AS-LEVEL CREATIVE WRITING CREW2 Exploring Creative Writing Report on the Examination 2750 June 2015 Version: 1.0
Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk Copyright 2016 AQA and its licensors. All rights reserved. AQA retains the copyright on all its publications. However, registered schools/colleges for AQA are permitted to copy material from this booklet for their own internal use, with the following important exception: AQA cannot give permission to schools/colleges to photocopy any material that is acknowledged to a third party even for internal use within the centre.
Introduction As in the first year of the AS course, moderators noted their enjoyment in reading an extremely varied and exciting selection of writing. Many centres submitted a commendable range of folders with work in a variety of forms, demonstrating that their students had been encouraged to pursue their individual interests. The breadth of voices and approaches in some centres was outstanding, with talent clearly flourishing. Many reflective commentaries also testified to a wealth of reading experience with students studying published work independently and with a sharp focus on the creative strategies of the writers whose work they had explored. In some centres, as last year, however, the creative work demonstrated a less varied approach. Occasionally students from the same centre had each attempted writing in the same two forms and at times even the content varied little as teachers perhaps prescribed tasks arising out of work in English Language or Literature, such as monologues inspired by set texts, travel pieces or biographies. Teachers should be reminded that students deserve the freedom to develop their own interests and ideas if they are to benefit fully from the coursework component of this course. Some students submitted work which fell well below the word guidance for this component, and teachers should consider whether this allowed them to demonstrate that they could write in a developed and sustained way. Creative Work Prose fiction was again a popular choice and moderators read an impressive range of short stories, opening chapters and flash fiction, which demonstrated a confident handling of form. The first person narrative was also popular and students enjoyed creating interesting characters and voices. Many students might be advised to read more widely in order to develop a sharper grasp of the form, especially in terms of the exciting potential for point of view, setting, the use of time, innovative structures and the ways in which dialogue can be deployed. There was again a good range of prose non-fiction, including memoir, travel writing, reviews, biography and articles on a variety of topics. Where students had studied writers of prose fiction they performed well, showing an awareness that non-fiction is a creative form and deploying a range of creative strategies such as sharp attention to detail and descriptive techniques, witty word play and irony. Students are to be reminded that well-crafted and imaginative language are expected in non-fiction as in other forms. Independent, lively voices are to be applauded. Students are advised to explore non-fiction writing more widely and to write about topics that engage their interest. There was some very imaginative and well-crafted poetry in a variety of forms. Teachers sometimes tended to over-reward the poetry of their students more than writing in other forms, however, and this is perhaps unsurprising as this is a new area of assessment for most. Some students again attempted forms such as the sonnet or villanelle with excellent results, showing outstanding crafting. Others perhaps found this constriction challenging. Teachers should be reassured that no one form of poetry carries more weight than another. They might also consider that where sense is marred by rigid adherence to rhyme and meter, the poetry may not realise its intentions and this should be noted. Students might be encouraged to experiment in all forms, including free verse, and to write in a form which allows them to convey what is important to them. Reading the work of published poets, including and perhaps especially contemporary poets is to be recommended. The most successful students were able to communicate while being creative with 3 of 6
language and form. Where poetry was characterised by cliché or abstraction, forced rhymes or seemingly accidental line endings, it was less successful. Students are clearly enjoying the opportunity to write in script form and a variety of scripts for stage, film and radio were submitted again this year. Many students had clearly been guided well and had consulted published scripts and this led to successful writing. Fewer centres this year submitted monologues as scripts without adhering to any of the appropriate dramatic devices such as directions. At times, however, the monologue form led the student into writing which tended to show rather than tell and remained rather static, abstract and underdeveloped, as though an emotive voice or dark theme in itself was enough to engage the audience. Students are advised to explore published monologues, observing how dramatists engage interest and sustain momentum, for example by incorporating references to concrete and sensory detail, by using reported speech in other voices, by varying pitch, pace and tone and creating hooks. Teachers might also consider whether a monologue and a prose fiction submission written in a first person voice, as the components of a folder of work, afford the student sufficient opportunity to explore different approaches in their writing. The Assessment Objectives Teachers should be confident that the terms in the mark scheme do help to differentiate between pieces of work operating at different levels. Moderators found that the terms, Outstanding and Highly developed, whilst often accurately applied by teachers to the exceptional work of their students, were again also sometimes applied to work that was more accurately Confident and Skilful. Teachers are advised to revisit the mark schemes and standardisation materials. By awarding 13/15 to work which was confident rather than outstanding, teachers did not sometimes differentiate sufficiently between the work of their students to allow the best folders to shine. Disparities were sometimes noted too between, for example, a comment that suggested work was underdeveloped and a mark which suggested competence. Teachers are reminded that AO2 assesses the crafting of writing and technical control, which includes textual organisation and cohesion, consistency of technical approach and use of spelling and punctuation. Some teachers still tended to interpret AO2 as a simple test of written accuracy and showed some severity where students made errors in spelling and punctuation. Others seemed not to wish to penalise inaccuracy and often failed to signify where there were errors. In fact in some centres students would be well advised to proof read their work much more thoroughly and teachers could indicate a few examples of a student s errors via their annotation. Overall, balance is required. Inaccuracy in a final draft often prevents creative work from fully realising its intentions. However, work that displays inaccuracies in spelling and punctuation and even control of tenses and agreements might still demonstrate overall cohesion and organisation, for example in its narrative, poetic or dramatic structure or in its deployment of cohesive features. Credit should be given for these aspects of crafting. Commentary Many students are addressing AO3 with commendable insight, reflecting in detail on their ideas and stimulus for their writing and the ways in which each piece had been developed from the first draft to the final version. The most successful commentaries focused with clarity and precision on technique and displayed impressive independent thinking about their intentions for the work and the methods they employed in order to realise them. Students should be advised to aim for precision, quoting examples from their own draft and final version and identifying and explaining their editing decisions. Where students were highly engaged in this process they were also able to 4 of 6
refer to various responses to their work from their peers and teacher or other readers and explain how these affected their final version. On the other hand, undeveloped comments on the creative forms not attempted or statements about editing work simply to fit the word guidance are not recommended. AO4 continues to prove a challenge for many students. Teachers should be congratulated where students had been introduced to or guided towards a range of published work to suit their needs. Teachers are advised to differentiate carefully in awarding marks for A04. Moderators observed some over-rewarding here. Where a student simply states, for example, that their character was based on the protagonist of The Hunger Games, or that they used an idea or theme from an article by Brooker, then A04 is unlikely to be highly developed. The more highly developed commentaries explore creative strategies in detail, and this involves an analytical approach, leading to an exploration of how writers have realised their intentions, through their use of creative strategies. Highly developed commentaries quoted from the published source, defined the strategy deployed, and quoted from their own work, explaining how they employed or adapted this strategy to fulfil their own creative intentions. Exposure to a range of writers talking or writing about writing should be encouraged throughout the course. Students should be encouraged to read widely in all forms as well as in reflective writing, such as in the notebooks, interviews and journals of published writers. It was evident that some students had not read any published work at all in the forms they had chosen to submit. It is unlikely, for example, that a student who chooses to submit poetry without any reference to published poetry and the creative strategies particular to poets will be equipped to reflect in a way that could be deemed skilful. Annotation In many centres teachers applied the mark scheme rigorously with summative comments on each piece of work and helpful marginal annotations. In such cases the moderator was able to identify where the assessment objectives had been met. Where internal moderation had taken place in centres, it was pleasing to see evidence of a second opinion and dialogue between teachers about the assessment of the work. However, in some centres annotation and comments could have been more helpful to the moderator and to the student. Ticking without explanatory comments provided no guidance. At times unexplained heavy underlining was used in such a way as to even obscure the work. Teachers occasionally wrote over their students work, making it difficult for the moderator to read. Moderators again found some comments to be inappropriate or not in keeping with the language of the mark scheme. Comments referring to audience,, purpose and presentation again signified a familiarity more with the assessment criteria of English Language rather than Creative Writing and this causes concern about guidance given to students. There were some emotive written responses from teachers, where lengthy explanatory comments accompanied the work, even saying how hard the student had worked or how young they were. Teachers are reminded that such comments can be unhelpful to their students. Annotation should reflect the tone and language of the mark scheme and should not be addressed to the student. Teacher and internal moderation comments should elucidate both the strengths and weaknesses of the students work. The work will stand on its merits and the teacher s investment in and encouragement of their students is always palpable in reading the work itself and in the teacher s use of confident and outstanding where appropriate. 5 of 6
Administration The presentation of folders assists the moderator in assessing the work efficiently. Centres are advised to ensure that the Student Record Form is completed in full, indicating clearly the forms chosen by the student with correct marks, even if the centre has produced its own cover sheet for internal administration. Any illustrations provided by the student are not assessed. The work should be secured with treasury tags rather than sent to the moderator in folders or plastic wallets. Work should then be submitted in the order outlined on the Student Record Form: Creative Piece 1, Creative Piece 2, Reflective Commentary, Drafts, and clearly labelled as such. Many centres omitted to send the Centre Declaration Form this year and reminders had to be sent out during the moderation process. Conclusion Students and teachers should be congratulated on this year s exciting range of creative work and on fascinating reflective commentaries which demonstrated an impressive engagement with reading critically as developing writers. With further standardisation materials available in the second year of the course, teachers should continue to familiarise themselves with the range of work on offer and the marks awarded. This will help to consolidate standards and build confidence in teaching this course and assessing its coursework. Mark Ranges and Award of Grades Grade boundaries and cumulative percentage grades are available on the Results Statistics page of the AQA Website. Converting Marks into UMS marks Convert raw marks into Uniform Mark Scale (UMS) marks by using the link below. UMS conversion calculator 6 of 6