the question wasn't disregarded, only a narrow minded person would believe that the question was straightforward. you write about ONE, then another ONE, you've still answered the question as they didnt say you couldn't write more as they didn't have an ONLY before the ONE.Even if half of the state wrote about 2 texts as an above poster suggested, that DOES NOT make them right, it just means they were inflexible under pressure. I don't think the people that did 2 should be punished, but the second text should not be marked.
THE QUESTION WAS NOT AMBIGUOUS IT SAID USE 1 F**KING TEXT.....lol
but seriously it's the truth, you can not just disregard the question and hope you will get the same marks.
It could just be that 1/2 of the state are morons and don't understand what the simple 3 letter word "one" means.it's CLEARLY not that fucking obvious when half the state has done one thing and half the state did the other. all of the hardline "one related text" people will obviously argue your case but then the people who wrote two will argue theirs.
i.e. ambiguous
+1it is obvious as people just went in with their pre-prepared responses! and there was NOTHING ambiguous about that question. it said ONE text. not 'at least one', but ONE. it, in no way, asked for any extra material apart from your set text and ONE related text. by year twelve you would assume you'd be able to differentiate between the two
Nope, the question was clearly disregarded because anyone who wrote more than 1 did not answer the requirements of the question.the question wasn't disregarded, only a narrow minded person would believe that the question was straightforward. you write about ONE, then another ONE, you've still answered the question as they didnt say you couldn't write more as they didn't have an ONLY before the ONE.
Let me ask you this seeing as you guys don't seem to understand. If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take one, how many lollies would you take?
If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take at least one, how many lollies would you take? take more then one if you want
If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take only one, how many lollies would you take? only take one
If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take one, how many lollies would you take? i could take one, or more then one, i still did what they asked
like i said before its all semantics and how one interprets the question. i interpreted differently to you. doesn't make either of us wrong as the wording of the question left it open to interpretation.
Good now we're getting somewhere. See the word "could"? Was that in the question?If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take at least one, how many lollies would you take? take more then one if you want
If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take only one, how many lollies would you take? only take one
If someone had a jar of lots of lollies and said you could take one, how many lollies would you take? i could take one, or more then one, i still did what they asked
like i said before its all semantics and how one interprets the question. i interpreted differently to you. doesn't make either of us wrong as the wording of the question left it open to interpretation.
well a three year old wouldn't necessarily have the intelligence or the capability to question. see im not three so i can see more then one interpretation. say if i took two lollies, did i go against what this mum has asked?Now let's use that lolly example again because it seems to make things easier to understand somehow.
How many lollies would you take if your mum told you to take one lolly out from the jar?
Do you now see how a 3 year old would be able to do that simple task?
at the end of the day, the sole debate, imo, is whether merely exceeding the specific parameters of the question means you should get marked down. In other subjects, exceeding the parameters is useless, doesn't get you extra marks, doesn't get you a penalty - just wastes your time. This is the same standard that should be applied to english. Half the people who prepared essays wrote about 1 text anyway, they just chopped out part of it - so there's no defined line between those who memorised, and those who didn't.
I beg to differ. Most 3 year olds would be able to completely understand the question and be smart enough to question - at the very least all of the many 3 year olds i have encountered.well a three year old wouldn't necessarily have the intelligence or the capability to question. see im not three so i can see more then one interpretation. say if i took two lollies, did i go against what this mum has asked?
Yes.well a three year old wouldn't necessarily have the intelligence or the capability to question. see im not three so i can see more then one interpretation. say if i took two lollies, did i go against what this mum has asked?
OMFGwell a three year old wouldn't necessarily have the intelligence or the capability to question. see im not three so i can see more then one interpretation. say if i took two lollies, did i go against what this mum has asked?
but she placed no parameters or limits on how many. i take one, then i take another one. i did what she asked. i took one. but she didn't place an adverb specifically stating the desired amount. because no, she didn't say only. hence i can take more without going against her command.I beg to differ. Most 3 year olds would be able to completely understand the question and be smart enough to question - at the very least all of the many 3 year olds i have encountered.
Yes, you went against what your mum asked you to do because she clearly asked that you only take one.