This year, some teachers are focusing quite heavily on “argument” development and “tracking” of arguments.
Typical feedback includes:
- My teacher wants me to focus more on argument progression and the reasons for shifts in arguments.
- My teacher said she did not want me to skip parts from the piece and talk about the arguments in order of the piece itself.
- My teacher wants me to focus more on viewpoints and sequencing of viewpoints.
- My teacher wants me to “track” the argument and analyse how it is being developed.
The Study Design states: “You must analyse each other’s point of view and their argument, showing a “thorough understanding of the arguments presented in the texts and how they have been constructed to position audiences”. (VCAA)
Some teachers seem to assume that “viewpoints” are interchangeable with “arguments”. I understand “viewpoints” to be main contention and supporting reasons. “The Construction of the Argument” relates to how the views are supported by evidence, and how they are sequenced (primarily substantiated by evidence (personal/professional) and comparative examples, attacking techniques and appeals etc.).
In some of the “models” floating around, the authors are making a “meal” of arguments at the expense of “viewpoints” and “written language”. When you over-elaborate on one element, the evaluation becomes a list of techniques and quotes. There is also a tendency to summarise and repeat (esp. with the opening contextual/background/credibility paragraph(s)). There is a tendency to sacrifice depth of analysis and positioning of persuasive word choices.
I like a balance — constantly keeping a focus on the “viewpoints” that must be shared. Your task is to evaluate the “ways in which argument and written and visual language are used in the material to persuade others to share the points of view presented.” If you do this sharply and smartly you will stand out.
Where some authors in “suggested models” often take six sentences to (over) explain and unpack the argument and its development, I crunch this into three sentences with a sharp link to viewpoints to avoid summarising. Then hone in on, and group, strategic word choices that reinforce the argument/viewpoint. This is a more realistic model in a 1 hour exam and a 1.5 hour SAC. (See our sample of paragraph openers that are smartly contextualised and linked to viewpoints. Don’t isolate! This leads to listing. You must group and show the complementarity of persuasive word choices and how they feed into the argument/examples and viewpoint.
Also see Yellow A+ workbook; pp 35; 44-46; 48; 55; 60; 87;
Also keep in mind time constraints; this means you must prioritise the sections of the text that enable you to shine; pp. 65; 80;