Monday, January 1, 2018

Observations on Lear, Infancy, and Multiple Choice Passages

It's 2018 and we are now looking forward to second semester with plays (The Cherry Orchard, The Importance of Being Earnest), short fictional works and frame stories (The Metamorphosis, The Canterbury Tales), essays (A Vindication on the Rights of Woman), novels (Frankenstein, Wuthering Heights), and poetry (The Romantics -  the walker Wordsworth, the artist Blake, the addict Coleridge, the playboy Byron, the reviled Shelley, my lover of purplue Keats). In between all of that reading, we will have allusions, multiple choice practices, feminist critical theory, and Marxist critical theory. I know this sounds like a of work, which it does qualify as; however, there will be creative opportunities for the upcoming assessments, which will include a character chart, a found prose poem, and our own class pilgrimage to another location. In case you remember my random outfit choices last year, we ended up at Hogwarts and Jurassic Park. 

Before we can commence all the aforementioned antics, we must look back at 2017 and, more specifically, the end of semester assessments. We will spend quality time reviewing the Poetry Test, the Psycho Lear Essays, the Poetry Prompt and Multiple Choice test from the final during our opening day classes. Prior to that day - in what I am sure will be a very cold classroom - I will give you the observations from the evaluation process and the minutia of highlights and lowlights from these evaluations. 

In regards to that play about a feisty king with feisty daughters with feisty spouses hanging out with feisty foils, there were strong essays detailing the psychology of the characters with an emphasis on speech patterns, meter, and other literary elements that behoove the telling of the id, the ego, the superego, coping mechanisms, stages of development, birth order, and other delusions of grandeur from the psychoanalytical spectrum (alas, no one grasped the trauma of the real, a personal favorite that Lear finds in conjunction with the raging storm out of doors). For the 3 students scoring a 9 on this essay (if you would like to play initial matching, MH, AP, JK), they offered a clear context in the introduction of the historical realm, the psychological conflicts inherent in the character, or an analogy that connected directly with the character. To further their writing, they merged psychoanalytical terminology with literary terminology in every, or almost every, paragraph to show how Shakespeare's literary elements construct the psychology and adjustment of character throughout the play. To exhibit the information, these students brought in multiple examples of evidence per paragraph - not always stopping at two - and fully analyzed the meaning of each word, phrase, idea to its zenith. Overall, second hour averaged a 6.31 for this writing, and fifth hour averaged a 5.84. To make it interesting on my end, I evaluated the essays by character, starting with all of the Lears, moving to all the Edgars, and so on an so forth until the end with the Cordelias. 

As with all essays, including the final, you want an introduction that engages the audience and connects to the text and the prompt given, transitions from the hook to the thesis with ease, incorporates the author and the title (properly punctuated, which is still a difficulty for too many of you at this point), and ends with a thesis of mature language, specific direction, and indication of the paper's overall focus. The thesis may be heavily focused on psychoanalytical terminology (Lear) or on literary elements (poetry prompt). 

The body paragraphs rely on structure first and development of ideas second. A topic sentence commences each paragraph and will indicate the specific quality or term to be focused upon and its significance. Building from the topic sentence, students will begin to explain the element and bring in evidence from the text to exhibit a usage of caesura, a look at the id's overwhelming takeover of rational human beings, or any other focus. The evidence should be in words and phrases that flow into your writing and do not cause a distraction from your ideas. In addition, the citations should be properly placed and punctuated. Each element of evidence must be explained and connected to the topic sentence. Once all the above necessities are included, a concluding sentence ends the show.

The conclusion does not have to be a regurgitation of the whole essay, but it needs to end with something memorable for your audience, who, for instance, may be reading 37 essays about King Lear or two poems side-by-side. I recommend returning to your hook in some fashion and expanding upon it with the knowledge shared during the essay. 

To specify a bit more from the final, you had to do the above qualities regarding 2 poems. For Plath (you know her background, so you have some context to help you here) and Blake (a couple of you may know that he is a Romantic poet, artist, religious man, and realist), you had to look at how they used imagery to reveal their tones toward infancy. As a result, you, as an AP-level student should, went beyond imagery and connected it to persona, similes and metaphors, alliteration, free verse vs. formal rhyme, caesura, enjambment, tercets and quatrains. Some responses went for more of a surface read (motherhood is grand; infancy is horrible). However, there were several layers to Plath's poem of anxiety, careful concern, and natural instinct  that went beyond a simplification of happy to be a mother. (I must say I was disappointed that not one of you went after the idea of her Victorian nightgown, a reflection of a repressive era of forced gender roles!). Those of you that found all those layers and all those poetic devices were evaluated highly. Overall, there were two 9 scores (TK & CB) with second hour averaging 5.82 and fifth hour averaging 5.65.

Lastly, the MC test was all over the place and, interestingly enough, the majority of you did better with the later passages than the first passages! I did too, actually, scoring 44 out of 51, which would be the curve score for this portion of the final. Reminders for MC are fairly redundant but important too: close read the passage and understand the plot first. Rushing through the text to get to the questions may take away from your reading for necessary plot, facts, and character information. 

On each and every MC test, we will have 4 goals:

Goal 1 is 50%, which is 26 correct on this exam 
Goals 2 is 60%, which is 31
Goal 3 is 70%, which is 36
Goal 4 is scoring enough to have a 2 on the exam without writing an essay, which is 42 

And how did you do with these goals? 

Goal 1: 9 
Goal 2: 10
Goal 3: 8
Goal 4: 0 

If you do the math, there are still many of you working to reach Goal 1, and we will be working on this to help you feel more confidence and accuracy on this portion of the exam.

See all of you on Thursday - and don't forget to be reading The Cherry Orchard and working on your book card for this play! 

No comments:

Post a Comment