As part of my English Language and Literature GCSEs, I have to analyse a number of seen and unseen texts. The seen, read and pre-prepared texts are 19th century 'Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde', Shakespeare's 'Much Ado About Nothing' post 19th century 'The Woman in Black' and a whole load of poems. All fascinating, insightful and thoughtful texts. The words 'analysis' and 'analyse' are frequently used in everyday speech, but what do they actually mean and how are they applied?
Analysis is about pulling a text apart (not literally!) An extract will be presented with a question along the lines of ''How does the writer present a character/mood and atmosphere/tension/suspense/death/loss?'' or any other theme. To answer the question, you'd make a range of specific points, quoting different words and their effect as evidence to support your answer. A lot of the answer is based on someone's interpretation of language, structure and form. Anything relevant to the question is allowed, provided you can back up the opinion. More often than not, the answer has to include analysis from other parts of the story or poem, linking ideas and connections together. Analysis, though sometimes hard and tiring, really makes you think about why the writer included a specific word/phrase/simile and what they wanted us, the reader, to think. Though analysis seems a tricky, confusing concept, anyone can do it, provided they revise the texts, complete practice questions and think about the aims of the author. It can also be an important life skill, when reading a work report, watching a play or writing a book of your own! ******************************************************************************* The government seems quiet about its plans to open new grammar schools, in my opinion a good idea. From what I've read, we haven't seen or heard a report for over a month. The government knows there is fierce opposition from many parties and their own backbenchers and may not attempt a vote until they believe it will pass. Sort of a mini 11+ test! I do firmly believe in these schools, that select only on merit and provide a real opportunity to clever, working class children whose families couldn't afford a private education. The current education system does select on wealth; who can afford the private school; who can afford to live near the outstanding comprehensive. This leaves behind many of the poorest children in failing schools. Opponents of grammars say the majority of children from poorer backgrounds would never pass the test. Well, if primary schools specifically taught them things that would be on the test to a rigorous, excellent standard, I believe many would have a decent chance. And for those who don't pass, the choice isn't as binary as before. Comprehensives, academics, free schools, technical colleges and more are all available to those with ranging abilities. The choice is more open, inclusive and flexible. Grammars only add to this. ******************************************************************************* It's saddening, but not surprising, to hear the Scottish National Party launch another Independence Bill. I admire Nicola Sturgeon as an effective operator and a good First Minister of Scotland, but utterly disagree with her on Scottish independence. It was right that Scotland had a chance to vote for or against independence, after choosing a majority SNP government in 2011 with an independence referendum in their manifesto and being part of the UK for over 300 years. The historic referendum occurred in September 2014, and thankfully 55% of those who voted chose to remain in the UK. 2 years on, the party that will always want an independent Scotland now wants another referendum. The image of what an independent Scotland would look like is no clearer now than it was 2 years. What Scotland would want to keep (their benefits from being in the UK) and what it wouldn't want are not known. The economic argument for independence has been lost, with the price of oil at an all time low. Then again, economics didn't stop Brexit. But more than economics, it's the sense of unity I feel with all 4 parts of the UK. I am a proud Unionist and would be devastated if the UK were to split up. The sense of working together, united, for the common good seems entirely logical and necessary to me. The SNP say their mandate for a 2nd referendum is Scotland voting to remain in the European Union this June. However, the country voted as the United Kingdom and not individual nations. Therefore the collective result must be based on all 4 nations combined and must be accepted. A majority of Scottish MP's weren't Tory, but we still have a majority Tory government, Though negotiations will be tough, I feel the government will try to do what is in the interest of all parts of the UK, as Theresa May said when becoming Prime Minister. No matter how long it takes, the SNP will campaign and work hard for an independent Scotland. It is the job of Unionists to say why an Independent Scotland wouldn't be good, but more importantly the benefits of being a member of the UK, show how much they are valued and how much they would be missed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Author:Noah enjoys writing a blog and drinking tea Archives
September 2022
Categories
All
|