Can I still get an A grade - English Language AQA

I got 125/200 - AS English Language AQA

I am retaking in January - which I am so nervous for Unfortunately I got a C in my course work.

I need 140 marks for a B grade at AS. Is it a dream or can it be a reality. Or should I just aim for a B grade.


Nonetheless, If anyone can give me any good revision sites, recommended book and so on I will be so grateful!

I got 125/200 - AS English Language AQA

I am retaking in January - which I am so nervous for Unfortunately I got a C in my course work.

I need 140 marks for a B grade at AS. Is it a dream or can it be a reality. Or should I just aim for a B grade.


Nonetheless, If anyone can give me any good revision sites, recommended book and so on I will be so grateful!

Hi there,
I am somewhat of an expert now on the AQA AS spec given that my teacher used to mark their groupings question. After having my paper back from a disappointing AS exam grade of a B (low B), I now know the mark schemes inside out. This is a good thing, a tad geeky though :P

I, too, am resitting in January as I want an A overall and am doing a risky A2 coursework piece so I need a good foregrounding from my AS UMS marks.

The base C in your coursework is 48 - this means you would need 92, a middle-high B in the exam. This IS doable, and I don't see why you wouldn't be able to achieve it!

I have some general tips that should help.

Groupings Question 1:
Generally, don't group more than 3 texts in one group. 4 Groups of 3 texts will be fine to get good marks I think.
- Be creative. Don't go into the exam thinking you're gonna do a group on Grammar. This focus is too broad and will not allow you to access a mark above 10 out of 16 for that mark band.

- Closely analytical. You need to select appropriate language features and go into detail. EXPLAIN everything you can, but NEVER terminology. For example, always ask yourself "so what" after each point you make so you know that you've developed the point.

- Be systematic. This is hard to explain, and took several practice questions to grasp. You need to analyse in a system - When you group texts, first analyse what you're grouping them for. For example with this question:
- Start with pronouns as this is the group (then move onto grammar)
- Analyse lexis: is this similar? different? can you link this to the main group?
- Analyse graphology (if any): similar? different? can you link?
- Analyse pragmatics (if) - Similar, diff? link?
You get the idea. It's important that you discuss the same language features in the same paragraph. Don't say "Legalistic lexis gives authority to the text A, e.g "quote", which is necessary given the context as the leaflet would only work if people trust it. Pronouns, such as "you" in Text B blah blah. Lexis in this text has the semantic field of cookery, e.g "deli" and "rice"."

It's too mixed. The examiner knows you're just randomly picking stuff - you need to have a system (hence the systematic) :P

- Context! This is probably the easiest to gain marks for. After stating your group, e.g "I am grouping texts A & E for their use of extended metaphors." go on to state their purpose, ideal audience, origin etc. e.g "Text A is a flyer aimed at teenagers concerned with their sexual Health, and is likely to feature in a school. Text E is a magazine article, aimed at an older adult audience, highlighting that driving whilst smoking is against the law"

You won't necessarily get marks for this, as it's stating what the exam paper already says, but without stating WHO WHAT WHERE WHEN you can't link your ideas to context. if anything, it helps you to keep track of your point

It's equal weighting for the mark bands.
You are given up to 16 for picking good, clear groups that are specific and allow you to talk about things in depth.
You are given up to a further 16 for your analysis using linguistic terms and terminology. In this bracket you also need to choose examples and quote from the text, with meaningful quotes that actually support your point.
You are given the final of up to 16 for being systematic, and talking about the same things in the same paragraph. E.g starting with pronouns, then lexis, then graphology etc. not jumbling up points

For Questions 2/3/4 it's language and society. This is your ability to connect with the text, and be insightful.
You are given up to 16 for your selection of quotes, ideas etc. and for terminology.
You are then given a whopping up to 32 for context and being systematic (like I mentioned above!). If you group the same linguistic techniques used into their own paragraph, you can't really go wrong. Be insightful - give your opinion if you can back it im, but do it in am impersonal expression in the concluding bit:

e.g "Although the text works well at exerting power, given it's context it is likely to be ignored because of the heavy use of legalistic lexis, and it's formal language. Teenagers who are sitting exams will take one look at the text and ignore it, leaving it powerless. If the text doesn't use techniques to appeal to it's main audience, then the chances are it won't > FURTHER EXPLAIN.

I hope this helps,
best of luck!
I shall be re-sitting it with you :P

that is amazing!!!!!!! but can I get an A at A2 or stick with getting a B?

If you get a B at AS, it's definitely possible to get an A at A2 - I went from a B to an A* in English Lit, so I'm speaking from experience here. I didn't do English Language, but my advice would be to do as well in your resit as you can, but even without that, work on your A2 coursework (I'm assuming you still have cwk at A2?) to get it as good as possible, because that will put less pressure on the exam.

I got a B in English Lit AS and am resitting it this month. I have an A in my AS coursework, but only got a C in my exam (one mark off a B) which brought my overall grade to a mid B. Do you have any tips? I'm really starting to panic about it. I'm lucky they're letting me resit it because I was only predicted a C in the first place, but they think I can do better and so do did I... But I'm not sure any more. What helped you? How should I go about answering the question to maximise marks? My first exam I really didn't use my time wisely, and spent 20 mins deciding what question to do, and only left myself about 25 minutes for part B.

Any advice would be appreciated

Hi there,
I am somewhat of an expert now on the AQA AS spec given that my teacher used to mark their groupings question. After having my paper back from a disappointing AS exam grade of a B (low B), I now know the mark schemes inside out. This is a good thing, a tad geeky though :P

I, too, am resitting in January as I want an A overall and am doing a risky A2 coursework piece so I need a good foregrounding from my AS UMS marks.

The base C in your coursework is 48 - this means you would need 92, a middle-high B in the exam. This IS doable, and I don't see why you wouldn't be able to achieve it!

I have some general tips that should help.

Groupings Question 1:
Generally, don't group more than 3 texts in one group. 4 Groups of 3 texts will be fine to get good marks I think.
- Be creative. Don't go into the exam thinking you're gonna do a group on Grammar. This focus is too broad and will not allow you to access a mark above 10 out of 16 for that mark band.

- Closely analytical. You need to select appropriate language features and go into detail. EXPLAIN everything you can, but NEVER terminology. For example, always ask yourself "so what" after each point you make so you know that you've developed the point.

- Be systematic. This is hard to explain, and took several practice questions to grasp. You need to analyse in a system - When you group texts, first analyse what you're grouping them for. For example with this question:
- Start with pronouns as this is the group (then move onto grammar)
- Analyse lexis: is this similar? different? can you link this to the main group?
- Analyse graphology (if any): similar? different? can you link?
- Analyse pragmatics (if) - Similar, diff? link?
You get the idea. It's important that you discuss the same language features in the same paragraph. Don't say "Legalistic lexis gives authority to the text A, e.g "quote", which is necessary given the context as the leaflet would only work if people trust it. Pronouns, such as "you" in Text B blah blah. Lexis in this text has the semantic field of cookery, e.g "deli" and "rice"."

It's too mixed. The examiner knows you're just randomly picking stuff - you need to have a system (hence the systematic) :P

- Context! This is probably the easiest to gain marks for. After stating your group, e.g "I am grouping texts A & E for their use of extended metaphors." go on to state their purpose, ideal audience, origin etc. e.g "Text A is a flyer aimed at teenagers concerned with their sexual Health, and is likely to feature in a school. Text E is a magazine article, aimed at an older adult audience, highlighting that driving whilst smoking is against the law"

You won't necessarily get marks for this, as it's stating what the exam paper already says, but without stating WHO WHAT WHERE WHEN you can't link your ideas to context. if anything, it helps you to keep track of your point

It's equal weighting for the mark bands.
You are given up to 16 for picking good, clear groups that are specific and allow you to talk about things in depth.
You are given up to a further 16 for your analysis using linguistic terms and terminology. In this bracket you also need to choose examples and quote from the text, with meaningful quotes that actually support your point.
You are given the final of up to 16 for being systematic, and talking about the same things in the same paragraph. E.g starting with pronouns, then lexis, then graphology etc. not jumbling up points

For Questions 2/3/4 it's language and society. This is your ability to connect with the text, and be insightful.
You are given up to 16 for your selection of quotes, ideas etc. and for terminology.
You are then given a whopping up to 32 for context and being systematic (like I mentioned above!). If you group the same linguistic techniques used into their own paragraph, you can't really go wrong. Be insightful - give your opinion if you can back it im, but do it in am impersonal expression in the concluding bit:

e.g "Although the text works well at exerting power, given it's context it is likely to be ignored because of the heavy use of legalistic lexis, and it's formal language. Teenagers who are sitting exams will take one look at the text and ignore it, leaving it powerless. If the text doesn't use techniques to appeal to it's main audience, then the chances are it won't > FURTHER EXPLAIN.

I hope this helps,
best of luck!
I shall be re-sitting it with you :P

If you get a B at AS, it's definitely possible to get an A at A2 - I went from a B to an A* in English Lit, so I'm speaking from experience here. I didn't do English Language, but my advice would be to do as well in your resit as you can, but even without that, work on your A2 coursework (I'm assuming you still have cwk at A2?) to get it as good as possible, because that will put less pressure on the exam.

x

Bit random, but do you know how much is needed for a B at A2 from 140/200 at AS?

You sir, are a absolute legend. +1rep

For AS, a B is 140/200.
For A2, this is doubled as they are both worth 50% (AS & A2 = 100%) so it's 280 for a B, then 320 for an A.

Hi there,
I am somewhat of an expert now on the AQA AS spec given that my teacher used to mark their groupings question. After having my paper back from a disappointing AS exam grade of a B (low B), I now know the mark schemes inside out. This is a good thing, a tad geeky though :P

I, too, am resitting in January as I want an A overall and am doing a risky A2 coursework piece so I need a good foregrounding from my AS UMS marks.

The base C in your coursework is 48 - this means you would need 92, a middle-high B in the exam. This IS doable, and I don't see why you wouldn't be able to achieve it!

I have some general tips that should help.

Groupings Question 1:
Generally, don't group more than 3 texts in one group. 4 Groups of 3 texts will be fine to get good marks I think.
- Be creative. Don't go into the exam thinking you're gonna do a group on Grammar. This focus is too broad and will not allow you to access a mark above 10 out of 16 for that mark band.

- Closely analytical. You need to select appropriate language features and go into detail. EXPLAIN everything you can, but NEVER terminology. For example, always ask yourself "so what" after each point you make so you know that you've developed the point.

- Be systematic. This is hard to explain, and took several practice questions to grasp. You need to analyse in a system - When you group texts, first analyse what you're grouping them for. For example with this question:
- Start with pronouns as this is the group (then move onto grammar)
- Analyse lexis: is this similar? different? can you link this to the main group?
- Analyse graphology (if any): similar? different? can you link?
- Analyse pragmatics (if) - Similar, diff? link?
You get the idea. It's important that you discuss the same language features in the same paragraph. Don't say "Legalistic lexis gives authority to the text A, e.g "quote", which is necessary given the context as the leaflet would only work if people trust it. Pronouns, such as "you" in Text B blah blah. Lexis in this text has the semantic field of cookery, e.g "deli" and "rice"."

It's too mixed. The examiner knows you're just randomly picking stuff - you need to have a system (hence the systematic) :P

- Context! This is probably the easiest to gain marks for. After stating your group, e.g "I am grouping texts A & E for their use of extended metaphors." go on to state their purpose, ideal audience, origin etc. e.g "Text A is a flyer aimed at teenagers concerned with their sexual Health, and is likely to feature in a school. Text E is a magazine article, aimed at an older adult audience, highlighting that driving whilst smoking is against the law"

You won't necessarily get marks for this, as it's stating what the exam paper already says, but without stating WHO WHAT WHERE WHEN you can't link your ideas to context. if anything, it helps you to keep track of your point

It's equal weighting for the mark bands.
You are given up to 16 for picking good, clear groups that are specific and allow you to talk about things in depth.
You are given up to a further 16 for your analysis using linguistic terms and terminology. In this bracket you also need to choose examples and quote from the text, with meaningful quotes that actually support your point.
You are given the final of up to 16 for being systematic, and talking about the same things in the same paragraph. E.g starting with pronouns, then lexis, then graphology etc. not jumbling up points

For Questions 2/3/4 it's language and society. This is your ability to connect with the text, and be insightful.
You are given up to 16 for your selection of quotes, ideas etc. and for terminology.
You are then given a whopping up to 32 for context and being systematic (like I mentioned above!). If you group the same linguistic techniques used into their own paragraph, you can't really go wrong. Be insightful - give your opinion if you can back it im, but do it in am impersonal expression in the concluding bit:

e.g "Although the text works well at exerting power, given it's context it is likely to be ignored because of the heavy use of legalistic lexis, and it's formal language. Teenagers who are sitting exams will take one look at the text and ignore it, leaving it powerless. If the text doesn't use techniques to appeal to it's main audience, then the chances are it won't > FURTHER EXPLAIN.

I hope this helps,
best of luck!
I shall be re-sitting it with you :P

Firstly thanks a lot for this, it was very, very helpful.

I think i've identified my problem as the system thing you were talking about, I just don't really understand what you're trying to say. My answers are always very cluttered and jumbled up which I believe is the main reason for me getting a C instead of my prediction. So i'm now resitting, just hoping you could try to explain this system thing for me, because i'm just reading what you wrote and it's not going in.

Thanks x

Hey,
Thanks, no probs.

Basically, the exam board does't want you to annotate the text and then simply write everything you see. They want you to take a planned, structured approach.
This means identifying similar features, and then writing about these together, always focussing on context for Section B.
In essence, like you said, this is easier said than explained and then done.

You want to open the exam paper, and read all the texts as quick as possible.
Begin with section B if you like, to ensure you have the system thing nailed before grouping - just remember to put the question number and it doesn't matter, you can do them either way

Decide what you're doing - gender/technology/power, then annotate the transcript.
Whilst annotating, be thinking of similar things - if you're doing power, and you've spotted legalistic lexis such as things like "client", "prosecution", "terms", "conditions" and "penalty", then you want to write about these with the rest of the lexis, do you understand that?

I have always been told a good approach is like this:
Context - what is the text? who wrote (if written)? mode-spoken/written? morals? values? ethics? not too deep, but this provides the starting point for everything as the question is all focused on context.

Discourse - Discourse is hard to explain. I always remember it as LOOKING at the text, and KNOWING what the text is straight away. For example, how do you know that a letter IS a letter? because it has the address in top right, is usually dated, has a sign on/sign off format e.g "Dear...yours sincerely", is formal (depending, look first) - these are features of the discourse of a letter.
Think of a book - how do you know it is a book? just have a think in your head HOW you know, just by looking, that it is a book. Discourse isn't just appearance though, think language too!

Sentences - Sentence types, structures, latinate? why? how does this help context/influence context? Impact of lengthy/short sentences??

Lexis - Words words words. How are words used? This is quite simple, and deemed by examiners to be the easiest group to write about. Covering it in detail and with imagination, e.g connotations, denotations, metaphors is better.

Grammar - this is deemed one of the hardest. everything grammar: pronouns, tenses, prepositions, auxilaries, negatives... they will all contribute. If it's power, pay specific attention to pronouns as these help to exert power lots - inclusive e.g "we" gives the text power and authority as it is as though there is a group, and not just one person. If I said "I think..." you wouldn't trust it as much as "we think...".

Spelling, punctuation - Quite simple. If there is anything to say, say it, but try not to say lots about a little as it can be waffling.

I hope this helps.

For groupings, make a grammar group as examiners think this is more sophisticated.

-Kins.

Hey,
Thanks, no probs.

Basically, the exam board does't want you to annotate the text and then simply write everything you see. They want you to take a planned, structured approach.
This means identifying similar features, and then writing about these together, always focussing on context for Section B.
In essence, like you said, this is easier said than explained and then done.

You want to open the exam paper, and read all the texts as quick as possible.
Begin with section B if you like, to ensure you have the system thing nailed before grouping - just remember to put the question number and it doesn't matter, you can do them either way

Decide what you're doing - gender/technology/power, then annotate the transcript.
Whilst annotating, be thinking of similar things - if you're doing power, and you've spotted legalistic lexis such as things like "client", "prosecution", "terms", "conditions" and "penalty", then you want to write about these with the rest of the lexis, do you understand that?

I have always been told a good approach is like this:
Context - what is the text? who wrote (if written)? mode-spoken/written? morals? values? ethics? not too deep, but this provides the starting point for everything as the question is all focused on context.

Discourse - Discourse is hard to explain. I always remember it as LOOKING at the text, and KNOWING what the text is straight away. For example, how do you know that a letter IS a letter? because it has the address in top right, is usually dated, has a sign on/sign off format e.g "Dear...yours sincerely", is formal (depending, look first) - these are features of the discourse of a letter.
Think of a book - how do you know it is a book? just have a think in your head HOW you know, just by looking, that it is a book. Discourse isn't just appearance though, think language too!

Sentences - Sentence types, structures, latinate? why? how does this help context/influence context? Impact of lengthy/short sentences??

Lexis - Words words words. How are words used? This is quite simple, and deemed by examiners to be the easiest group to write about. Covering it in detail and with imagination, e.g connotations, denotations, metaphors is better.

Grammar - this is deemed one of the hardest. everything grammar: pronouns, tenses, prepositions, auxilaries, negatives... they will all contribute. If it's power, pay specific attention to pronouns as these help to exert power lots - inclusive e.g "we" gives the text power and authority as it is as though there is a group, and not just one person. If I said "I think..." you wouldn't trust it as much as "we think...".

Spelling, punctuation - Quite simple. If there is anything to say, say it, but try not to say lots about a little as it can be waffling.

I hope this helps.

For groupings, make a grammar group as examiners think this is more sophisticated.

-Kins.

I've got another query. Was doing some past papers and was making a group about common audiences, ie texts that are written between people that know each other. One text was a postcard to a friend, another a note exchanged between brothers and finally a local flyer. I thought this was a good grouping because they all have different degrees of knowing each other (Friends, Siblings, Acquaintances) and so you can explore these differences. As well as wondering if this would be a suitable group, I then wondered, do I need to explore the other texts in terms of audience, within the same paragraphs. eg. the other texts are more inclined to use personal pronouns rather than proper nouns because they are referring to people they don't know on a personal level...

Thanks for any info...