Year 11 and 12 Advanced English – Module B – Critical Study of Literature |

Year 11 and 12 Advanced English – Module B – Critical Study of Literature

The Module B syllabus rubric often causes headaches for Year 11 and 12 Advanced English students in New South Wales. Before we unpack it for you, here it is:

In this module, students develop analytical and critical knowledge, understanding and appreciation of a literary text. Through increasingly informed personal responses to the text in its entirety, students develop understanding of the distinctive qualities of the text and notions of textual integrity.

Students study one text appropriate to their needs and interests. Central to this study is the exploration of how the author’s ideas are expressed in the text through an analysis of its construction, content and language. Students develop their own interpretation of the text, basing their judgements on evidence drawn from their research and reading, enabling the development of a deeper and richer understanding of the text. In doing so, they consider notions of contexts with regard to the text’s composition and reception; investigate the perspectives of others; and explore the ideas in the text, further strengthening their personal perspective on the text.

Students have opportunities to appreciate and express views about the aesthetic and imaginative aspects of a text by composing creative and critical texts of their own. Through reading, viewing or listening they analyse, evaluate and comment on the text’s specific language features and form. They express increasingly complex ideas, clearly and cohesively using appropriate register, structure and modality. They draft, appraise and refine their own texts, applying the conventions of syntax, spelling and grammar appropriately.

Opportunities to engage deeply with the text as a responder and composer further develops personal and intellectual connections with this text, enabling students to express their informed personal view of its meaning and value.

So, from the looks of it there’s a lot there that’s important. But really, it’s only two things:

Textual integrity, and
Reception

The entire module can be fit underneath those two headings. Let’s explore them in more detail.

Textual Integrity

Textual integrity is a deceptively simple idea that only becomes complicated when applied to complicated texts. At some point in the module you’ll begin to doubt everything you thought you knew about ‘textual integrity’ but you’ll be able to get over this if you keep firmly in mind the basics and proceed through it step by step.

First NESA gives us the definition of textual integrity as “the unity of a text; its coherent use of form and language to produce an integrated whole in terms of meaning and value”.

So what does this mean? We know from the module outline that we’re interested in “construction, content and language”. This is your usual English stuff: techniques, structure, narrative voice, motifs, etc. Usually in English we simply ask “how do all those things create meaning?” For example we might recognise that a poet uses the motif of flowers. We might also know the flower is a symbol for a lost lover. We thus infer that the poet uses the recurring motif of flowers to signal that he or she is still hung up on this lost lover.

But when discussing textual integrity, there’s a second step: is the central thesis of the text integrated throughout it? Is it unified? Is it coherent? Does it succeed in expressing its meaning and values?

In English we usually stop after step one. We see how the composer is creating meaning and call it a day. In Module B we want to go one step further. We don’t just want to describe just what the composer is doing; we also want to make a value judgment on whether or not it is effective. This is what makes Module B tough – everyone will be able to describe the techniques, but only the successful students will be able to judge if the composer did it well.

But isn’t doing something well ‘subjective’? Isn’t it a matter of opinion?

No, not in Module B. Why? Because Module B gives us a criteria to test it by. What is this criteria? We’ve already mentioned it – the unity and coherence and of the text.

Do all the different aspects of the text work together? Do they all fit? Or, do they contradict? Has the composer undermined him or herself by a poor use of language choice? If things fit together, there is a strong sense of textual integrity. If they don’t, it is weak.

Let me give you some examples.

In Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, Brutus wants his audience to trust him when he says he’s protecting their freedom. But how does he start his speech? “Romans, countrymen, and lovers! hear me for my cause, and be silent”. His opening tells them what to do – hear me! Be silent! He says he’s protecting their freedom, but as he says it he’s telling them exactly what to do. He’s contradicting himself. His intentions say one thing but his language another. It is poor textual integrity.

So what’s good textual integrity? Well, NESA wouldn’t set a bad prescribed text so you’ll likely find yourself celebrating your text more than you will criticising it.

So to summarise, textual integrity is whether all the different parts of the text work together in order to effectively communicate its desired values or meaning.

Reception

After understanding textual integrity this follows on fairly logically. After you’ve looked at the text and assessed its coherence you’ll want to ask how people have received it. Has it inspired change? Does it still hold value today? Does it challenge your ideas about certain things?

The only other thing you really need to know about reception and how it makes Module B unique is it’s not just about other people. It is also about you. Questions may directly ask how your thoughts and ideas have been challenged by the text. You thus need to be able to engage with the text and present a personal opinion, maybe even using ‘I’ and ‘my’ in your essays. Of course not all questions will ask this of you, but some might.

Reception can really throw a curveball into the Module B questions. Some past trial papers have asked students to write three or four reflections rather than an essay. The module suggests you can be asked to compare and contrast your own views with the text with the views of others. Teachers in the past have also taught students not only to incorporate their own views but the views of a ‘class forum’ they had at school.

A Summary

Essentially you’re being asked to consider how the language, content and construction of the text (‘textual integrity’) construct a particular ‘meaning’, and how this meaning received by audiences across time. Make sure that you offer an informed personal understanding of the text by reading widely. Critical readings help in this regard. Consider the ideas that others offer but don’t let their ideas take over your own. Use their ideas to form your own argument.

Here is a bit of sample writing. Just be aware that not all school’s encourage the use of the first person voice. So use your better judgement!

Brutus wishes to convince his audience that he is committed to protecting their freedom. He does this by imploring them to “be silent” and to “hear [him] for [his] cause”. However, these are both imperatives. Thus even though he says he acts for their freedom the irony in his word choice undermines his message. For this reason his audience finds him unconvincing and so do I. Rather than convincing me of his noble personality Brutus reminds me to always be vigilant about a politician’s words.

Now anyone who has studied Julius Caesar knows Brutus’ character is a little more complicated than that but for the purposes of explaining Module B it’ll do. Nowhere does it say the words ‘textual integrity’ but it clearly has all three steps: analysing Brutus’ language, making a judgement on how effectively it conveys his meaning (or values), and exploring how I, and others, have received it.

If you do that, you’ll succeed in Module B.