VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: Price: Greatest Country on earth,…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 70%: The recent final results of the vote for House of Representatives, where The Australian Labour Party, a…
The recent final results of the vote for House of Representatives, where The Australian Labour Party, a progressive party, beat the other parties by a landslide, has sparked debate about whether Australia is truly the greatest country on earth, as Angus Taylor claims. His opinion piece, “Price: Greatest Country on earth, Angus? Not if you live in Victoria,” published in the Herald Sun on the 20th of February, 2026, adopts a criticising tone to argue that Australia’s national pride is declining, and political leaders like Angus Taylor are boasting and bragging while the country is actually declining. Targeting an audience of traditional and conservative readers, the author intends to instill urgency about the decline of the country’s national pride and values.
Price opens by calling out Angus Taylor’s tendency to brag about Australia being the greatest country in the world, but ignoring that the country’s values are declining. He discusses Taylor’s eagerness to “snatch the leadership” from Sussan Ley, and “talk about immigration and shutting the door” on several groups of people and communities, but no actions regarding either of these claims is to be seen. The author is hinting at the ineffectiveness of Taylor in taking actions on the claims he makes, suggesting that it is now in the hands of the conservative audience, who truly do care about the country’s pride and traditions, to reintroduce the country’s values into everyday life, and show their pride in the country. Alongside questioning “are we brave enough to admit” that who is ‘an Aussie’ needs to be redefined and that the country needs to reconsider how many people, and who should live here, suggests that Taylor himself, needs to admit that these things need to be changed before he can claim that Australia is the greatest country on earth. This is done to instill urgency to act within the audience, and ensure that, unlike Taylor, they are actively working to ensure that the country’s pride and values are upheld.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: The cherrypicking of ‘Australian…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 60%: Published on the progressive website of ‘Women’s Agenda’, on the 2nd of March, 2026, Angela Priestley’s opinion…
Published on the progressive website of ‘Women’s Agenda’, on the 2nd of March, 2026, Angela Priestley’s opinion piece, ‘The cherrypicking of ‘Australian Values’ to conveniently overlook equality, compassion and respect’ sternly exposes peoples tendency to ‘cherry-pick’ some core Australian values, while failing to mention other values that are also clearly listed in the australian values statement. The author exposes this behaviour in relation to recent political events, to an audience that would be progressive leaning and interested in the perspectives of women.
Priestly opens her opinion piece by mentioning the increasing tendency, in which people are picking and choosing Australian values that they want to support. Clearly making note of politicians recent tendency to “throw about” Australian values instills concern and distrust between political leader and the audience, raising the question of whether political leaders are trully supporting the values of this country, or whether they’re simply using certain values when it best serves their intentions. This is a strategic choice by the author to maintan the readers attention, as they become interested in exposing that politicians such as Angus Taylor are only promoting and speaking about values that they personally agree with, and leaving out the values that they do not care for.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: THIS IS ORAL PRESENTATION
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 97.5%: Madam Speaker [Smile Nod] As a member of this parliament, but also (small pause) a voter, tax payer and a…
Madam Speaker [Smile Nod]
As a member of this parliament, but also (small pause) a voter, tax payer and a citizen of this country ; I have the right to ask, which side does Australia actually take, not politically, (pause) legally.
The Magnitsky Law which commenced on 8th December 2021, is a targeted human rights (small pause) and anti-corruption legislation that empowers governments to impose extra-territorial sanctions - such as travel bans and asset freezes - on foreign individuals or entities responsible for grave human rights abuses or significant corruption.
Now [Raise voice] , We as a nation persistently claim to stand by the ‘rule-based-order’. But that so-called (small pause) ‘order’ [use two fingers to denote inverted commas] that we so happen to follow, appears to be an option menu on the war crimes we act against based on ‘who’ [use two fingers to denote inverted commas] committed it, rather than the crime itself.
Right now [Raise voice] , The International Criminal Court - The ICC - has recently issued arrest warrants 2026, for Israeli leaders over alleged war crimes and severe violations against humanity while the ICJ - The International Court of Justice - continue to consider allegations under the (very small pause) genocide convention. Arrest warrants are issued for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant for grave crimes against civilians, and Australia’s response, (small pause) well minimal. (small pause)
[Raise Voice] How exactly has our (point to yourself) nation responded to this situation. Well, Australia’s sanctions system appears to operate in a selective manner, or you can say…. (small pause) [face expression] ‘a political fashion’. Australia has placed target sanctions on ‘just’ two far right Israeli ministers by the names Ben Gvir and Smotrich for [enthusiasm] ‘inciting violence’. Meanwhile they sanction over 230 Iranian individuals, listed Iran’s revolutionary guard as a state sponsor of terrorism and expelled Iran’s ambassador. Let me tell you Madam (small pause), does this systemic favoritism not overthrow our moral values as a nation?
Now, I want to make it very clear [use hands with the gesture], many of those sanctions against the Iranian Regime are indeed justified due to their actions. But the favoritism, undeniable!. When Iran commits brutality, Australia responds swiftly and comprehensively with no problem. When Israel continues to commit several humanitarian war crimes, the response is cautious (small pause), minimal (small pause), delayed (small pause) and sometimes non-existent………. [say slowly to emphasise]
This issue doesn't just regard foreign policy, but legal integrity, and MY [point to yourself] (small pause) yours [point to them], and everyone's [move face outwards] taxes continue to fund this systemic erosion which actively corrodes our legal and moral values as a nation. (say slowly for structure (end to Intro/Hook)
—--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[5 second pause for structure (argument 1) ] [walk slightly to a different spot or turn around just to signal this is a next argument]
So ,what does this selective use of the Magnitsky law actually cause and impact us as a nation worldwide you may ask?
Well let's look at the purpose of law. The rule of law is a principle of democratic governance ensuring all individuals, institutions and the government themselves remain accountable to a set of principles. A key principle of a law is equality and fairness - in other words, everyone is treated under the same law regardless of their wealth, political power, or status. This ensures no one is above the law (use fingers to signal above), typically those in power and a higher hierarchy, ensuring everyone's rights are preserved.
So how [RAISE VOICE] could our nation possibly betray that, Madam? We tell everyone Australia follows the ‘rule based order’. But if the government can pick and choose when this law is applied based on ‘who’ did it, it's no longer a rule based order, but a PR-stunt.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: THIS IS ORAL PRESENTATION
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 95%: Madam Speaker [Smile Nod] As a member of this parliament, but also (small pause) a voter, tax payer and a…
Madam Speaker [Smile Nod]
As a member of this parliament, but also (small pause) a voter, tax payer and a citizen of this country ; I have the right to ask, which side does Australia actually take, not politically, (pause) legally.
The Magnitsky Law which commenced on 8th December 2021, is a targeted human rights (small pause) and anti-corruption legislation that empowers governments to impose extra-territorial sanctions - such as travel bans and asset freezes - on foreign individuals or entities responsible for grave human rights abuses or significant corruption.
Now [Raise voice] , We as a nation persistently claim to stand by the ‘rule-based-order’. But that so-called (small pause) ‘order’ [use two fingers to denote inverted commas] that we so happen to follow, appears to be an option menu on the war crimes we act against based on ‘who’ [use two fingers to denote inverted commas] committed it, rather than the crime itself.
Right now [Raise voice] , The International Criminal Court - The ICC - has recently issued arrest warrants 2026, for Israeli leaders over alleged war crimes and severe violations against humanity while the ICJ - The International Court of Justice - continue to consider allegations under the (very small pause) genocide convention. Arrest warrants are issued for Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu and former defence minister Gallant for grave crimes against civilians, and Australia’s response, (small pause) well minimal. (small pause)
[Raise Voice] How’ exactly has our (point to yourself) nation responded to this situation. Well, Australia’s sanctions system appears to operate in a selective manner, or you can say…. (small pause) [face expression] ‘a political fashion’. Australia has placed target sanctions on ‘just’ two far right Israeli ministers by the names Ben Gvir and Smotrich for [enthusiasm] ‘inciting violence’. Meanwhile they sanction over 230 Iranian individuals, listed Iran’s revolutionary guard as a state sponsor of terrorism and expelled Iran’s ambassador. Let me tell you Madam (small pause), does this systemic favoritism not overthrow our moral values as a nation?
Now, I want to make it very clear [use hands with the gesture], many of those sanctions against the Iranian Regime are indeed justified due to their actions. But the favoritism, undeniable!. When Iran commits brutality, Australia responds swiftly and comprehensively with no problem. When Israel continues to commit several humanitarian war crimes, the response is cautious (small pause), minimal (small pause), delayed (small pause) and sometimes non-existent………. [say slowly to emphasise]
This issue doesn't just regard foreign policy, but legal integrity, and MY [point to yourself] (small pause) yours [point to them], and everyone's [move face outwards] taxes continue to fund this systemic erosion which actively corrodes our legal and moral values as a nation. (say slowly for structure (end to Intro/Hook)
—--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[5 second pause for structure (argument 1) ] [walk slightly to a different spot or turn around just to signal this is a next argument]
So ,what does this selective use of the Magnitsky law actually cause and impact us as a nation worldwide you may ask?
Well let's look at the purpose of law. The rule of law is a principle of democratic governance ensuring all individuals, institutions and the government themselves remain accountable to a set of principles. A key principle of a law is equality and fairness - in other words, everyone is treated under the same law regardless of their wealth, political power, or status. This ensures no one is above the law (use fingers to signal above), typically those in power and a higher hierarchy, ensuring everyone's rights are preserved.
So how [RAISE VOICE] could our nation possibly betray that, Madam? We tell everyone Australia follows the ‘rule based order’. But if the government can pick and choose when this law is applied based on ‘who’ did it, it's no longer a rule based order, but a PR-stunt.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: write an analysis of the ways in which…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 60%: In the online newspaper ‘Australia Today’, May Tran publishes an opinion piece where she posits the idea that…
In the online newspaper ‘Australia Today’, May Tran publishes an opinion piece where she posits the idea that intergenerational living in the solution to the current housing crisis in Australia. She expresses her opinion a logical and measured tone to encourage local Australian adults to invest in multigenerational housing rather than the current housing dream of living with a single family generation.
Tran questions whether the classic Australian housing dream is realistic, claiming that we should change it. To open her piece, Tran employs a plethora of inclusive language, using vocabulary such as ‘we all aspired’, ‘our own’ and ‘we could’ to establish a clear connection with the audience. This immediately draws the reader into the argument as the audience is given the impression that the issue is relevant to them, and that the author understands them. Additionally, Tran uses a variety of phrases and vocabulary that is associated with fairytales, such as ‘once upon a time’, ‘little piece of paradise’, ‘fantasy’ and ‘dream’ to set a light and playful tone, provoking a sense of wonder and joy into the reader. However, this is quickly juxtaposed with language that has negative connotations such as ‘outdated’, ‘unachievable’, ‘out of tune’ and ‘challenges we face’, diminishing the prior positive tone with a sense of helplessness, as the audience becomes pessimistic towards that idea of fulfilling this idea of a perfect home. This allows Tran to convince the audience that there is another solution, as they are driven to repair this ‘fantasy’. To strengthen this, Tran employs logos, stating that ‘property prices have been going up nearly twice as fast as wages’, this use of indisputable data solidifies the idea that owning a single family home is no longer realistic, encouraging the audience to seek an alternative option. This idea of finding an alternative option is assisted by an image of a looking glass hovering over some cut-out cardboard houses, symbolising the idea of looking for other options through the use of literal imagery.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: Here is the verbatim transcription of…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 70%: Appointing her condemnatory argument, Green-Moore targets both socially engaged and apprehensive listeners to…
Appointing her condemnatory argument, Green-Moore targets both socially engaged and apprehensive listeners to uncover common misconceptions about ethical shopping. She initiates her presentation, by employing a welcoming, and appreciative tone to immediately put the listener at ease, aiming to establish connection and lower the defenses of opposing listeners. Leveraging imagery, Green-Moore then urges the audience to “close their eyes and picture” a typical grocery run, this hypothetical scenario aims to evoke pathos in everyday shoppers who are “already familiar” with the experience of buying “all natural ingredients” that are believed to be “great for the environment, ultimately trying to relate to listeners through shared experiences, and create a sense of comfort. However, Green-Moore immediately juxtaposes this sense of comfort, through a jarring tonal shift, to pronounce blind trust in packaging labels as “wrong!”. This sudden revelation, is intended to create doubt and act as a moment of consideration about listeners' own behaviour, and aims for a moment of self-assessment especially amongst like-minded environmental shoppers. Additionally, this dismantles the confidence of refuting listeners,
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: Oral Presentation: Should Australia…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 95%: INTRO Politicians, last year Australians went to the polls with energy policy at the heart of the national…
INTRO
Politicians, last year Australians went to the polls with energy policy at the heart of the national debate. The choice was stark: a Labor government doubling down on renewables, or a Coalition vision that dared to say the word that has long been banned in this country, “nuclear”. The Coalition lost. But that does not mean the argument was wrong.
Mr. Speaker, I stand before you today as a senator, a senator who can see the clearcut evidence. If Australians are serious about reliable, affordable, low emissions electricity for our children, we must invest in nuclear energy.
ARG 1
Critics will tell you nuclear power is too expensive. But in the long run, is it?
Yes, nuclear plants carry high upfront construction costs. On paper you would never consider nuclear energy. Their operating lifespans stretch to 60 or even 80 years. Wind farms and solar farms can run for a maximum of 25 years. Hydro farms have an expected lifespan of 45 years. It would take the operational lifespan of an offshore windfarm and a hydro farm just to match the lifespan of a nuclear reactor. Nuclear energy also is more consistent through its lifespan, according to a blog posted by the U.S department of energy. Nuclear energy runs at maximum capacity more than 92% of the year while wind and solar run 35% and 25% of the year respectively. When you look past the initial price tag, nuclear energy isn't an expensive gamble. It’s a multi-generational investment that outlasts and out-powers the competition
ARG 2
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: Climate Change
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 85%: Baum continues her speech by further attacking the government for their actions towards cutting funding for…
Baum continues her speech by further attacking the government for their actions towards cutting funding for CSIRO’s scientific research. She accompanies a visual presenting a boat at medium shot, exemplifying the mass study towards marine life, which was dedicated by Baum in classifying this “hard-earned profession” as an amount unable to “ever [be] recogis[ed]” by the government to display the lack of over-reliance on external funding. Portraying the government as a greedy figure because they are unable to fund action towards climate change in the future, and instead provoking excuses towards Australian voters to characterise them as collecting rather than distributing, Baum instils aggression within her constituents and Australian voters concerned about climate change. They are positioned to view the government as a repulsive force in that rejecting their importance in funding these high-level companies when required. Compounding her argument with a contrasting tone when acknowledging how the funding is “allocated to other social services” in the opinions of the audience, which reject this proposal, amplifying the concern that the private funding can ensure the “best resources and greater incomes” to maximise the research around climate change,
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: Background Info: On an average day,…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 80%: In attempts to mitigate the increase of the disproportionate amount of Aboriginal children being incarcerated,…
In attempts to mitigate the increase of the disproportionate amount of Aboriginal children being incarcerated, the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), published a report (2024), contending that Australia's punitive youth justice system criminalises vulnerability rather than addressing its root causes. In addressing the general public and policy makers, the organisation posits that Australia’s youth justice system is failing because it ignores the systematic social factors driving children into it. The organisation then reframes children involved in the system from criminals to vulnerable victims of circumstance. Furthermore, by contrasting the costs of incarceration against those of early intervention, the organisation highlights possible economic efficiency. Finally, the organisation denounces the violation of international human rights.
The AHRC begins its critique by dismantling the notion that youth crime is a vacuum of individual choice;, rather it is a symptom of societal prejudice. By employing a hostile compounding of “poverty, homelessness, abuse, [and] mental health challenges”, the organisation attempts to overwhelm the reader with the reality of a vulnerable child's environment, suggesting that offending is basically a byproduct of such “intersecting disadvantages”. The accumulation of hardships serves to stimulate the reader’s sense of injustice, aiming to shift the blame from a child to a society that allows such conditions to exist. This textual plea is reinforced by an accompanying visual metaphor depicting a solitary child sitting under a bridge contrasting with a bright, expansive sky. The compositional choice to place the child as a small, isolated figure within the dark, functions as a visual hyperbole for the systematic prejudice that undermines them. By stripping the image of any signs of support or community infrastructure, the organisation visually manifests the “neglect” described within the text, compelling the audience to feel a protective urgency. Moreover, the report adopts an exasperated tone through the rhetorical question: “if we know the causes, why do we continue to ignore them?” Through this the organisation aims to position the government's current inaction as not merely a policy oversight, but as a deliberate and irrational neglect of “expert consensus". By labelling the current system as “not fit for purpose”, the AHRC addresses the reader as a rational observer, inviting them to view punitive measures as a primitive and ineffective response to a crisis that requires “earlier” holistic support. Therefore, the organisation asserts that the failure of the system is a choice, consequently portraying the status quo as an active perpetuation of injustice.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: "Sophocles presents leadership as a…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 75%: With climate change increasing more progressively, a future is not confirmed for younger generation. This issue…
With climate change increasing more progressively, a future is not confirmed for younger generation. This issue has been brought up by a scared mother in a comment section of a blog post which discusses how the government should be focusing on protecting our earth. The comment replied to a post titled ‘the earth is our home’ and followed a vulnerable and desperate tone to encourage readers to support her and fight for the younger generations future. The comment made public on the online post is most likely to capture the attention of other parents and younger individuals who often use media.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: 'Macbeth is a victim of forces beyond…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 87.5%: In his tragedy 'Macbeth', written at the cusp of the Jacobean era and set in the 11th century, Shakespeare…
In his tragedy 'Macbeth', written at the cusp of the Jacobean era and set in the 11th century, Shakespeare tells the story of the Thane of Glamis who is rewarded for his brave efforts in battle. At the start of the play, Macbeth is vulnerable to external forces of power including the witches prophecy and his manipulative, masculine wife, who both have ambitions for him to become king. These compel and force him to make decisions that have irreversible consequences in his life. However, as the play continues, Macbeth takes charge in his own decision making, placing him in control. This causes him to become tyrannical, contributing to his demise and death. The play ultimately serves as a caution for regicide and letting ambition consume oneself.
The witches act as the first external factor that sow the seeds for Macbeths tragic end. They prophesise that Macbeth will become 'king hereafter'. Macbeth is at first sceptical of the witches and their supernatural powers, suggesting that he does not need to take any action as 'if chance will crown [him] king, why, chance will crown [him] without [his] stir'. This infers that he is at the mercy of fate, and that he should not take any action to make the prophecy become true. This suggests that the witches, and the supernatural are in power over Macbeth, placing him passive to their force. At this stage in the play, Macbeth is untouched by 'deep desires', however he is pleased with what they prophesise, as he requests they 'tell [him] more', suggesting that they have triggered his ambitious streak.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: Explore the significance of this passage.
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 70%: In ‘my people’, Oodgeroo Noonuccal explores the significance of the poem, “Integration – Yes!”. Integration –…
In ‘my people’, Oodgeroo Noonuccal explores the significance of the poem, “Integration – Yes!”. Integration – Yes! Is a poem that highlights the themes of cultural pride, conformity, and identity. Cultural pride is displayed through the semantic field used with indigenous treasures, for example, “customs”, ”dances”, ”songs”, “crafts”, and ”corroborees”. Noonuccal argues that integration would only occur if both parties’ “sacred myths” are kept together, and not removed or outshined by the other. In addition to cultural pride, Noonuccal presents the idea of identity through the semantic field of aspiration and oneness, such as “integration”, “uplifting”, “So black and white may go forward together”, “harmony”, and “brotherhood”. Noonuccal uses the semantic field to make the reader understand her point of view and her direction of how she wants Australia to be, as in the early 20th century, the
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: AFP slammed for turning…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 82.5%: Following a career marred by allegations of war crimes, Ben Roberts-Smith was arrested in a widely-publicised…
Following a career marred by allegations of war crimes, Ben Roberts-Smith was arrested in a widely-publicised affair in April. In an opinion piece for news.com.au (AFP slammed for turning Ben-Roberts-Smith into a media circus), Caleb Bond argues that the prosecution and publicised nature of the arrest of Ben Roberts-Smith is both purposeless and damaging. He directs this piece to a centre-right audience, inclined to be empathetic but also questioning of authority, with an intention of placing criticism on institutional motives in the Ben Roberts-Smith case therefore undermining audience support for the prosecution.
Bond’s first substantive criticises the prosecution of Ben Roberts-Smith as purposeless and damaging, encouraging the audience to discredit the legitimacy of the prosecution. Bond inaugurates his article by rhetorically questioning ‘why should the court have to rule on this in the first place’, directly addressing the reader and questioning their justification of the practical benefits of prosecuting Roberts-Smith, subtly shifting their position to skepticism of the prosecution. Bond pre-emptively shields his critique by conceding that shooting unarmed prisoners must not be ‘condoned, encouraged or allowed to become commonplace.’ The tricolon establishes moral credibility in order to reframe skepticism of the prosecution as principled rather than permissive. Bond shifts to criticism of the Roberts-Smith prosecution as impractical, stating that it ‘does nothing to help anyone’, and that it ‘will do nothing to prevent that kind of behaviour in the military’. Through repeated negation, Bond utilises the already-established rapport with his audience to build upon the prior forcing of audience questioning to encourage their conclusion of the prosecution’s purposelessness. This is reinforced through a second rhetorical question in, ‘So what?’, building on Bond’s earlier assertions of the prosecution’s limited gains, to encourage the audience to question whether, due to its apparent lack of purpose, the marginal benefit warrants the use of the courts. To conclude the article, Bond consummates his questioning of the prosecution with the assertion of it being a ‘trial for show’ to ‘prove that we don’t like war crimes’, aided by his positioning of the audience to question the purpose of the charges, therefore persuading them to see the prosecution through a politically-motivated, and therefore illegitimate, lens. Throughout the first substantive, Bond argues that the charges against Roberts-Smith are purposeless and without benefit, positioning the readership to criticism of the prosecution.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: Jeff Kennett: The charges against Ben…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 80%: Following the arrest of highly decorated soldier Ben Roberts-Smith on war crimes charges, fierce debate has…
Following the arrest of highly decorated soldier Ben Roberts-Smith on war crimes charges, fierce debate has erupted as to their validity. In an opinion article for the Herald Sun, Jeff Kennett (Jeff Kennett: The charges against brave Ben Roverts-Smith should be withdrawn) argues that civilians are unable to make effective judgements on wartime decisions and therefore criticises the charges laid against the former soldier. He writes to the Herald Sun’s conservative audience, who are likely supportive of Australian soldiers, with a purpose of discouraging civilian criticism of Roberts-Smith and encouraging the charges against Roberts-Smith to be dropped.
In his first substantive, Kennett affirms the admirability of Ben Roberts-Smith as a highly effective and duty-bound soldier. By qualifying him as ‘one of the most highly decorated soldiers the nation has ever produced’, Kennett immediately establishes Roberts-Smith as a man of high achievement. Kennett shifts to emphasise his gallantry, in ‘putting his life on the line time and time again’. Its sequencing immediately succeeding the emphasis on Roberts-Smith’s achievement subtly positions the audience to view Roberts-Smith as both effective and prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice. This is aided through a visual medium depicting Roberts-Smith on tour. Roberts-Smith’s downward gaze and eyes obscured by sunglasses symbolise an apparent ignorance to the camera, feeding the audience the impression of focus. This is reinforced through Roberts-Smith’s headset, implying his senses are consumed by the task and enhancing the appearance of focus. The Australian flag depicted on the armband frames Roberts-Smith’s actions within the microcosm of duty, presenting the soldier’s positioning in war as a desire to serve the interests of Herald Sun’s Australian reader. For the reader, the visual medium enhances the perception of both Roberts-Smith’s eliteness and sacrifice established by Kennett. Through describing Roberts-Smith’s sacrifice as a deed ‘most Australians will never comprehend’, Kennett establishes the disqualification of the reader in making a judgement on the disgraced soldier, implicitly conditioning an internal stifling of questions about his conduct. This disqualification’s emergence as a pattern is utilised by Kennett to continually reinforce this idea, and consolidate said stifling within the mind of the reader. In concluding the substantive, Kennett shifts to criticising the process of Roberts-Smith’s arrest. Kennett’s appeal to pathos through describing the arrest as ‘in front of his children’ and ‘absolute disgrace’ elicits anger within the audience at the process, encouraging their perception of Roberts-Smith as a victim of an unfair system. Within his first substantive, Kennett establishes the admirability of Ben Roberts-Smith, positioning the audience to a more favourable position on the former soldier.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: analysis on Jordan Chens's comment on…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 70%: In his online comment on the 19th of July 2023, Jordan Chen adopts a foreboding tone in reply to the ongoing…
In his online comment on the 19th of July 2023, Jordan Chen adopts a foreboding tone in reply to the ongoing use of petrol cars. Contending there is a deleterious impact of gas-powered cars, labelling them to be more of an environmental and financial burden than being beneficial. He strives to position the Australian motorists to view gas cars as counterproductive and transition to Ev cars.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: this is my oral that i have to present…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 82.5%: Every time a violent youth crime makes headlines in Australia, public outrage follows close behind. Teenagers…
Every time a violent youth crime makes headlines in Australia, public outrage follows close behind.
Teenagers carrying machetes through shopping centres. Violent assaults filmed and uploaded online. Car thefts, home invasions, gang violence. In January this year, ABC News reported on a machete attack in Caroline Springs involving teenagers in Melbourne. Incidents like these dominate media headlines and understandably leave communities frightened and angry.
And in response, governments continue promising tougher laws, harsher sentencing, and stricter punishment.
But while politicians debate how to punish young offenders, far less attention is being given to the conditions that lead many young people toward offending in the first place.
Because youth crime does not simply appear out of nowhere.
It develops.
It develops through trauma, instability, violence, neglect, educational disengagement, and environments where children are failed long before they ever enter a courtroom.
Today, I will argue that the government must prioritise education and early intervention in disadvantaged communities to reduce youth crime, rather than relying on harsher punishment. Because youth offending is often shaped by trauma and disengagement long before offences occur, punishment alone fails to reduce reoffending, while education and intervention provide young people with support, stability, and pathways away from crime.
Firstly, governments must prioritise early intervention because youth crime is often shaped by trauma, neglect, and educational disengagement long before offences occur.
A government youth justice submission found that 53 percent of young offenders had experienced domestic or family violence, 45 percent were disengaged from education, employment or training, and 30 percent had unstable housing. These statistics are not excuses for criminal behaviour. Violent crime should never be excused. But they do reveal something important: many young offenders are themselves products of deeply unstable environments.
And if society creates the conditions for youth crime, why do we only punish the outcome?
One of my former teachers now works at a disadvantaged school in Cairns. She told me about students who steal food from classrooms because they do not have enough food at home. Students who arrive at school angry, exhausted, or completely disengaged from learning. Some come from homes shaped by violence, addiction, or neglect.
Another teacher described a young girl who violently assaulted another student at school. When the girl’s father was called into the office, he responded by saying, “I don’t know why she acts like this. Every time she acts out, I belt her.”
And suddenly, the behaviour becomes easier to understand.
Because children learn behaviour from the environments around them. Psychology research into observational learning shows repeated exposure to violence can normalise aggression and desensitise children to harmful behaviour. When violence becomes routine at home, it is far more likely to become routine elsewhere.
Even neurologically, young people are more vulnerable to impulsive behaviour. Doctor Martin Novik explains that adolescent brains are not yet fully developed, making young people more susceptible to peer pressure and less capable of rational decision-making.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: this is actually an oral point of view…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 80%: At 6:59am, thousands of Victorian students sit in silence refreshing the same webpage. Bedrooms become waiting…
At 6:59am, thousands of Victorian students sit in silence refreshing the same webpage. Bedrooms become waiting rooms. Phones become verdicts. And somewhere between the countdown and the loading screen, a generation prepares to reduce itself to a number.
Today, standing before the Minister for Education and members of the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority board as a representative of Victoria’s student body, I do not intend to argue that achievement is unimportant. Achievement matters. Education matters. Ambition matters.
What concerns students across this state, however, is the culture that has developed around the ATAR — a culture in which achievement increasingly determines identity, inequality disguises itself as merit, and student pressure becomes profitable for the institutions surrounding it.
The ATAR was designed as an educational tool. Yet for many students, it no longer functions merely as a ranking system; it functions as a measure of self-worth.
Within Victorian schools, academic performance has become inseparable from comparison. Students are ranked through SAC averages, predicted study scores, percentile data, and cohort performance. Classrooms increasingly resemble scoreboards rather than spaces of learning.
A survey by Jun Eric Fu, Youth Research Collective from The University of Melbourne was handed out to 40,000 graduates of 2023 and were asked to comment on their school experience. The language surrounding Year 12 reflects this transformation. Students are constantly told to “stay ahead,” “remain competitive,” and avoid “falling behind.” Education is no longer framed as intellectual growth, but as a race with winners and losers.
Crown prosecutor Meredith Hunt, reflected on her own experience with the ATAR, in an article for ‘The Age’, stating “I don’t think you should ever rank people, and especially young, impressionable teenagers, in a way that [ATAR] does.” She further explained that students are often burdened by the belief that the ATAR will determine “what you’re going to do for the rest of your life,” despite still “trying to grow up and figure it out.”
However, the issue extends beyond stress itself. Pressure has become normalised to the point where burnout is interpreted as discipline and exhaustion is mistaken for ambition.
In many classrooms, achievement is no longer relative to personal growth, but relative to everyone else. A student receiving an 85 may feel inadequate sitting beside someone who achieved a 95. Success becomes conditional. Satisfaction becomes temporary. And students begin chasing validation through numbers that never seem high enough. To us rest becomes associated with laziness, while overworking becomes associated with worth. In this environment, we no longer simply pursue achievement; we begin performing it.
And perhaps that is the most damaging consequence of ATAR culture: students are not simply afraid of failing academically — they are afraid of being perceived as failures themselves. I experience this too, not the drive to work hard for myself, but for other people, for the watchful eyes of teachers, as if your year 12 performance is a cyclic story unfolding right before them, and for family, who frequently predict and debate your future atar and study scores during dinner, urging you to never lack and to never fall back.
The ATAR was designed to rank academic performance, yet students increasingly believe it ranks them as people.
Yet even this pressure rests upon a larger illusion: the belief that every student competes under equal conditions. Dear Minister and VCAA board- picture this: one student enters Year 12 supported by private tutoring, specialist teachers, and extensive exam preparation programs. Another balances part-time work alongside school, studies in overcrowded classrooms, and lacks access to external support. Yet both students are ultimately reduced to the same ranking system, as though their educational experiences existed under equal conditions.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: oral essay
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 85%: Imagine explaining to the family of a terror victim that the people who willingly aligned themselves with one…
Imagine explaining to the family of a terror victim that the people who willingly aligned themselves with one of the most barbaric organisations in modern history deserve another chance.
Imagine telling Australians that after years of extremist propaganda, public executions, sexual slavery, and mass murder, the appropriate response is not distance — but reintegration.
Because that is exactly what Australia is now being asked to accept.
A woman boards a flight to Syria in 2014. She leaves behind the freedoms, laws, and protections of Australia to willingly enter territory controlled by ISIS — an organisation built upon torture, executions, and terror.
Years later, after the collapse of the caliphate, she asks to come home.
And Australia says yes.
Why?
Why should a nation bear responsibility for individuals who consciously abandoned it in favour of an extremist regime that declared war against Western democracy itself?
Australia should not repatriate individuals linked to terrorist organisations such as ISIS because doing so compromises national security, weakens moral accountability, and prioritises emotional idealism over the safety and trust of the Australian public.
Firstly, repatriating ISIS-linked individuals creates an avoidable national security risk.
Supporters of repatriation argue that these women and their families can be monitored, rehabilitated, and reintegrated into society. On paper, that sounds reasonable. In reality, it is dangerously optimistic.
Extremist ideology does not disappear the moment someone boards a return flight.
Counter-terrorism experts across Europe have repeatedly warned that radicalisation can persist for years after individuals leave conflict zones. According to the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism, many returnees continue to hold extremist beliefs long after physical involvement ends.
And Australia already understands the consequences of radical extremism.
The Lindt Café siege. The Bourke Street attack. Numerous disrupted plots uncovered by ASIO.
These attacks were not carried out by armies. They were carried out by individuals.
History repeatedly proves that large-scale terror often begins with a single radicalised person operating at the exact moment security systems fail.
It only takes one.
One person avoiding rehabilitation. One person spreading extremist ideology online. One person slipping through surveillance systems.
And despite political assurances, surveillance is not flawless. Monitoring high-risk individuals requires enormous intelligence resources, staffing, and funding over long periods of time.
So why would Australia voluntarily increase that burden?
A government’s first responsibility is not appearing compassionate on the international stage. Its first responsibility is protecting its citizens.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: The US/Israel strikes on Iran cross…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 95%: "A World Without Rules" — Oral Point of View Speech Revised Draft Picture this. You are asleep. It is the…
"A World Without Rules" — Oral Point of View Speech Revised Draft
Picture this.
You are asleep. It is the middle of the night. Then: a sound. An explosion. Shattering glass. The walls of your home are blown apart. Debris from the building across the street is thrown into yours.
That is not a hypothetical. That is what a resident of Tehran described to Al Jazeera reporters on the ground, just one of tens of thousands of ordinary people caught in the middle of a war they did not start, did not choose, and cannot escape.
I am here today to argue that the US-Israeli strikes on Iran crossed both legal and ethical lines, and that the justifications offered to the world simply do not hold up to scrutiny.
Let us start with the law, because the law is not a suggestion.
Since the United States and Israel launched their war against Iran, most international law experts appear to be speaking with one voice. The attacks violated Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits the use of force against states. The US and Israel produced no evidence that Iran posed an imminent threat to either of them. And neither brought the matter to the UN Security Council. This was a clear breach of international law.
The United States attempted to justify these strikes as self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter. But look at what that actually requires. Retired Navy Captain and international law advisor Dr. Tian Shiuchen is unequivocal: under the UN Charter, there is no general right of pre-emptive use of force. A future retaliation is speculation, not an armed attack. And speculation does not justify war.
So what does imminence actually mean in law? The Caroline test sets the standard: the threat must be instant, overwhelming, leaving no other means of choice, and no time for deliberation.
Instant. Overwhelming. No time for deliberation.
There was no intelligence indicating an imminent threat from Iran to the United States. And crucially — and this is the part that still strikes me — the two countries were engaged in negotiations. According to the Foreign Minister of Oman, the mediator, they were close to reaching a deal when the United States and Israel chose to strike. Launching strikes during ongoing negotiations violates the principle of good faith under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
Close to a deal. And they struck anyway.
Now let us talk about what this war has actually looked like on the ground.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: The US/Israel strikes on Iran cross…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 97.5%: "A World Without Rules" — Oral Point of View Speech Final Draft Picture this. You are asleep. It is the…
"A World Without Rules" — Oral Point of View Speech
Final Draft
Picture this.
You are asleep. It is the middle of the night. Then: a sound. An explosion. Shattering glass. The walls of your home are blown apart. Debris from the building across the street is thrown into yours.
That is not a hypothetical. That is what a resident of Tehran described to Al Jazeera reporters on the ground, just one of tens of thousands of ordinary people caught in the middle of a war they did not start, did not choose, and cannot escape.
I am here today to argue that the US-Israeli strikes on Iran crossed both legal and ethical lines, and that the justifications offered to the world simply do not hold up to scrutiny.
Let us start with the law, because the law is not a suggestion.
Since the United States and Israel launched their war against Iran, most international law experts appear to be speaking with one voice. The attacks violated Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits the use of force against states. The US and Israel produced no evidence that Iran posed an imminent threat to either of them. And neither brought the matter to the UN Security Council. This was a clear breach of international law.
The United States attempted to justify these strikes as self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter. Strip away the rhetoric, and the legal foundation collapses. Retired Navy Captain and international law advisor Dr. Tian Shiuchen is unequivocal: under the UN Charter, there is no general right of pre-emptive use of force. A future retaliation is speculation, not an armed attack. And speculation does not justify war.
What does imminence actually mean in law? According to the Caroline test, the threat must be instant, overwhelming, leaving no other means of choice, and no time for deliberation.
Instant. Overwhelming. No time for deliberation.
There was no intelligence indicating an imminent threat from Iran to the United States. And crucially, the two countries were engaged in negotiations. According to the Foreign Minister of Oman, the mediator, they were close to reaching a deal when the United States and Israel chose to strike. Launching strikes during ongoing negotiations violates the principle of good faith under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
Close to a deal. And they struck anyway.
Now let us talk about what this war has actually looked like on the ground.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: The US/Israel strikes on Iran cross…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 97.5%: Here's the full speech with every em dash replaced by more fitting punctuation: "A World Without Rules" —…
Here's the full speech with every em dash replaced by more fitting punctuation:
"A World Without Rules" — Oral Point of View Speech
Final Draft
Picture this.
You are asleep. It is the middle of the night. Then: a sound. An explosion. Shattering glass. The walls of your home are blown apart. Debris from the building across the street is thrown into yours.
That is not a hypothetical. That is what a resident of Tehran described to Al Jazeera reporters on the ground, just one of tens of thousands of ordinary people caught in the middle of a war they did not start, did not choose, and cannot escape.
I am here today to argue that the US-Israeli strikes on Iran crossed both legal and ethical lines, and that the justifications offered to the world simply do not hold up to scrutiny.
Let us start with the law, because the law is not a suggestion.
Since the United States and Israel launched their war against Iran, most international law experts appear to be speaking with one voice. The attacks violated Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits the use of force against states. The US and Israel produced no evidence that Iran posed an imminent threat to either of them. And neither brought the matter to the UN Security Council. This was a clear breach of international law.
The United States attempted to justify these strikes as self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter. Strip away the rhetoric, and the legal foundation collapses. Retired Navy Captain and international law advisor Dr. Tian Shiuchen is unequivocal: under the UN Charter, there is no general right of pre-emptive use of force. A future retaliation is speculation, not an armed attack. And speculation does not justify war.
What does imminence actually mean in law? According to the Caroline test, the threat must be instant, overwhelming, leaving no other means of choice, and no time for deliberation.
Instant. Overwhelming. No time for deliberation.
There was no intelligence indicating an imminent threat from Iran to the United States. And crucially, the two countries were engaged in negotiations. According to the Foreign Minister of Oman, the mediator, they were close to reaching a deal when the United States and Israel chose to strike. Launching strikes during ongoing negotiations violates the principle of good faith under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
Close to a deal. And they struck anyway.
Now let us talk about what this war has actually looked like on the ground.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: ISSUE: Is the “tradwife” trend…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 95%: Katy Hall’s opinion piece, published in The Sydney Morning Herald (13 August 2024), challenges the widespread…
Katy Hall’s opinion piece, published in The Sydney Morning Herald (13 August 2024), challenges the widespread criticism of the “tradwife” trend, contending that such women should not be dismissed as regressive but understood as responding rationally to systemic inequities. Writing for a progressive, largely feminist Australian audience, Hall adopts a measured yet provocative tone to reframe the debate, arguing that the issue lies not in individual choices but in a flawed social and economic system that makes such choices appealing. Through a strategic progression of ideas, the integration of compelling statistics, and the use of evocative language and visuals, Hall positions readers to reconsider their assumptions and adopt a more empathetic perspective.
Hall initially seeks to legitimise the tradwife movement by emphasising its widespread popularity, noting that related TikTok trends have amassed “almost 10 billion views.” By foregrounding this statistic early in the piece, she frames the phenomenon as culturally significant rather than marginal, challenging any inclination among readers to dismiss it as trivial. This appeal to scale not only establishes relevance but also encourages readers to view the movement as reflective of broader societal sentiments. Furthermore, Hall’s description of these women as “celebrating stereotypically feminine activities” employs neutral, even slightly positive diction, which subtly destabilises the negative connotations often associated with such roles. Rather than outright endorsing these behaviours, Hall carefully balances her tone, allowing her to maintain credibility with a feminist audience while encouraging them to reconsider whether such choices are inherently oppressive. This reframing is reinforced when she characterises criticism of tradwives as a “knee-jerk reaction,” a dismissive phrase that undermines opposing viewpoints and positions critics as reactionary rather than thoughtful. In doing so, Hall guides readers toward a more reflective stance, suggesting that the issue requires deeper consideration than surface-level condemnation.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: read a article and do an analysis of…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 82.5%: Every generation of students has been accused of taking shortcuts. From handwritten notes passed under desks…
Every generation of students has been accused of taking shortcuts. From handwritten notes passed under desks to copying homework before class, the fear that young people are avoiding real thinking is nothing new. Today, that fear has a new name: artificial intelligence.
It is easy to look at a student using AI to generate an essay and assume the worst—that they are disengaged, lazy, or unwilling to think for themselves. But this assumption may say more about our expectations than about students’ actual abilities. Many students are not replacing their thinking; they are reshaping how they approach it.
In classrooms across the country, students are using AI tools to brainstorm ideas, clarify difficult concepts, and experiment with different ways of expressing their thoughts. Rather than staring at a blank page, they are engaging in a process that is more interactive and immediate. For some, this lowers the barrier to participation and builds confidence.
VCE · Language Analysis
Language Analysis: The weight of love “No! I’ve got a…
VCE Language Analysis essay scoring 75%: In my creative piece “The Weight of Love,” I interrogate the confronting ethical dilemma between personal…
In my creative piece “The Weight of Love,” I interrogate the confronting ethical dilemma between personal safety and humanitarian ethics. This is explored through the lens of a father’s last message to an adolescent son, tailored around a “moral paradox”. My piece is written in order to resonate with individuals who’ve faced an ultimatum with no safe venture out. By leveraging juxtaposition, imagery and suspense, the father’s death serves as the beginning of a new quest rather than the end of an old one.
The avarice of modern-day pharmaceuticals is a key pillar in my narrative. Through portrayals of “maintenance-based revenue models” and “lucrative model”, the deceitfulness of such conglomerates is epitomised; in doing so, I denounce the ethics of such establishments. This corporate coldness is juxtaposed with the family life Clark lives in my story. Carefully rendering the domesticity of Clark, my text elucidates the true nature of implications associated with current-day corporate bodies, warning the readers of the insidious ramifications these entities have on one’s life.