Paper 1 June 2021 Question 1
Question 1
a) Usain Bolt Wins First Olympics
After the gun fired, all the runners lurched forward but Trinidad and Tobago's Richard Thompson had the best lead. Following close behind him was Jamaica’s Usain Bolt. In an attempt to catch up, Bolt stumbled over himself but was successful in making a fast recovery. Bolt managed to propel himself forward far enough to overtake his predecessor. However, the two were not alone. Walter Dix, Churandy Martina, Michael Frater, Marc Burns, and Darvis Patton were not too far behind. Asafa Powell, the previous 100-meter world record holder was expected to make an impressive performance on the track but was too far from the front.
About ninety meters through the race, and just ten from finishing, Bolt began to pound on his chest and he threw his hands up in the air. He was further ahead from the rest of the following runners and there was no way anyone was going to be able to pass him. Within seconds, Usain Bolt had crossed the finish line and won his first Olympics and now he was the world’s new 100-meter Olympic champion! From Asafa Powell to Usain Bolt, Jamaica has produced some of the world’s finest runners!
b) While the first excerpt was written in first-person, the second text used a third-person perspective to explain what was going on. The works were written in sequential order and in a play-by-play format in an attempt to tell a story. In the autobiographical extract, Usain Bolt describes the experience by saying, “I glanced across the line. He’s the only dude leading the pack. And then there was me. Keep chilling.” Here, this shows how he was explaining the order of things going on through his head while he was running.
The language in the report was significantly more sophisticated compared to the language Bolt used in his autobiography. Bolt wrote, “..my longer stride taking me past Thompson,...” This was much more casual compared to the report in which the same situation was described how Bolt “managed to propel himself forward far enough to overtake his predecessor.” The difference in this language gives off two different moods. Bolt’s piece is casual and suspenseful whereas the report is strictly informative and reflective.
In addition, Bolt wrote his autobiography in short bursts compared to the report where there is varying sentence length. The first text was more spaced out while the second text was more compact. In Bolt’s piece, all of his thoughts make it sound like the race took a long time when it was only just a matter of seconds. On the other hand, the report’s close wording makes the race seem really short and not as impactful as the first.
Bolt would alternate between explaining what is going on and his own personal thoughts. In lines thirteen and fourteen Bolt says, “...he [Richard Thompson] got a start like nobody else in the history of the Olympics. Wow! How did he do that?!” This shows the reader what going on in his head. Reports describe the external view of a situation and therefore do not present a personal perspective. In the report, it reads, “..all the runners lurched forward but Trinidad and Tobago's Richard Thompson had the best lead.” While this gives a proper explanation, it does not show how the runners are feeling and does not show what they are thinking about.
In Bolt’s autobiography, he used onomatopoeias like “Bang!” and “Pow!” These are literary devices that make the reader feel like they are really there. The report does not use this type of language. It focused more on visuals to give its audience a better view of what would’ve happened if they were there.
Question 1a would earn 4 marks in AO1 because of the writer's understanding for the characters, the setting, and the audience. The student uses proper language to decribe the events that occur and uses informal language that keeps the audience interested.
ReplyDeleteIn AO2 the student would also earn 4 marks for their response that is effectively expressing the events that occur, and the chronological structure of the report.
Question 1b scores five marks in AO1 for a sophisticted understnding of the text, clear language to the audience, and reference to chracteristic features. The student does. a really good job using lnguge appropriate to the udience. In AO3 the response would earn six marks for the clear comparative analysis of the pieces elements as well as thr writer's stylistic choices,
Hi Sommar!
ReplyDelete1a.) AO1: I believe you showed a clear understanding within your report. It was to the point and informative. Which is exactly how a report should be, the reader doesn’t want to read a bunch of fluff. Even within your title, “Usain Bolt Wins First Olympics”, it is to the point, so the reader knows exactly what to expect. Although it was clear you could have scored a 4 if you were clearer with the meaning, context and audience. In the second half of your report you are clear in stating “Usain Bolt… won his first Olympics and now he is the world’s new 100-meter champion.” This gives the reader the context, but there could have been more of a detailed understanding if the context and audience was pointed out earlier on. I do believe that you scored a 4 in “effective reference to characteristic features”. This is because you effectively outlined the actions that were made in the 100-metre race. An example of this would be “Bolt stumbled over himself but was successful in making a fast recovery.” Here you effectively outlined what a reporter would have seen in the race.
AO2: I believe you would have additionally received a 4 for your effective expression. You did a very great job of being direct with the audience, as to what happened. You literally went step by step even stating, “About ninety meters in…”. Again, you could have improved this score by directly stating your context earlier. Even if you stated something like, “At the 100-metre dash Olympic event…: Additionally you did a great job of effectively noticing what the audience wanted to read about, and you executed this well. The only thing you could have improved upon here was directly calling out the audience. I know I did this by ending my report with “This was an event you would not have wanted to miss.”
1b.) AO1: I do believe that you scored a 5 when it comes to having a sophisticated understanding of the text. You went paragraph by paragraph when explaining form and structure, and you even used the buzz word of “sophisticated”. This is very beneficial because you are directly stating a word from the rubric. You also used other words that directly relate to the prompt like “difference”, and this just makes your analysis even more clear. When it comes to the characteristic features I believe you scored a 4. You did an effective job of analyzing the features, but you can have made them more insightful by digging a bit deeper in your explanations. For instance, you stated the use of “first-person (and) third-person perspective…”. You did a great job in stating this, but I believe you could have done a deeper analysis on this and you could have connected this with your paragraph on Bolt’s personal thoughts.
AO2: With the slight lack of deeper understanding, I would have given you a 3 within your comparative analysis. It was obvious that you understood the texts well, but you had many thoughts that were just touched on, that could have given you a higher score. Even in writing about the onomatopoeia, you can have written about this being considered informal language, and this could have led to another paragraph about the texts using informal vs formal language. I would have given you a 4 when relating the analysis to the audience. In your final paragraphs you do directly state the “audience” and “this shows the reader”, and this directly shows how you understand the writer's stylistic choices to shape the audience's view.