Paper 1, Question 1
Olympics 100 Metres Finale
a)
Usain Bolt was competing against many great runners in the history of the world. A few of the many runners in the race were: Thompson, Walter Dix, Churandy Martina, etc. Usain Bolt, told us about how he feels when he runs a very important race such as in the Olympics. He started by sharing that the race only lasts 9 and a half seconds but that in that short period of time, he think talks ‘trash’ to himself.
There was a specific runner that he was worried about. Bolt was worried that Thompson could beat him because he had the strongest start. Bolt thought to himself, “Wow! How did he do that?!”
When Bolt recovered from a bad step, he made a great comeback and he passed Thompson. At 80 metres Bolt noticed that his teammate, and former holder of the world record, Asafa, was out of sight. Bolt continued to push himself through the last few metres, as he said to himself, “Like Stockholm, yo. Remember Stockholm. Do not panic. Get through your driving phase and chill.”
At the last few metres Bolt thought to himself, “Oh man, oh man …I’m gonna win this race!” and he did. Usain Bolt broke the world for the gold medal. He won the ‘Olympics 100 Metres Final’
b)
Usain Bolt’s autobiographical extract had great form, language and structure. The form was organized. The extract had relevant information such as the inner thoughts Usain Bolt goes through while he is running in important races such as in the Olympics against great runners. For example, the extract mentioned that when Bolt could not find his teammate, Asafa, he was saying to himself, “Where are you, bredder?” The structure through the extract was well organized. The extract began with an action word, ‘Bang!” This gets the reader excited to keep reading because they know that something interesting will happen. The use of exclamation symbols made the text a lot more interesting. The use of language was balanced. The extract had many simple sentences as well as complex sentences, the valence of both made the extract’s language have a great impact on the reader.
My newspaper report contained less words than Usain Bolt’s extract. I believe that my newspaper reports had good form, language and structure. I also believe that it was not as good as Usain Bolt’s autobiographical extract. The form of my newspaper report contained overall good structure, form, and the language could have been better due to the fact that it was a newspaper report, and I could have interacted more with the readers. I feel like my newspaper report was more of me telling the story of what happened at the ‘Olympics 100 Metres Final’ rather than a report. The structure in my report was mostly good but overall I feel like I could have combined everything into two paragraphs to make it flow better.
Comparing Bolt’s autobiographical extract to mine; I can definitely see the differences. Usain Bolt’s autobiographical extract had better structure, form and language. For example, the language in the extract was more powerful because it had more action words such as, ‘Bang!’ As mentioned before, the use of these types of words right at the beginning of a piece of writing keeps the reader interested and waiting for more. On the other hand, my opening sentence was, Usain Bolt's was competing against many great runners in the history of the world’ which is still a strong sentence to start off a newspaper report not direct and stronger than the action word, ‘Bang!’
Hello Estefany,
ReplyDeleteYour blog was very good. For part a, I think that you had done a good job of explaining a lot of details, but I think that you had a little too many details for a newspaper article. I also think that you should have put the most important information at the very start so the reader does not get bored and reads the article. I am also a little confused on how the reporters there would know exactly what Usain Bolt was thinking the entire race. I would give this 4 marks for AO1 because you had listed lots of useful information. For AO2 i would give you 2 marks because the information did not flow easily.
For part b, I think you had done a great job comparing the two texts, but I think that you could have written less about which one was better and more examples of the differences and similarities of the form structure and language of the two texts. I think that the points that you had made were very good, you just need to add a few more. I also think that a few quotes were out of place and not needed for specific texts and could have been used to describe more than one point. I would give this 3 marks for AO1 because it could have compared the two texts in more detail. I would give 6 marks for AO3 because it could have given more points that could have helped drastically. Overall good job!
Hi Estefany.
ReplyDeleteYour response for 1A was somewhat off the prompt. The rubric says that your response should use “key factual information about the event” and by using quotes from Usain Bolt’s own thoughts such as “Wow! How did he do that ?!” this shows information that you would not have known as a journalist, which is what the prompt had instructed you to impersonate.
1.a) AO1. I would say that you had a clear understanding of the text but not a detailed understanding. You said that “Bolt was worried that Thompson would beat him” however it was Asafa that Bolt was clearly worried about. Bolt was “chill” about Thompson, but he was frantically scanning for Asafa. You also said that “Bolt continued to push himself through the last few meters” however this is not the way that the text describes it. Usain Bolt says “I went totally wild, even though I was still ten metres from the line.” This shows that you did not have a detailed understanding of the text. Your AO1 score was a 3
1.a) AO2. Unfortunately you had multiple grammatical errors throughout your writing, in response A. You said that “Usain Bolt broke the world for the gold medal” which is clearly a mistake. You also said “but in that short period of time, he think talks ‘trash’ to himself.” These mistakes not only change the meaning of what you were trying to say, but they cause the reader to have to read it multiple times in order to understand what you were saying. Although you had multiple errors, your content was very relevant to the audience and your ideas were developed clearly. Your AO2 score was a 2
1.b) AO1. You could have gone into much more detail pertaining to form, structure and language. As form goes, all you said about Usain’s writing was that “the form was organized.” and you said that “the form of my newspaper report contained overall good structure, form, and the language.” This does not tell us much about your form at all. You did explain a few differences between your writing and Usain Bolt’s writing, therefore your AO1 score is a 3.
1.b) AO3. As I said earlier, did not dive very deep into the form for either of the writings. You did a good job explaining Usain Bolt’s language and the way that he used onomatopeias such as ‘bang.’ However for both the form and the structure you simply said it was “well organized.” Your AO3 score is 6
Hi Estephany!
ReplyDelete1 (a)
I would give this response a combination of 4 marks (AO1) and 4 marks (AO2). The response has detailed understanding of the text and effective reference to characteristic features. There is also effective expression with few errors that impede meaning and the content is relevant to the audience and purpose.
The response had form since it mostly reflected a report for the sports section of a newspaper. This is because I was not sure of a headline being used which is crucial in a report which is also a style element used for reports. The response also appealed to the correct audience which is shown by “many great runners in the history of the world. A few of the many runners in the race were: Thompson…” in order to not bore sports fans but to also catch any newcomers up on the sport. The response fulfills the purpose of creating a report mostly due to the uncertainty of the headline at the top. The response also uses the style of a report mostly due to the small paragraphs and possible heading. The response also uses language from the autobiography shown by reference to “‘Like Stockholm, yo. Remember Stockholm. Do not panic. Get through your driving phase and chill.’”
1 (b)
I would give this response a combination of 2 marks (AO1) and 4 marks (AO3). I feel like there was a limited analysis and understanding in general because you could have gone through a lot more so I recommend not focusing too much on nitpicking your report with the autobiographical extract since you mention that your report “contained less words” than the extract which I would say is not very useful here. So I recommend going through the list that was given for possible responses and just getting familiar with it so you can just go through the bullet points on there and rack up points. But still good job, Estephany and you have lots of potential!
The response comments on form, structure, and language such as both being well organized and the inner thoughts of Bolt and the usage of one-word onomatopoeia to begin the text such as ‘Bang!’ used in the response. Also identifies complex and simple sentences which highlights sentence types. The response tries to compare the two texts in terms of how well they were made which is an interesting and unique aspect of the response.