What is the point of creative writing? How can I make mine better? Birmingham City University has some top tips.
0 Comments
Part of both Paper 1 and Paper 2 is showing your ability to evaluate a text. This sounds simple, but you'd be amazed how many students actually get this wrong to some degree! This is a 15-mark question on both papers and understanding how to respond to it will put you in good stead for tackling the rest of the paper. What does it mean to 'evaluate'? Basically, evaluation is asking you 'how well' something is done. For example, if I asked you to evaluate my teaching, I'd be asking you to tell me how well I teach; if I asked you to evaluate school lunches, you'd tell me how well they are made, and how well they are received. Texts are no different. Cardinal error #1: Misunderstanding the question Remember, you are being asked how well, not how. Which means that if you are asked to look at how well a writer creates tension, you need to evaluate how well he creates tension - not describe how it is done! A great many students have lost out on marks thanks to this small error of judgement. See the writer as an architect One of the key things you need to remember when writing an evaluation is that the writing is a creation made by the writer. You need to keep the writer in the forefront of your mind - why have they made particular choices? What is the thought behind it? How successful have they been? Take the task: In this text, the writer tries to engage the reader through their description of the jungle. Evaluate how successfully this has been achieved. If we re-write the question (which we should always, always do!) with the writer at the centre of it, we end up with: How well does the writer's description of the jungle engage the reader? Now we're cooking on gas. It means that now, when we evaluate, we know that we're not looking at how he describes the jungle, but how well he describes it in order to make it interesting. Annotating the text As always, annotation is key. It means that you don't need to plan and you won't be pushed for time when you're writing as all of your notes will already be there. I made a post last week about the comparison question and I showed you Ria's annotations - this is what annotations should look like: Make sure your annotations relate directly to the question, and nothing more. You don't want a whole heap of annotations that you can't use - that would be confusing. Answering the question First, let's look at the mark scheme: As you can see, you're being asked to write critically - I wrote a post of critical evaluation and highly recommend that you read it - you can find it here. However, you're also being asked to analyse and evaluate the writer's choices. So how do we do this? Refer back to the question, using the writer as a focus When you're writing about the writer, you must use evaluative language and you must refer back to the question. That means using words like: These evaluative words should help you to make the differentiation between 'commenting', 'explaining' and 'evaluating'. Consider: James wears a red hat, which symbolises his anger. James' red hat is a symbol of his anger as the colour connotes rage; the fact he wears it on his head could indicate that his anger is inside his head. The writer gives James a red hat to send a clear signal to the audience that he is feeling, in his mind, angry. It is a powerful indicator of his mood; these symbols are also used elsewhere - for example, when he is calm, he wears a blue hat. In the final response, the candidate has clearly evaluated the usefulness of James' red hat - they have said 'how well', not just 'how'. A good idea would be to use your topic sentences to establish evaluation - The writer successfully creates... The writer clearly displays... The writer creates an obvious... This then gives you free reign to begin your analysis in the knowledge that you've already clearly displayed your understanding of the writer as an architect. So, all in all, you must remember - TL;DR:
Thinking outside the box is important when writing creatively. You have no idea how many times an examiner will see a single storyline when they are marking - the questions aren't always exciting, and so many students write about the same, tired ideas. Take, for example, this GCSE question from the days of old:
Write about a journey you have taken. Your experience can be real or imagined. Now, you've been given a gift here - a GIFT! You've been told that you may write something from your imagination. However, you'd be surprised how many students write about exactly the same thing. I set this question back in 2014 for a Year 9 class before teaching them to 'think outside the box'. Then, I skimmed off the top ten responses. Here are the topics of each of those ten stories:
Notice anything? It's important to build a fictional world that isn't something usual or 'inside the box'. Your examiner is looking for an exciting, interesting story that shows talent and understanding of what makes a reader tick. If they wanted to know about a holiday, they'd ask about a holiday. They're sneaky and they're trying to trick you. Surprise, surprise; the green response was one of the highest-marked responses. Why? Well, isn't it obvious? The writer wrote from the perspective of a virus that had taken over a human body, and described the journey through the bloodstream. Not only do these 'outside the box' ideas allow you to be creative, they're also a great opportunity to experiment with figurative techniques - metaphors, similes, personification - all techniques that show talent. I like you all, but I'm really not that interested in the time you went on a train. This TedEd video explains really well the importance of building a unique and exciting fictional world in your writing: Ms Chinn has sent me this brilliant resource that has a wide range of practice image-prompt questions for you to have a go at. It shows you a great way to plan your piece if you're not a fan of Todorov's Narrative (equilibrium > problem > recognise problem > solve problem > return to equilibrium). Remember, in Section B, you have a choice of two activities - only one will use an image as a prompt. You do not need to closely refer to the image, but in the case of total brain freeze, it really helps to have a plan of attack. It uses all parts of the image to create a truly detailed piece of writing. Consider:
It's a great idea to have a go at planning these pieces in timed conditions in order to be able to plan quickly and efficiently come exam time. Remember - you only have around 5 minutes to plan, and you must always think outside the box!
Section A of Paper 1 is the reading section. It requires you to read a text, then respond to a number of short, medium and long questions on it.
This is a really clear video that clearly outlines how to approach this section of the exam well.
This quick TedEd video gives some really great insights into how to tell a good story. Remember - don't be clichéd and think outside the box!
|
In a Nutshell...This paper is a run-up to Paper 2. If you can master this, you're golden. ArchivesCategories
All
|