Am I doing well in English?

i_need_mental_asylum

I'd say year 8 but idk - the content is good and is year 8 to me, but I'd say the structure is kinda off? for example, you have only used simple sentences which makes the text kind of boring. the language used is year 7 ish and so is the layout (I cant tell if it is teel)

I hope this doesn't come out as rude, but some ways to improve could be to use more complex sentence types and follow the teel structure 🙂 could probably bump it up a few years levels I hope I haven't offended you 😅

markkk

i_need_mental_asylum

i_need_mental_asylum Ok. I’m not gonna say anything about what year I’m really in because I want to see what other people say. But how can I make my sentences more complex and not as boring lol. I’d love to hear your advice. Thx

FH ⭐️

i_need_mental_asylum i’d like to just put in how “good” writing doesn’t actually follow the simple TEEL structure. this is a basic structure taught in junior levels, but you slowly realise that, in order to synthesise ideas, you cannot solely use a TEEL structure.
you will embed evidence in your analysis. you might analyse before evidence. etc etc.

markkk

markkk hold up. This one is wrong. This is like a brainstorm where I just put everything together before actually writing. Sorry. Here is the real one:
Ammaniti explores how the fear of doing what is morally wrong makes people listen to their conscience. Michele consistently visits Filippo in his hole throughout the course of the narrative, taking every chance he could when “there was nobody with [him].” When caught by Felice, Michele was confronted by his father and “[swore] on [his] head” that he would never go back to see Filippo. Michele knew what his father had told him, but his ultimate fear of not only Filippo struggling, but also doing what was wrong, made him go visit him. Ammaniti believes that the right thing isn’t always what you’re told, which he portrayed through Michele’s constant exposure of being told not to visit Filippo. Not seeing Filippo “tormented’ Michele and knowing that Filippo was “waiting for [him]” drove Michele to do what he saw as right. Telling himself that there was “nothing to be scared of” also drove Michele to see Filippo, as he knew that he would have to face fear to help Filippo. Additionally, Michele’s loyalty to his conscience and moral values can be seen through his actions regarding his bike, or the crock. After finding out that Michele knew about Filippo, papa bought him a new red bike, with the words Red Dragon written in gold letters, symbolizing evil and wealth, which is a side that Michele doesn’t seem to want to turn to. Whenever Michele went to see Filippo, he always “got the crock”, symbolizing his commitment to doing what is right, despite being bribed to do what is wrong. It is through a first-person narrative perspective where the reader is truly able to see how Michele is determined to doing what is right, as it give insights into his thoughts about the decisions he should make. Ammaniti argues that despite potential benefits, those who truly stay committed to their values ultimately do what is right. Ultimately, Ammaniti portrays how the fear of doing what is wrong makes people do what they believe is morally correct, proving how fear drives characters throughout the novel.

i_need_mental_asylum

markkk sry for earlier that wasn't your real piece 😬

i_need_mental_asylum

markkk ohhhhhhhhh this makes more sense this is like year 9 honestly @FH correct me if I'm wrong

MMHS

markkk i feel as though as you said this is like year 8 level, you will need a better play on words and using better vocabulary, the passage needs to flow a bit better also. It seems year 7-8 level in the fact that many things are just placed and stated, but rather should be weaved allusively throughout the passage

Koala4444

markkk
Hi!
I know this is really late (original post was in August) and I didn't even study English (I did EAL 3&4 this year and started mid year 10, but I was in top 3 of my class and my practice exam results were pretty decent).
I think the problem was that the writing needed to be a little less descriptive and more concise, don't include as many related quotes because you can, choose the best quote and be as succinct as possible. The first example has too much description and so, the analysis is just not enough to justify it. You also should extend the analysis a little bit more than just half a sentence and cut a little deeper, as analysis is somewgat expected to be longer than the evidence itself. Remember to somehow connect it to the topic sentence of the body paragraph and by extension, to the original essay topic. Also, TEEL as some mentioned, may not make the essay be interesting, but don't underestimate the effect of a solid structure that helps ground your essay and writing. (I used it in my exams this year and in practice exams that an English examiner graded. TEEL is good!)
You did well in embedding quotes and solid grammar and punctuation. For vocabulary and nore complex sentence structures, make a word bank to use during writing practices and read a lot.
Also, don't be afraid that you can't improve because it's too late. This year (remember, year 12), my language analysis' result (a practice exam) was 6/10, and just a few tutoring sessions (school organised it for me) and more directed feedback from my year 12 teacher brought it up to 8/10 in just one term.
Anyway, I've rambled on too much on a relatively old post, but I hope that it puts you at ease!
Good luck with the rest of your studies!

i_need_mental_asylum

i_need_mental_asylum my bad for earlier

i_need_mental_asylum

ur actually really good

markkk

i_need_mental_asylum thank you very much. Ye idk why I just like to just write what I think about in a paragraph, like really bad, then write the actual one.

markkk

MMHS ok thank you. Any suggestions on how I can do that.

NOSSALSUCCESSBUTNOTGOING

markkk for vocab use 1100 words you need to know

..

markkk Could you tell me where you explained how your evidence links with your explanation? (not a critic just a question). Also I think you should go more into depth about the core fundamentals of a human and how that relates to fear.

For example(I have no idea what a story is about so mb in advance) you could add sentences like "An integral piece in humanity is the ability to hold onto and maintain social connection, and when a mental foundation like this is facing conflict, fear arises. A prominent example is Michele, a person who relies more on core fundamental instincts instead of the logical approaches when dealing with the dilemma with visiting Filippo". I don't know if that's a good example, I am after all only a year 9 student who sucks at English.

NOSSALSUCCESSBUTNOTGOING

[deleted] oi stop with the vape advertisements

ZarraorTheDinosaur

No its not good. There.

NOSSALSUCCESSBUTNOTGOING

ZarraorTheDinosaur oof

i_need_mental_asylum

what are those links

jess

It is a little hard to judge out of context but often when analysing something in English one of the criteria is cultural attitudes, assumptions, and beliefs I think it would help if you were to research a bit of background about when whatever this piece was made and a bit about the author and overall background, that way you can reference it throughout and really drive the main point of whatever the piece your analysing is I see you've done it at the start but I think it could be done a little more and a little better. The first sentence for example could be extended and improved on, you've sort of got the idea but cut it short just before you've made a concise yet detailed point. Your sentence structure could be improved on as the paragraph doesn't seem to flow nicely (part of this is because I have no context for the paragraph) it sort of seems like really individual sentences that have quite apparent starts and stops instead of one flowy paragraph that just goes on. You used the names a lot this may be difficult to cut down if you look at it sentence to sentence as it may be confusing if you just replace it with he however I think if you look at the paragraph as a whole you could restructure the sentencing which would help the paragraph flow more but also cut down on the repetitiveness. It also seems like your analysis is a bit surface level once again it's hard to tell without context but the way it is worded seems like you have these big broad concepts to analyse but you've only really scratched the surface level. Overall, you've got a really good base and with a little more effort on how you word it and put it together and a deeper level of analysis I think it would be fantastic. As for what grade level it is tough to say honestly especially since it also depends the grade but I think about a grade 8 B level. I'm in year 11 currently and I love giving feedback on assignments so if you need any in the future I'd be happy to help😊