Jamaica Takes Home the Gold Medal in the 100m Sprint
After a hard fought and close race, Usain Bolt wins a Gold medal for Jamaica in the men's 100 meter race in this year's Olympics. This is the first time Usain Bolt has ever taken home a gold medal and shouldn’t be his last. Usain Bolt is an up and coming runner who runs for Jamaica, which he was born and raised in.
At the beginning of the race it had looked as if Richard Thompson, who was running for Trinidad and Tobago, was going to win the race because of an incredible start from the runner. However, Usain Bolt had stayed behind the lead runner for the beginning of this sprint, but had overtaken him later on in the race. As Bolt was running we can see that he repeatedly looked over his shoulder at the other runners.
Other than Usain Bolt the rest of the runners were all remaining the same speed. These runners include Richard Thompson, Walter Dix, who was running for the United States, Churandy Martina, running for the Netherlands, Michael Frater, running for Jamaica, Marc Burns, running for Trinidad and Tobago and the other American runner, Darvis Patton.
The article that i have written is very different from the autobiographical extract from Usain Bolt based on the different perspectives, however they are very different in form, structure and language. I am going to analyse these differences between the newspaper article that I have written and the autobiographical extract from Usain Bolt.
The first topic I am going to talk about is the form of the articles. In the newspaper article we can see that it starts off with the most important information that most readers will want to know. The article then goes into more depth and detail about the race, for example the newspaper says “At the beginning of the race it had looked as if Richard Thompson, who was running for Trinidad and Tobago, was going to win the race because of an incredible start from the runner.” This is where the newspaper starts to go into more depth about the events of the race itself.
The extract from Usain Bolt's autobiography goes over the race in the order that the events had happened and also starts by mentioning how much he thinks while he is running. He explains the events of the race as what he is thinking about while the race is going on. For example he says “Wow! How did he do that?! Now I can’t see where I am in the race, because he’s blocking my view of Asafa on the other side.” This shows exactly what Usain Bolt was thinking while he was racing.
The second topic I am going to describe is the structure of the two articles. The newspaper article is divided into the important facts in the first paragraph. For example in the first paragraph it says “After a hard fought and close race, Usain Bolt wins a Gold medal for Jamaica in the men's 100 meter race in this year's Olympics.” This is giving off the most important information to the reader right away, like most newspapers are formatted to. Then in the second paragraph it describes the events of the race in detail and describes how the race started and ended.
The autobiography is divided up into many different paragraphs each with their own description of the events of the race. This is also structured in chronological order in order to make the most sense. For example the text says “I could feel my momentum building, my longer stride taking me past Thompson, and once I’d cleared him, I could see the rest of the line.” This is showing the events that had happened in the way that they had unfoiled and how Usain Bolt had seen them.
The language used in both these texts are very different. In the newspaper it tries to use a formal and professional tone to describe the events of Usain Bolt's first gold medal. The newspaper uses descriptive words to describe the point like in the sentence the newspaper says “At the beginning of the race it had looked as if Richard Thompson, who was running for Trinidad and Tobago, was going to win the race because of an incredible start from the runner.” This is an attempt at a professional and formal tone for a newspaper article.
The language used in the autobiographical extract is somewhat informal as it shows what Usain Bolt is thinking. For example the autobiography says “Like Stockholm, yo. Remember Stockholm. Do not panic. Get through your drive phase and chill. Chill, chill, chill. Thompson hasn’t pulled away. He’s right there in front of you.” This is an informal tone that shows the panic and belief he had while he was racing.
Hey Colby,
ReplyDeleteYour writing for response A was good. You wrote it in a way that entertained the reader and you structured your writing well. You displayed a good understanding of the text and you clearly went through each event in the race. Your AO1 score was a 4. Your ideas were developed in a very good way that made sense to the reader. By introducing the topic in the first paragraph, and then going into the detail of the race, your writing felt as though it was a real newspaper article. Your AO2 score was also a 4.
Your writing for response B was pretty good. You went into detail and depth about form, structure, and language. You also did a good job comparing and contrasting all of the aspects. You showed that you understood the text and referred to the characteristic features of the text. Your AO1 score was a 4. You did a good job comparing your text to Usain Bolt’s text. Your AO3 score was an 8.
Good Job
What’s up Colby!
ReplyDelete1 (a)
My score is a combination of 4 marks (AO1) and another 4 marks (AO2) which totals in at 8 marks. The response has a detailed understanding of the text and uses effective reference to characteristic features. The response has effective expression with a few minor errors which do not impede communication. Content is also relevant to the audience and purpose and the ideas are developed effectively.
The response is in the proper form since it includes the style of a report for the sports section of the newspaper. The response includes a link to the appropriate audience through the identification of other runners which sports fans will be more familiar with and by including context on which runners run for which countries for the new sports fans that will read the report. The response also succeeds in fulfilling the purpose of the question because it was asked to write a report of the race for the sports section of the newspaper which is shown by the reporting of the race through phrases like “After a hard fought and close race, Usain Bolt wins a Gold medal for Jamaica in the men's 100 meter race” and “At the beginning of the race”. The response includes proper structure due to the use of short paragraphs and a heading at the beginning that is seen in reports of newspapers. The information is also sorted from most important to least important through the use of the inverted pyramid of news reporting which shows proper style. The response also includes content through the use of key information about the event such as that “Bolt had stayed behind the lead runner for the beginning of this sprint, but had overtaken him later on in the race.” The tone also creates an effect of interest for the reader through the use of phrases that bring the race up and sets it up to be one of many golden moments which is shown by “This is the first time Usain Bolt has ever taken home a gold medal and shouldn’t be his last.”
1 (b)
My score is a combination of 3 marks (AO1) and 6 marks (AO3). I think I might be grading too harshly but I feel like this could be a much better response if there were more quotes to support the analysis that is being made and if more form/structure/language was pointed out. But the response was very good but it would be better if there was more in general so that you can keep getting more and more marks. So just look over page 7 and the bullet points on that page to help you.
The response also starts off with an opening which I would not recommend since it is better just to focus on what the question asks, so I would say that the first paragraph has got to go but the part about the different perspectives of the two texts is good so keep that which is this part: “very different from the autobiographical extract from Usain Bolt based on the different perspectives”.
The response mentions that the report is arranged in order of importance meanwhile the autobiography is arranged in chronological order and in chunks. I just summarized but the response goes more into depth and includes examples from the text like “‘At the beginning of the race it had looked as if Richard Thompson, who was running for Trinidad and Tobago, was going to win the race because of an incredible start from the runner.’” and ““Wow! How did he do that?!...”
Although the response could have included more quotes from the text to explain how the autobiography “goes over the race in the order that the events had happened” such as including multiple quotes that discuss the beginning to the end of the race to give the audience the feel of the text indeed going through chronological order.
The response mentions the attempt at making a professional type of tone for the newspaper.
The response mentions the use of colloquial (informal) words and phrases like “‘Like Stockholm, yo. Remember Stockholm. Do not panic. Get through your drive phase and chill. Chill, chill, chill…’.
Hi Colby,
ReplyDeleteAfter reading your response in part A, I would give you a level 3 in AO1. You had a clear understanding of the text as well as clear references from the text. With that being said, you went over Usain Bolt’s extract and grabbed the main points. In my personal opinion, this made your response very strong. However, you could have had a stronger response if you used more detailed examples from the extract. As of AO2, I would give you a level 3. In my opinion, this is the score that fits your response the best. I believe that you seemed like you kind of rushed the task and this is clear due to the fact that you went from past tense to present. It is a very common mistake but in order to make your writing flow better, try to not avoid those mistakes. I have seen it happen quite a lot throughout your response. Overall, you did a great job because the main points were there and you did things that I did not even think about when writing my blog. For example, you went over the main points whereas I went very in-depth with details. Great Job!
After reading your response in part A, I would give you a level 3 in AO1. I am giving you this score because you did compare both pieces but you were mostly off topic. For example, most of the time you talked about the thing the extract did like structure, language and form. It was good that you talked about those things but you could have talked about your response more. As for AO3, I give you a 4 because as I mentioned before you did focus on that alot and you wendt in-depth with it. Good job!