IOC Self Grading
Planning and Analyzed Passage-
I believe I got this score for numerous reasons. I gave context for the book as a whole at the beginning, as in during the intro, but it was not carried all the way through. I talked about Miss Emily and who she was as a person during my analysis, but I did not give any real outside context as to who Tommy and Kathy were. I also referenced my texts numerous times throughout my IOC, which gives me an advantage. There are many things I can work on for next time, such as giving an overview for not just the main character, but for the secondary characters within the passage, the author, and the book as a whole.
B: Understanding the use of and effects of literary features- Score- 6
I think I did an adequate job in the analysis of the literary features within the passage given. I was able to identify the key language features of the passage and how it had an effect on the characters given. One thing that I could have done better was analyze the overall affect on the reader and on the novel as a whole, as I spoke of it briefly but not fully in-depth. Along with that, I could have looked at other aspects besides the language of the passage, thus showing why I didn't earn higher than a 6.
C- Organization- Score- 3
I think I had a pretty good structure, although there was some repetition involved. I was able to show the context of the extract into the thesis statement. From there I outlined the intro sentences for each arguing point then showed evidence. One thing within this section I could have done better was link back my arguing point to the thesis that I had at the beginning, something that I have done but did not do to the full effect. Along with that, I also did not have a great conclusion, as I got pretty tripped up with my words. As a whole, I think I did what was necessary within this portion but I could have done better.
D- Language- Score- Between 2 and 3
I believe that I could have done a lot better within my language. For one, I was quite repetitive and went over the same talking points multiple times. I think what I said made sense but as a whole, I could have done a better job. My grammar and sentence structure also could have been better, as I got flustered at points so I was kinda tripping over my words. But as a whole, I think my IOC practice was able to be understood and I got my point across.
In conclusion, this is not my best work. I could have definitely prepared better and went back over what I need to for the real IOC. In order to improve for the real IOC, I will look back over my practice, look at the sample, and study the formats that were given to me. I know that if I put in the time and effort, I will be able to improve and get the score that I want for the real IOC.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHey!
ReplyDeleteA: 5
B: 4
C: 3
D: 4
I like the background you give and that you pretty much jump right in- you sound calm and organzied. I think you've got a great use of devices here, but keep linking back to the overall purpose of the passage. That's really the effect. Keep thinking...why is Ishiguro doing what he's doing in the passage? How do you know? I also think you have clear organization in your planning, but thinking about the two questions I mention will help keep it more organized orally. Make sure you aren't just listing examples (I noticed this about 2ish minutes in); I'd also suggest simplifying the purpose (to convey a theme of past versus present, to convey a theme of childhood, to convey a theme of ambition)- it makes it easier to prove through devices.