If you look in the examiner's report article I posted here , you'll see the wording of question 1 has changed from 'learn' to 'understand'. This means that you need to vary your answers slightly from being mainly fact based to mainly inferential.
What is inference?
Definition = the process of arriving at some conclusion that, though it is not logically derivable from the assumed premises, possesses some degree of probability relative to the premises.
So it is a skill of coming to a conclusion based on evidence that is not definite but highly probable.
E.g. - Someone is crying - inference - they are unhappy.
Now though this is likely (we generally experience people crying when unhappy) it is not definite (could be tears of joy).
So your answer needs to focus on what you think 'might' be an issue based on clear evidence.
“heinous social, economic and spiritual damage” suggest that the writer strongly disagrees with...
You have evidence and you are making an inference.
So here is your bonus weekend question.
8 Marks - 12 Minutes of Revision - post your answer below.
What do you understand about the issues of camera phones at gigs?
Source 1
Popular Posts
-
[ View the story "Getting started" on Storify ]
-
Here is a little Q2 practice for you. This question is another 8 Mark question and requires you to develop an answer that focuses on Prese...
Jordan
Some of the benefits of accidental teaching...
Support :
Creating Website | Johny Template | Mas Template
Copyright © 2011. English Advice from an Accidental Teacher - All Rights Reserved
Copyright © 2011. English Advice from an Accidental Teacher - All Rights Reserved
+ comments + 12 comments
From reading the article, we readers begin to understand the majority of people’s opinions towards the extreme usage of camera phones at concerts. For example, we understand that the main issue of camera phones is that people aren’t enjoying the experience through their own eyes, but through a LED screen – It is said that gigs are suppose to be a ‘moment in time’ and therefore people are essentially ruining the experience for themselves. Also, another issue is that the over-use of camera phones is changing the ways we’re suppose to enjoy live performances. We mainly understand this through the writer’s personal and minute annoyance towards them as she says that at gigs ‘the arms in the air are no longer waving to the music’ but rather ‘bristles of tensed and frozen tripods’, so we can understand that if anything, she feels disappointed that others aren’t enjoying the live music as they should be.
In addition we can also understand that another main issue with camera phones at gigs is that not only is it ruining your personal experience, but it is also ruining it for others who have attended because ‘they are in the way of the people behind you’. We can understand from this line that the issue of camera phones could have a bigger effect then we originally expect because not only are you ruining your own fun, but you are also ruining someone else’s as well and it could possibly be encouraging others to do the same. Thus, we can infer that this could completely change how people behave at live concerts over time as the writer makes a comparison to classical music, ‘as a result, fewer people to these kinds of music’ because of the way it has changed for the worse.
Essentially you've got the idea of inference packed neatly in here. You need to be careful of two things which will stop you from gaining top marks:
1) Your answer structure is a little bit repetitive with over use of 'understand' which lacks the fluency of a sophisticated answer.
2) Take a look at this 'Thus, we can infer that this could completely change how people behave at live concerts over time as the writer makes a comparison to classical music, ‘as a result, fewer people to these kinds of music’ because of the way it has changed for the worse.'
I can half see what you mean but again it disrupts the fluency needed for a top band answer.
6/8
Musicians feel that ‘camera phones have become a nuisance’ as they perform at gigs; the use of mobile technology is inhibiting them and other members of the audience from truly enjoying themselves at the ‘moment in time’. Those using cameras are thought to be obnoxious and annoying.
‘To watch a gig is to move with it, to physically feel the music’ and to endure the high spirits of everybody within the building. By using mobile phones, the audience isn’t going to be ‘present’ in the ‘moment of time’ which they should be for every performance, not dwindling with settings and making sure the angle is just right to capture the staging.
Some fans have other negative points about gigs. For example ‘most venues are not purpose built with raked floors’ meaning they are unable to see the stage set anyway. McNulty may be just ‘an average-sized woman’ yet venues should cater for each fan to be able to see the stage.
From the article I understand that ‘nuisance’ camera phones are causing a rift between artists and fans. Some believe that they should be ‘banned’ because they interfere with the overall enjoyment of a concert. Camera phones and other ‘smart devices’ can also interrupt other people’s concert experience and it would be ‘courteous to the person behind you’ if you refrained from using them.
I also understand that it is due to the ‘advancement’ of modern technology that the issue of camera phones and their ‘searing white glow’ exists. Some people believe that by banning people from filming concerts and performances would have a negative effect as ‘fewer people’ would attend them. This has happened in other genres of music.
I understand that it is ironic for ‘mobile-phone’ companies to sponsor these events as a lot of people want them cell phones banned. Also, that some are calling for a ‘truce’ between fans and performers regarding the sensitive issue of camera phones.
You show a clear understanding of the text here but don't really show any inference around the 'issues'.
The question is asking to take the information you have presented above and come to some sort of conclusion about why the writer is against the use of mobile phones.
e.g.
Rather than just stating:
"the use of mobile technology is inhibiting them and other members of the audience from truly enjoying themselves at the ‘moment in time’"
Developing it by stating:
the use of mobile technology is inhibiting them and other members of the audience from truly enjoying themselves at the ‘moment in time’ highlighting that author seems to feel that fans are less focused on experiencing an event but capturing it to look back on or boast to friends about.
By going that little step further you are developing inference which gets you into the top band.
Re-do this and see if you can improve on your score.
4/8
You show a clear understanding of the issues within the text but to gain to band answers you need to show an understanding of the writer's attitude to the issues. This is where the skills of inference come in.
e.g.
Instead of:
I also understand that it is due to the ‘advancement’ of modern technology that the issue of camera phones and their ‘searing white glow’ exists.
You would develop this to:
I also understand that it is due to the ‘advancement’ of modern technology that the issue of camera phones and their ‘searing white glow’ exists. Which highlights the author feels this is disrupting the experience of not just the person filming but the others that have to see past the glow.
This level of inference is what gets you into the top bands.
Re-do this seeing if you can improve on your score.
5/8
From the article I understand that ‘nuisance’ camera phones are causing a rift between artists and fans. Some believe that they should be ‘banned’ because they interfere with the overall enjoyment of a concert. This implies that the writer feels annoyed with other people filming concerts and that she thinks it could disrupt the relationship artists share with their fans.
Camera phones and other ‘smart devices’ can also interrupt other people’s concert experience and it would be ‘courteous to the person behind you’ if you refrained from using them. Again this highlights the writer’s annoyance but also suggests that she think people who use the ‘smart devices’ are selfish for ruining others enjoyment.
I also understand that it is due to the ‘advancement’ of modern technology that the issue of camera phones and their ‘searing white glow’ exists. Some people believe that by banning people from filming concerts and performances it would have a negative effect and the author feels that ‘fewer people’ would attend them as it has happened in other genres of music.
I understand that it is ironic for ‘mobile-phone’ companies to sponsor these events as a lot of people want them cell phones banned. Also, that some – including the writer of the article - are calling for a ‘truce’ between fans and performers regarding the sensitive issue of camera phones.
This is a lot better now Olivia - you are showing the necessary inferences to target top band marks but the cherry on top of this would be to improve the 'fluency' or 'sophistication' of your response.
You are often repeating 'I understand' which can ruin the flow of the writing and make it seem like 4 separate paragraphs rather than one coherent answer.
These might help you http://www.luizotaviobarros.com/2013/04/academic-writing-useful-expressions.html
As will the use of discourse markers (connectives at the beginnings of paragraphs).
Thanks for the website sir. I hope I've made my answer a bit better...
From the article I understand that ‘nuisance’ camera phones are causing a rift between artists and fans. Some believe that they should be ‘banned’ because they interfere with the overall enjoyment of a concert. This implies that the writer feels annoyed with other people filming concerts and that she thinks it could disrupt the relationship artists share with their fans.
Camera phones and other ‘smart devices’ can also interrupt other people’s concert experience and it would be ‘courteous to the person behind you’ if you refrained from using them. Again this highlights the writer’s annoyance but also suggests that she think people who use the ‘smart devices’ are selfish for ruining others enjoyment.
Arguably, it is due to the ‘advancement’ of modern technology that the issue of camera phones and their ‘searing white glow’ exists. Some people believe that by banning people from filming concerts and performances it would have a negative effect and the author feels that ‘fewer people’ would attend them as it has happened in other genres of music.
The issue of ‘mobile-phone’ companies to sponsoring these events is ironic as a lot of people want them cell phones banned. Also, that some – including the writer of the article - are calling for a ‘truce’ between fans and performers regarding the sensitive issue of camera phones
Now you've got it - I would expect that to get a top band mark (hopefully the elusive 8/8). Well done.
Make yourself a checklist of how achieve this level first time.
After reading the article I understand the vented 'annoyance' present at gigs and other concert venues between both music artists and fans. The on-going 'break out' of the issue of camera phone use at gigs are expressed to be causing arms in the air to be 'frozen' - ruining the entire experience for yourself, audience and performers. This indicates the writer feels aggravated with people using their smart phones to record performances as it disrupts the interdependent relationship between the artist and fans.
Arguably, smart phone companies promoting new technology could be to blame for this new phenomenon of watching gigs 'through the screen',(referencing to 'Yeah Yeah Yeah') which is a presented to be a 'nuisance'. Some impressions of people watching performances through the screen to be a 'boon' for the people surrounding due to the LED screens creating 'illuminated' fans - creating a 'battle' to view. This suggests the writers opinion towards this issue to be disrespectful towards the people behind and also the artist.
Overall, the issues focused on the 'rights and wrongs' are on-going but nevertheless the author feels that the awareness of the issues of camera recording in gigs are not emphasized enough as; ''A performance is a moment in time.''
You've have a wide range of detail in this Jasmin and it would probably be enough to take you into Band 3 but you only have two sections where you've shown inferential understanding.
Look at this section:
'This suggests the writers opinion towards this issue to be disrespectful towards the people behind and also the artist.'
'the writers opinion towards this issue to be disrespectful' doesn't make sense and therefore doesn't show 'Clear understanding'. This would put you at the bottom of Band 3.
Overall 5/8 marks.
Re-write this piece rewording the sections that don't make sense and add 1 or 2 inferential points to target full marks.
Post a Comment