Should English Be Compulsary Poll (4 Viewers)

[ccc123]

the question should be: Should English be compulsary for the UAI?

Well, the reason English is compulsary is because there needs to be a common subject for scaling. Considering this, would it really be fair to make any other subject compulsary other than English?

 

[nayyarv]

Well, the reason English is compulsary is because there needs to be a common subject for scaling. Considering this, would it really be fair to make any other subject compulsary other than English?

I dont quite follow

Why should english be the only compulsary subject?

Using the same argument i can argue that any subject should be compulsary

Well, the reason Aboriginal Studies is compulsary is because there needs to be a common subject for scaling. Considering this, would it really be fair to make any other subject compulsary other than Aboriginal Studies

I know this is a bit extreme, but u get the point

 

[selablad]

YES! because it evens things out!! its just weird/not fair for people to just do numbery sciencey subjects.

But year 11/12 is essentially post-compulsory education (yes I know that's not really true, but you don't have to be in school, you could be at TAFE or something), so why must you have a wide range of subjects? I can understand at year 10 level, making you do english/maths/science or whatever, and making you have a wide range, but after that, it is your choice about what you want to do, and if english forms no part of your future life plans then why do it?

I'll try to explain what I mean, I didn't explain that very well Obviously you want all high school graduates to have some basic skills eg in english, maths, whatever. But you should use year 10 to get everyone at the same level of basic skills, and use year 11/12 english as an elective course where you analyse texts and deconstruct stuff and whatever.

Because in year 11/12, you don't learn anything really about the language/grammar itself, you learn how to express yourself and all that. But if you were, say, interested in economics, you'd still learn how to express yourself, but in a way that was best for economics, which would benefit you more.

Wow, that post makes little sense even to me. Sorry

 

[russianROULETTE]

I'm quite sure I stated somewhere in my previous posts that English should be compulsory and needed to be passed.

My bad, I was replying to that particular post and didn't see one of your posts from earlier in the thread:

I've spent my whole hols on english because I'm so bad at it. I reckon english should be compulsory for the HSC but you only need to pass it.

So in that case, yes it would be fairer.

 

[ccc123]

I dont quite follow

Why should english be the only compulsary subject?

Using the same argument i can argue that any subject should be compulsary

Well, the reason Aboriginal Studies is compulsary is because there needs to be a common subject for scaling. Considering this, would it really be fair to make any other subject compulsary other than Aboriginal Studies

I know this is a bit extreme, but u get the point

Sorry, was a bit unclear. For the purposes of scaling, there needs to be a common subject right? So, since it is inevitable that a subject needs to be made compulsary, what other subject do you propose could replace English?

 

[Razzah]

YES! because it evens things out!! its just weird/not fair for people to just do numbery sciencey subjects.

& remember... theres nothing u can do to change it.. so go to your room. shut your door. open your book & play the game.

So its fair for people to do all humanities based subjects?

 

[ccc123]

its just weird/not fair for people to just do numbery sciencey subjects.
.

Hmm, I agree with Razzah. The HSC is such that everyone can choose subjects that will maximise their performance, whetehr that be the sciences or the humanities.

 

[ccc123]

I'm doing 3 units of English (would have done 4 if the course had run), but I think the current system is complete BS. It shouldn't have to count towards your UAI unless it's actually in your 10 best units (especially since maths is probably actually more useful in everyday life, and yet they don't make you do the subject, let alone count it in your UAI unless it's in your 10 best units).

They also need to redo the syllabus. There are people in year 12 who still can't spell or use proper grammar, but we haven't done any real work on that since about year 7.
Ditch the compulsory Shakespeare, given that Elizabethan English is practically a foreign language.
Make the strong focus on analysing texts part of the extension courses, where people actually enjoy (or are at least good at) reading.
Put a wider variety of texts on the syllabus - I've done 3 Jane Austen novels since year 11, and they're all about the same bloody story with different characters.
And all that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Lol. I agree that the current syllabus is completely impractical. I always though they should have two English subjects:

a) A generic 'English' which focuses on skills you actually need (reading, writing etc)

and b) English literature or English analysis (which includes analysing texts etc like we do in English currently).


People who just wanted the fundamentals do teh former, the people like me who actually enjoy analysis and shakespearian shit do the latter. And the former should be compulsary for the purposes of scaling and the UAI.

 

[selablad]

So its fair for people to do all humanities based subjects?

Exactly. If they can do all humanities, others can do all sciences.

---

Year 10 should emphasise basic skills. You should learn all the main things you need to know for your everyday life, like english language, maths, etc.

Year 11/12 should be whatever you choose. Most people I would assume would go on to do some kind of training or employment, so they should choose the subjects that are best for that. Why make them do a course which has nothing to do with basic skills, as many people have pointed out, if they aren't going to do any sort of analysing or whatever after school? They should already have the basics from year 10, that's enough.

 

[dpospination]

at the end of the day, English ultimately covers fundamentals, reading, spelling, grammar, punctuation, and interpretation which is required within every day life. i believe English should be compulsory within the constraints of the UAI because at the end of the day, these fundamental skills are needed in society. ok, u mite not need to know certain techniques within the physical world, but if it weren't compulsory, many people within society would not develop the appropriate english skills taht they need because many would choose not to study English...

 

[selablad]

Lol. I agree that the current syllabus is completely impractical. I always though they should have two English subjects:

a) A generic 'English' which focuses on skills you actually need (reading, writing etc)

and b) English literature or English analysis (which includes analysing texts etc like we do in English currently).


People who just wanted the fundamentals do teh former, the people like me who actually enjoy analysis and shakespearian shit do the latter. And the former should be compulsary for the purposes of scaling and the UAI.

When my parents were growing up that's what they had at their schools. They were english language and english lit. They were both rigorous subjects in their own right, eg language wasn't just the dumb subject, you had to learn all this linguistics stuff.

But if you are going to have a fundamentals course, why not teach it earlier, ie grade 10? I mean, once you know the basics of english, there's no real need to continue teaching them further. In each other individual subject, you learn how to apply those basics to specific things, eg history essays.

 

[me121]

I think that the Board needs to publish papers and documents on studies done on the topic.

I personally didn't like English at high school, but then again about half way thorough year 12 i got a new teacher and he helped me to understand English. Once I understood it, I appreciated it and knew its value much more.

Although the study of English is very valuable, I'm not sure if everyone should be made to do it. Besides the kind of English you learn in standard is the wrong type to be teaching standard students.

So yeah.. I'm sure that the Board has thought about this a lot and consulted many professionals, however there seems to be a lack of the findings and reports on the topic in the public domain.

EDIT: None of the poll results are valid, because having one question in the poll, and then a completely different question in the first post is bad. You should have deleted the thread and started it again.

 

[selablad]

95% of time, the assumed knowledge was
english, so i guess uni requires certain level of english..

If the course requires english, then the kids can choose english, but if it doesn't, why make it compulsory?

--

I have no idea why I'm arguing this. I like english. I really don't feel that strongly about it, but oh well

 

[selablad]

We have a system in Qld, I'm not sure if you have it in NSW/wherever, with field positions.

Basically, every subject is given a ranking from 1-5 (5 being highest) in 5 different fields, eg Field A is like extended written response, another one's for practical performance, another for short responses, and another two maths skills related ones.

So English would be rated very highly in fields A and B (extended and short response) but very low in fields C and D (maths ones). You have to get 60 points in an FP to say you have it. Then the unis will say something like "OP 8, with field positions C and D" or something.

Not that that long explanation was really relevant (I was going to say something extremely significant about it but I forgot ), but if you are aiming for a course like maths, why do you need things which are more FP A/B oriented, and the reverse is true, if you want to study english, then study english.

---

On re-reading, this post makes no sense, *again*. Most of my posts have been like that tonight Need to start thinking things through before I start writing.

 

[x.Exhaust.x]

I don't have a passion for English, but I believe we need English in our everyday lives...I don't mind .

Edit:

Referring to the UAI question, it should be counted a minimum of 2 units compulsory as a UAI.

 

[Jachie]

shouldnyt be complosury for uai

but yaeh everyones hould have to do it dudes

 

[Sarah182]

English also includes essential skills that may be of great value once we go to universities as I heard that we will be bombarded with essay writings once we go there.

EDIT: English also helps other subjects. From English we learn to form & strucutre better answers and essays. I reckon all subjects except few (like Mathematics Extension 1 & 2) have essays in varying lengths. Being good at essay wouldn't hurt, would it?

Everything you said I agree with entirely, English crosses over into alot of other subjects and to be able to articulate ideas and express yourself is so important in many jobs today and at uni.

I voted that it should be counted towark a UAI because firstly its our nations language people! Anyone can just bludge through the SC and HSC in English and still achieve 100 UAI even if they have very poor English skills, 20% of the prelim English course has to be a speaking task partly because of that reason I think. Imagine visiting a doctor and you can barely understand what they are saying and they are struggling to talk to you.

Also English gives you the ability to excel in some other subjects, the only subject I havent had to write an essay or long response for has been maths. I think that is enough proof that the writing skills in English are important.

I know we are going to get some very biased opinions in this thread.

 

[Stevo.]

English should be compulsory because too many idiots are running around with atrocious spelling and grammar let alone reading comprehension. English is the foundation on which we are able to understand the world, and that is why it is absolutely neccessary that English be compulsory.

 

[conics2008]

Death to english.


I like CAKE! I'm going to eat some cake and gain some weight.

 

[Cerry]

well.. 95% of course requires english as assumed knowledge...
i think this is a huge, so that is why i thought english is a subject
which is reasonable to be called as compulsory subject.

Most of the time in my experience, when they say that English is assumed knowledge, it's either an advanced course, or has at least one other subject with it. And maths/sciences don't tend to require it. I can't help thinking that they specify it because they know we have to, or so that people from overseas realise that they'll need more than basic English for the course.

English should be compulsory because too many idiots are running around with atrocious spelling and grammar let alone reading comprehension. English is the foundation on which we are able to understand the world, and that is why it is absolutely neccessary that English be compulsory.

Yeah, but we don't really learn that in English in high school anyway. There are several people in my advanced class who still can't spell (not that I'm all that great at spelling myself), can't use 90% of punctuation (including commas and apostrophes, which are so simple), and have shithouse sentence structure, but the teachers do shit all about it. They just correct the same problems over and over again in essays, and never realise that the fact that half the class can't do it means they should actually teach it to us.