What is this 2023 short answer question? Are they stupid? (1 Viewer)

[IllStaunchYa]

Ok I've been griping with this Q in particular: "How does Hamblin expand the reader’s understanding of the paradoxes of consumerism?" (4 marks). It's in the 2023 test. No way this question is actually worded properly. If you were to take it at face value, it is asking for you to explain not only the paradoxes of consumerism, but how he actually EXPANDED on our understanding of them which implies we already know about them but he's saying even more stuff. Which he clearly isn't. But surely it's just worded stupidly and what they actually wanted you to talk about is how readers are positioned to recognise the paradoxes of consumerism (rather than EXPANDING our understanding of the nature of them), and identify a couple of them in the text. right?

perhaps the issue is that in the text itself, it mentions 'expanding on the current understanding of ...' so they just ripped it out of there with absolutely no regard for making the Q make sense. obviously you're not meant to directly answer the q but this is just on a whole nother level of stupid... right?

 

[mvrcuriee]

English is a stupid subject bro

 

[Masaken]

Ok I've been griping with this Q in particular: "How does Hamblin expand the reader’s understanding of the paradoxes of consumerism?" (4 marks). It's in the 2023 test. No way this question is actually worded properly. If you were to take it at face value, it is asking for you to explain not only the paradoxes of consumerism, but how he actually EXPANDED on our understanding of them which implies we already know about them but he's saying even more stuff. Which he clearly isn't. But surely it's just worded stupidly and what they actually wanted you to talk about is how readers are positioned to recognise the paradoxes of consumerism (rather than EXPANDING our understanding of the nature of them), and identify a couple of them in the text. right?

perhaps the issue is that in the text itself, it mentions 'expanding on the current understanding of ...' so they just ripped it out of there with absolutely no regard for making the Q make sense. obviously you're not meant to directly answer the q but this is just on a whole nother level of stupid... right?

I remember that one, I did it last year haha. After reading this one I went to skim through the text and got so many memories lolol
A 'paradox' just means something that seems illogical, where on the surface it doesn't make sense - so the question is asking for you to find an idea about consumerism communicated to the audience that seems pretty illogical and contradictory on the surface-level but makes sense when you look at it deeper

'expand the reader's understanding' - If you're familiar with the rubric, there's a part where it talks about audience response and engagement with the text and what they learn about it, so this is just a buzzphrase for that. I understand what you mean but I think you're just overthinking it, it's just asking "What paradoxes of consumerism have you learned about?" With this aspect of the rubric it's very superficial. it's just asking you to identify an overall paradox about consumerism (easier than finding multiple paradoxes) then supporting your argument with 3 quotes

If you wanted to be literal you could answer it as "Hamblin expands the reader's understanding of the paradoxes of consumerism, by denoting its contradictory relationship with happiness ..." blah blah

 

[mvrcuriee]

I remember that one, I did it last year haha. After reading this one I went to skim through the text and got so many memories lolol
A 'paradox' just means something that seems illogical, where on the surface it doesn't make sense - so the question is asking for you to find an idea about consumerism communicated to the audience that seems pretty illogical and contradictory on the surface-level but makes sense when you look at it deeper

'expand the reader's understanding' - If you're familiar with the rubric, there's a part where it talks about audience response and engagement with the text and what they learn about it, so this is just a buzzphrase for that. I understand what you mean but I think you're just overthinking it, it's just asking "What paradoxes of consumerism have you learned about?" With this aspect of the rubric it's very superficial. it's just asking you to identify an overall paradox about consumerism (easier than finding multiple paradoxes) then supporting your argument with 3 quotes

If you wanted to be literal you could answer it as "Hamblin expands the reader's understanding of the paradoxes of consumerism, by denoting its contradictory relationship with happiness ..." blah blah

I genuinely admire how good u are at English bro

 

[IllStaunchYa]

I remember that one, I did it last year haha. After reading this one I went to skim through the text and got so many memories lolol
A 'paradox' just means something that seems illogical, where on the surface it doesn't make sense - so the question is asking for you to find an idea about consumerism communicated to the audience that seems pretty illogical and contradictory on the surface-level but makes sense when you look at it deeper

'expand the reader's understanding' - If you're familiar with the rubric, there's a part where it talks about audience response and engagement with the text and what they learn about it, so this is just a buzzphrase for that. I understand what you mean but I think you're just overthinking it, it's just asking "What paradoxes of consumerism have you learned about?" With this aspect of the rubric it's very superficial. it's just asking you to identify an overall paradox about consumerism (easier than finding multiple paradoxes) then supporting your argument with 3 quotes

If you wanted to be literal you could answer it as "Hamblin expands the reader's understanding of the paradoxes of consumerism, by denoting its contradictory relationship with happiness ..." blah blah

aye I probably am overthinking it. thx for expanding my understanding with the detailed response.