AQA LITB3 Gothic - 6th June 2013

Looking forward to this exam more than my others, quite enjoying Frankenstein and Macbeth!

Hey has anyone got any advice on moving an A grade essay to an A* grade?

To get into the A* band you need to really be evaluating the interpretations that you put forward, along with discussing one or two critical interpretations also. I think this is the thing that commonly stops people entering the top band when doing these essays... unless you did do this?

By 'evaluating the interpretation' do you mean I have to discuss why I believe such an interpretation relates to the question for example and the implications that such an interpretation has etc. (Does that make sense) or am I getting in wrong?

No I don't mean evaluating the interpretation in the sense of how it relates to the question. Any interpretation you put forward should relate to the question regardless, otherwise it seems a bit of a waste putting it forward if you are then having to explain why it links to the question in the first place.

What I mean by an interpretation is discussing what something could mean/why the author may have included a certain thing/why something is significant to your point. E.G - Say you were making the point in Frankenstein that Shelley uses homoeroticism in the novel. You can use this as an interpretation, but then say you don't believe this is a strong point, putting forward an alternative interpretation that homosexuality was a taboo subject at the time of writing, so the stronger view is that Shelley in fact uses misogyny throughout the novel, rather then homoeroticism.

So you get AO3 marks for giving different interpretations, then top AO3 marks for evaluating them as in the example I thought of above. Hopefully that makes sense! It's more about why a certain interpretation is strong/more appropriate/more fitting rather then why a certain interpretation relates to the question.

Hey I sat this exam in January and got full marks, I think the key to it is absolutely nailing the AOs, it sounds really simplistic but I don't think that this spec allows room for creativity or originality unless the AOs are really clearly signposted.
What I found worked for me was really engaging with the terms of the question, in my intro to both questions I defined the terms set out in the question, and then I integrated the terms in the question into the beginning and ending of every single paragraph I wrote so that all of my points were consistently relevant.

And as Unsworth said, really go to town on evaluation! I tried to link AO2, AO3 and AO4 together, by using contextual evidence in order to evaluate my arguments; I would make a point about language structure and form - suggest how this could be interpreted with regards to the terms set out in the question - and then evaluated them using contextual evidence.

I think students need to go about this paper really methodically, almost mathematically! I also found reading the examiners reports for each session absolutely crucial!

Do you have any advice on timing, as this is my main issue. Also would you have any practice responses that we could look at. I have so many top mark responses but I feel like it is important to know the best way to structure your response.

Thanks

What are the main things we need to learn ? Is it just the knowledge on the books and essay writing?

Hey I sat this exam in January and got full marks, I think the key to it is absolutely nailing the AOs, it sounds really simplistic but I don't think that this spec allows room for creativity or originality unless the AOs are really clearly signposted.
What I found worked for me was really engaging with the terms of the question, in my intro to both questions I defined the terms set out in the question, and then I integrated the terms in the question into the beginning and ending of every single paragraph I wrote so that all of my points were consistently relevant.

And as Unsworth said, really go to town on evaluation! I tried to link AO2, AO3 and AO4 together, by using contextual evidence in order to evaluate my arguments; I would make a point about language structure and form - suggest how this could be interpreted with regards to the terms set out in the question - and then evaluated them using contextual evidence.

I think students need to go about this paper really methodically, almost mathematically! I also found reading the examiners reports for each session absolutely crucial!

Hiya! Do you have any advice on a good way to structure the part b answers? Like should we talk about all 3 texts at the same time or just relate them at the end/beginning of the paragraph ? Sorry it's just our teacher has been a bit useless and isn't really giving us any help so if you have any advice it would be very appreciated

Hey I sat this exam in January and got full marks, I think the key to it is absolutely nailing the AOs, it sounds really simplistic but I don't think that this spec allows room for creativity or originality unless the AOs are really clearly signposted.
What I found worked for me was really engaging with the terms of the question, in my intro to both questions I defined the terms set out in the question, and then I integrated the terms in the question into the beginning and ending of every single paragraph I wrote so that all of my points were consistently relevant.

And as Unsworth said, really go to town on evaluation! I tried to link AO2, AO3 and AO4 together, by using contextual evidence in order to evaluate my arguments; I would make a point about language structure and form - suggest how this could be interpreted with regards to the terms set out in the question - and then evaluated them using contextual evidence.

I think students need to go about this paper really methodically, almost mathematically! I also found reading the examiners reports for each session absolutely crucial!