nalyses with skill and discrimination in which writers' uses of poetic form, structure and language create the meanings of the poems." The candidate also "[e]valuates the effects of the writers’ use of form, style and language with a mature judgement and clear focus on the question and key issues."
This is where things get hazy. What exactly is skilful analysis? What does it mean to evaluate the effects of the writers' craft with a mature judgement and clear focus on the question and key issues?
For both H1 and H2, you may interpret the phrase, "key issues", as the poet's thematic concerns and commentary.
Let us consider Alfian Sa'at's poem, "The River Musi", inspired by the SilkAir crash of 1997 where no passengers survived deals with the topic of memory/remembering. In this poem, the poet explores the pain of retrieving memories, especially traumatic ones, and the avoidance of such memories. There is thus a respectful distance between the persona and the victims of the crash. Yet, the poet also suggests that amnesia only provides absence, or a hollowness, not closure.
Thus, your analysis of the poem should centre around the awareness of these key issues, if applicable to the quote that is. To apply this principle, let's consider the quote where the persona throws their passport back into "the depths where the eels/And the turtles remember [their]/Drowned childhood." The aquatic imagery of a a deep, underwater environment here conveys a suppression of memories, or even, death of memories as the persona's childhood is personified as a dead person, "Drowned".
For H2, "mature judgement and clear focus on the question" means focusing the discussion on the subject of comparison and the subjects that are related to it.
Now, what does "effects of the writers’ use of form, style and language" mean? There are many ways to look at it, but most generally, consider how each device impacts the poet's presentation of the subject matter.
Rubric C. Use of Evidence
For the examiner, the top band of use of evidence "uses quotation, paraphrase and critical terminology appositely and economically."
There are four things which the examiners look for in "Use of Evidence" :
If there are two words which you should remember from this segment, they are "moderation" and "accuracy".
1. Length of Quotation
Quotes should not be excessively long. There are too many things to focus on if quotes are too long, or you will ignore a large part of the quote.
Avoid excessively short quotes and/or quotes without any context as well.
2. Critical Terminology
Accurate identification of literary devices/techniques or appropriate usage of literary terminology.
3. Frequency and Use of Quotation
All assertions must be supported with evidence.
All readings/interpretations must be supported with relevant quotes.
4. Integration of Quotes
Proper grammatical conventions should be ensured when integrating the quote into your sentences and analyses.
H2 Paper 1 Section A: "Skill of Comparison" Rubric (Rubric D)
For the H2 Unseen Component, there is one extra component of the marking rubrics that is absent the H1 Unseen: Skill of Comparison.
In the words of the H2 syllabus document, the top band of the skill of comparison looks at the candidate comparing "the two poems skilfully and perhaps in original ways, moving between them with ease."
In essence, the examiners are looking out for two things to determine your Skill of Comparison:
1. Frequency of Comparison
Instead of analysing the two poems separately and connecting them together with a comparative statement like "Similarly, Plath also explores the unhealthy obsession with love", consider comparing the poems more frequently.
How? Perhaps after examining 2 pieces of evidence from one poem (let's call it Poem A), start to bring in a relevant piece of evidence and evidence from the other poem (let's call it Poem B) then transition back to the first poem, poem A, by examining another piece of evidence from Poem A.
2. Ease and Appropriacy of Comparison
Whilst it is encouraged that you compare more frequently, avoid doing so just for the sake of it .
Rather, beyond making more frequent comparisons, you should consider making active connections between different pieces of evidence too. Identify what exactly is similar and/or different.
Make sure that comparisons are logical/sound.
Conclusion
Of course, these are just guiding principles. The application of these principles, writing skills and other reading and thinking skills that are or will be difficult. It is also pivotal to obtain detailed or personalised feedback from a trustable source like your teachers or us.
Some of you may lament that the feedback you obtain is often generic and there are hardly any concrete suggestions for you to improve.
If you would like to make the process of studying literature easier for you, and found this article insightful, then consider literature coaching at A Way With Literature! We are a team of passionate literature tutors who wish to extend our love of the subject to everyone else.
Above all, we would love to help smoothen your journey of improvement.
Learn more about the A Way With Literature (AWWL) experience and pedagogy below.
Commentaires