Les 1 Paper 1 Prep with Wine

• Engels
• Middelbare school
• vwo
• Leerjaar 5,6

Wine

The Paper 1 response is written with a good degree of understanding for the ways in which language works. In its execution it shows a knowledge of language that is uncommon among IB students. It is, however, far from impossible to teach the understandings shown in the response. One of the interesting things about this response is the level of sophistication brought to a text type – a wine label – that many may consider relatively banal. There is a sometimes-expressed snobbery that reading literature, or at any rate literary texts, has an inherent value that surpasses any value we might attribute to so-called language texts. Yet, as the response reveals, language texts – even those that may seem at first glance mundane – can be remarkably intricate. It seems reasonable for IB students, negotiating a world saturated by images, ads, social media posts and so on, that having a knowledge of how language works is an important part of developing critical mindedness and becoming engaged citizens. To this ambition we may also observe that knowing something about how language works helps students perform better in their Paper 1 exam. That’s obvious.

In selecting this text – the wine label – we are, of course, aware that in a few parts of the IB world it may be considered taboo for classroom purposes. However, for those able to work with the text – the vast majority of our subscribers – we think it has many significant and interesting features. Of particular note is the plurality of purposes and intended readers; recognising that the text has several, competing functions, each of which situates the reader in a different role is essential for understanding it. The Paper 1 response to the wine label is also interesting. For example, we would draw your attention to the discussion of the text’s visual qualities. These qualities – things such as layout, font, background and foreground – are perhaps not obvious precisely because most of use would probably regard them as self-evident. The students who do really well in Paper 1 can often, in effect, defamiliarize a text to identify the strange in the everyday, and the unusual in the prosaic.

https:

https:

Criterion A: Understanding and interpretation (5 marks)

· To what extent does the student show an understanding of the text? What inferences can the student reasonably make?

· To what extent does the student support their claims with references to the text?

5 out of 5. There is a convincing and insightful interpretation of larger implications and subtleties of the text. This can be seen, for example, in the ways the student’s reading of the text recognizes the social and cultural contexts in which it exists. The reading of the text understands that the text is socially constructed. This is clear, in particular, in the final paragraph where the student seems to discuss negotiated or oppositional readings of the text that could challenge its dominant reading.  

Criterion B: Analysis and evaluation (5 marks)

· How well does the student does the student evaluate the ways in which language and style establish meaning and effect?

5 out of 5. The response demonstrates an insightful and convincing analysis of textual features and/or authorial choices. There is a very good evaluation of how such features and/or choices shape meaning. This is shown, for example, in the various ways the response addresses the guiding question. The guiding question relates to purpose (or, if you prefer, function). The student gives a range of examples that show how function is linguistically expressed, and oscillates consistently between examples and convincing explanations of how meaning is shaped.

Criterion C: Focus and organisation (5 marks)

· How effectively does the student structure and present their ideas?

· How balanced and focused is the response?

5 out of 5. The presentation of ideas is effectively organized and coherent. The analysis is well focused. The student, with little deviation, responds to the guiding question. An interesting aspect of the paragraphing/organization is the student’s decision to consider the text’s visual layout last. The discussion is somewhat separate from the (preceding) paragraphs that discuss the written text, but works to extend the earlier discussion. The introductory paragraph effectively establishes some ‘signposts’ that guide the subsequent discussion.

Criterion D: Language (5 marks)

· How clear, varied, and accurate is the student’s language?

· To what extent is the student’s choice of register, style, and terminology appropriate?

5 out of 5. Language is very clear, effective, carefully chosen and precise, with a high degree of accuracy in grammar, vocabulary and sentence construction; register and style are effective and appropriate to the task. Achieving a 5 in this criterion is not straightforwardly easy. Nevertheless, it is not required to be ‘flawless’; that is an unrealistic expectation, and there is more than ‘enough’ here to award a 5.

Rest of lesson

Read the following two sites for further information on preparing for the P1. 

Also review the tips given by the IB in the 10 tips in the MS teams file.

https:

https: