The ManicaPost
Morris Mtisi Education Correspondent
THERE are obviously many points of weakness to look out to during the final examinations just round the corner. This week allow me to handle only two.
The first point is lack or absence of depth in the candidate’s answer. This refers to answers that are sensible but not depicting enough depth and sensitivity to the issue(s) under discussion. Every point remains a claim until there is enough support by way of illustrations or examples. Remember this!
You cannot say for example. ‘‘Tsitsi Dangarembga portrays Martha’s father as a hypocrite,’’ until you state or add that it is true. And you only need to add ‘‘And that is true’’ at the end of your point, to make the point yours and not necessarily the author’s.
Then you supply the evidence from the novel. In other literary pieces it may be evidence from the poem, from the dialogue, from the passage (the paragraph) etc. Only when you do this in some depth and detail does this become a point worth credit. Quote or give enough examples as you feel are satisfactorily exhaustive. One or two examples do not validate a claim or point.
You cannot say, ‘‘Freddy is dehumanised or poisoned by his entrenchment in patriarchal cultural beliefs and traditions,’ and stop there. You must say why you are saying that by way of enough examples that make the above claim or assertion creditworthy.
You cannot say, ‘‘the author uses diction’’ and stop there. Of course he uses diction. What else would he or she use? Diction simply refers to choice of words.
You need to identify what kind of words (vocabulary) or expressions and state what effect such diction has in the final presentation; be it a narrative or description. If they are similes, figures of speech, simple or elevated language, tell the marker what effect these have to bring out meaning, attitude and feelings? What sensory input does the writer . . . the poet, factor in or throw in, in his or her work as a result of diction? How does he or she use choice of words to catapult the sense of sight (visual), the sense of hearing (auditory), the sense of smell (olfactory), the sense of touch (tactile) and the sense taste (gustatory) in the amplification of effect or meaning?
After supplying intelligent and relevant evidence you must ensure that you briefly and smartly state your comment. This refers to your personal thoughts, idea(s) and feelings as a summation of the point you stated in the opening sentence of every paragraph. Of course you will remember not to say, ‘‘I . . . me . . . my . . . mine). Simply say, ‘‘One does not fail to see the sense in . . ./ We are obviously likely . . . bound to believe . . . to think, to conclude . . ./ Readers will agree that . . ./Our judgment is likely . . . is bound to be guided by . . . ’’
While evidence can be in the form of direct quotations from the text, poem or whatever piece of literature under study, it can also be from outside the text (It is called external, inter-textual or comparative reading.) Cambridge examination candidates, be warned! While ZIMSEC accepts or credits external evidence, Cambridge wants you to stick to the edges of the question and is known for penalising straying away from the piece.
Even as ZIMSEC accepts comparative reading or external evidence, it must be done sparingly and discreetly to drive a point home. Do not get lost in the ‘detour’ and wonder away into no man’s land.
The second point that weakens candidates’ responses is linguistic limitations. This refers to poor personal verbal prowess . . . inability to express an idea or a point succinctly . . . poor command of the English language we can call it. A lot of candidates struggle with their language and this cripples their effort to be clear and understood by the marker.
It is not the obligation of any marker to fill in gaps for you and make things clear for you. In the cases of argument presentation or driving a point home, it is the power . . . the command . . . the refinement of your English language that wins marks for you.
Next week I will elaborate the juxtaposition of the candidate’s language and grasp of depth and sensitivity in responses. WATCH THE SPACE!
