Hello there.

Welcome to today's lesson.

My name is Mr. Barnsley.

It's fantastic to see you today.

Okay, in today's lesson, we are gonna be continuing to explore the novela, "The Strange case of Dr.

Jekyll and Mr. Hyde." Today, we're gonna be looking at some work, some work that's been completed by our Oak pupils, and we're gonna be seeing if we can refine these, improve these, making them more evaluative.

Okay, I think it's time to get started.

Let's go.

So the outcome of today's lesson is that you will be able to refine an analytical responses and you're gonna make them more evaluative.

All right, let's have a look at some of the keywords that we're gonna be coming across in today's lesson.

So the first is that word that you'd have seen in the outcome, to evaluate.

Other words are gonna be really useful words because they are really useful when we are talking about the text.

And you will see them in the pupils' work that we're looking at today, and they are ominously, foreboding, bleak, and irony.

Should we have a look at what all of these words mean then? So evaluate, a really important part of our outcome today is assessing or judging the quality or the importance of something.

So when we are writing our own analytical responses, when we are looking at a text, we want to evaluate the success of it, okay? And we're gonna be looking at how we can improve some pupils' work to make it more evaluative.

Okay, the other words all really useful and used for describing Stevenson's novella, and you will see them in your pupils' work today.

So ominously means in a threatening or sinister manner.

It's suggesting some kind of future trouble.

Foreboding is a feeling that something bad will happen, a premonition.

Bleak is something desolate, grim, lacking in hope, lacking of all cheerfulness.

And irony is a situation where the opposite of what expected happens.

All right, keep your eye out for these words in today's lesson and let's see if you might be able to use them in your own writing.

So there are two learning cycles in today's lesson.

Firstly, we're gonna be looking at some compelling evidence.

So we're gonna think about how we use quotation and how we talk about quotation successfully in evaluative responses.

And then we're gonna move on to being tentative.

So let's start with our first learning cycle then, shall we? Okay, we are gonna look at the main body paragraph.

So this is from kind of the middle of someone's essay where they've written an introduction.

They're now moving on to their main argument.

They've been answering the question, how does Stevenson use Jekyll and his creation, Hyde, to explore ideas around the dual nature of man? This might be a question that you've looked at in previous lessons.

Fantastic if it is.

You can compare your own writing to the writing of your own pupils.

So this pupil has been writing a response to this question, and this was their first draught.

They wrote, "Stevenson uses a metaphor in chapter 10 to illustrate how Jekyll struggles with the reality of the dual nature of man.

In his confession at the end of the novella, Jekyll writes that he had been doomed to such a dreadful shipwreck.

That man is not truly one, but truly two.

By comparing his conflict, wrestling with his inner desires as a dreadful shipwreck, Jekyll is painted as an almost sympathetic character, a man who is drowning in the expectations of society." Now, this is not a bad response at all.

There's some really nice ideas in here.

There's some really nice analysis and starting to dive into that quotation, some nice inferences being made.

They've recognised which language techniques, which methods Stevenson has used.

So there's some good stuff in here.

However, that doesn't mean it can't be improved.

So the pupil has been given some feedback and now they've redrafted their response.

Let's have a look at how the improvements they have made.

So they wrote, "At the start of Jekyll's written confession, Stevenson depicts the protagonist as an almost sympathetic figure conflicted by the reality of the dual nature of man.

Upon the realising that man is not truly one, but truly two, Jekyll ominously declares that he has been doomed and his life has become a dreadful shipwreck.

The foreboding adjective 'doomed' implies Jekyll felt his dual nature was out of his control, perhaps trying to justify the creation of Hyde.

However, Stevenson's use of the bleak metaphor, dreadful shipwreck, paints a sympathetic image of a man drowning, like a ship in the ocean, as a result of the strict moral code expected of upper class society.

Although there is a sense of irony here as Hyde ultimately becomes the storm, which leads to Jekyll's downfall." Okay, so I hope you can see that whilst the first response that we looked at was great and had some lovely ideas, this is definitely an improvement.

What I want you to think about then is what feedback do you think was given to this pupil that enabled them to write such a successful redraft? Why don't you pause the video and if you've got a partner, you can talk through this together, that would be great.

You can work in pairs, but don't worry if you're working by yourself.

You can absolutely do this independently.

Just pause the video and think through this question.

Okay, that question one more time for you then.

What feedback do you think was given to this pupil, which enables them to write this successful draught? Okay, pause the video, over to you, and press play when you're ready to continue.

Okay, welcome back, some fantastic discussions there.

So you can see that as a reminder of the question that they were answering.

How does Jekyll, sorry, how does Stevenson even use Jekyll and his creation, Hyde, to explore ideas around the dual nature of man? Okay, let's have a look at some of the things that you might have said.

So first of all, you might have looked at this initial topic sentence that was written in the first draught.

Stevenson uses a metaphor in chapter 10 to illustrate how Jekyll struggles with the reality of the dual nature of man.

You might have seen that and thought that's not the best topic sentence.

And actually, so they might have had some feedback along these lines that topic sentences are always better when they focus on the writer's intention rather than the methods that the writer uses.

This is because if we just focus on methods like we did in that initial topic sentence, we're kind of boxing ourself in.

It's telling us that our whole paragraph has to be about this one specific metaphor, this one specific method that Stevenson's used in chapter 10.

It gives me nowhere to go.

It gives me nowhere to link between ideas.

So actually when we shift that and we focus on intention, we get a topic sentence like this.

"At the start of Jekyll's written confession, Stevenson depicts the protagonist as an almost sympathetic figure, conflicted by the reality of the dual nature of man." Now this is still giving me a focus.

It's telling me I'm gonna be looking at Jekyll's written confession.

So I'm still gonna be focusing predominantly on chapter 10, but I've got so many more ideas, so many more quotations that I'll be able to bring into this analysis because I'm looking at this or I'm finding evidence that's gonna help me argue that Jekyll is kind of almost sympathetic, but he's certainly very conflicted.

He's very confused about this duality that lives inside him.

So hopefully, you can see comparing that first topic sentence to that second one, by focusing on intention rather than method, we give ourselves a lot, lot more to analyse and more of a chance to succeed and say brilliant things.

Okay, let's have a look at some other feedback that you might have, you might have noticed this pupil was given.

So let's look at this section of the original piece of writing.

"By comparing his conflict, wrestling with his inner desires as a dreadful shipwreck, Jekyll is painted as an almost sympathetic character, a man who is drowning in the expectations of society." So we can see here, this is a response to that initial topic sentence where we just said, we're just talking about one metaphor.

Actually, when we're using evidence, particularly compelling evidence, we want to include a range of quotations.

That's gonna be a lot easier to do now that we've improved our topic sentence.

However, and this is kind of thinking of our outcome about being evaluative, using adjectives is a really useful way of evaluating the effect of specific methods.

So not only do I want to use a range of quotations, when I'm talking about those quotations and ideally, I'll be saying, you know, the methods that Stevenson has used, I also want to use adjectives to help me be more evaluative.

Let's have a look what that means.

Let's have a look at that in practise then, shall we? Okay, so the student used that feedback and they rewrote, "the foreboding adjective doomed." Okay, I could have just said the adjective doomed implies that Jekyll felt his dual nature was out of his control.

That's what the pupil could have written.

But by inserting that adjective "foreboding," it gives an extra level of analysis on the adjectives.

It tells me that the adjective "doomed" implies that there is a terrible thing on the horizon.

Okay? So I have done kind of a second level of analysis on the impact of that adjective by just using that word, by putting that other adjective in front of it.

Okay, so by including that word "foreboding," I've done an extra level of analysis without having to write a full sentence.

I've not have to say the adjective "doomed" is foreboding because da da da da.

I can just squeeze it in there before the method that I'm talking about and I've elevated my response, added an extra layer of analysis, and been more evaluative.

Let's see if you can spot where else the pupil does this in the paragraph.

So the foreboding adjective "doomed" implies Jekyll felt his dual nature was out of his control, perhaps trying to justify the creation of Hyde.

However, Stevenson's use of the bleak metaphor, dreadful shipwreck, paints a sympathetic image of a man drowning like a ship in the ocean as a result of the strict moral code expected of upper class society.

Did you spot where else the pupil did this? Of course, adding that adjective "bleak" before the metaphor tells me, adds that extra layer of analysis where I'm saying this metaphor lacks hope.

It paints a really desolate image, okay? So not only am I saying, you know, it helps me with that inference that I make that this creates a sympathetic image because I'm saying, look, this is a really bleak picture that Jekyll is living through.

This is a really desolate, this lacks hope and therefore, that makes us feel sympathetic to him.

So hopefully, this second bit of feedback that you can see about adding that evaluative adjective before you mention the method can really, really help elevate your response.

Okay, let's check our understanding then, shall we? So true or false, placing a relevant adjective when you are introducing analysis of a language device or method can make your analysis more sophisticated.

Is that true or false? Pause the video, have a think, and press play when you're ready to continue.

Well done if you said that was true.

Let's now justify that, shall we? An adjective can be used to evaluate the effect of the author's language device in a succinct manner, or is it this demonstrates your ability to use sophisticated vocabulary as part of your analysis? Pause the video, have a think, press play when you are ready to continue.

Yes, really well done if you said A, an adjective can be used to evaluate the effect of the author's language device, but most importantly, in a really succinct manner, it avoids me having to write a full extra sentence.

I can just place it in there before the method, before the language device.

All right, well done if you got that correct.

All right, over to you now for our first task.

So we know John has been answering this question, "How does Stevenson use Jekyll and his creation, Hyde, to explore the ideas around the dual nature of man?" I want you to use the feedback to improve John's response.

So let's have a look at what John wrote.

"Stevenson uses the extended metaphor of weather to illustrate the dangerous aspect of Jekyll using Hyde to explore his immoral desires.

Hyde unleashes a storm of blows, killing Carew in chapter four, illustrating how Jekyll loses control of his creation." So not a bad idea here.

This idea that he wants to argue that Jekyll, you know, it is really dangerous for Jekyll to use Hyde to explore his immoral desires.

It's not necessarily bad that Jekyll has this duality within inside of him, but the way he chooses to act, the way he choose to act on that duality is incredibly dangerous.

And we know this because it results in the death of Sir Danvers Carew.

All right, so nice ideas, but let's see the feedback again.

Let's remind us of the feedback.

Well let's make sure John's topic sentence should focus on intention, not method.

And let's make sure his evidence includes a range of quotations.

Only used that one word storm there.

And again, can we use adjectives before the device, before the method, to evaluate the effect? All right, I'm gonna pause.

I think it's time now to pause the video over to you to rewrite John's response and remember to press play when you are done and you are ready to continue.

Welcome back, some great work there and I was really, really, really pleased to see all of those of you who checked through your improvements for spelling, punctuation, and grammar before you put your pen down.

That was fantastic to see.

All right, before we move on to the next part of today's lesson, let's just reflect on that writing that we have now just done.

So we're gonna use coaching questions to identify how you've improved John's response.

Okay, so for that first bit of feedback that your topic sentence should focus on intention, not devices.

I want you to ask yourself this.

Where in your topic sentence do you mention the writer's intention? Where do you speak about Stevenson and what he's trying to do? And can you double check that your topic sentence is free from reference to methods? I don't want to see anything in there about metaphors, similes, adjectives.

I don't want to see that mentioned in your topic sentence.

So use those two questions.

Pause the video, look back at your topic sentence.

Have you managed to do those two things? And if you haven't, don't worry.

Now's the time to make some more improvements.

Okay, pause the video, over to you.

Press play when you're ready to continue.

Great work.

Let's look at that second piece of feedback then, shall we? Evidence should include a range of quotations, using adjectives to evaluate the effect of specific methods.

Some coaching questions for you then.

Where have you used more than one quotation to support that topic sentence? And where have you used adjectives to evaluate the effect of those specific methods? All right, again, over to you.

Pause the video, see if you can answer these two questions when looking at the work that you have done.

And if you can't, now is the time to make your improvements.

All right, pause the video, give this a go, and press play when you're ready to continue.

All right, time for us to move on to our second part of today's lesson, and this is all about being tentative.

Okay, we're gonna look now at two more pupil responses and we're gonna compare them.

Let's start by looking at John's.

So John wrote, "Stevenson presents Jekyll as a completely selfish individual who puts his own desire to explore his dual nature over the safety of others.

In chapter four, Hyde hails a storm of blows on the unsuspecting Carew, mauling the MP to death.

The vicious semantic field of weather illustrates Jekyll's lack of care for others, which is further highlighted by the fact he continues to transform into the monstrous Hyde after this horrific crime." All right, we're gonna compare this.

So think about to yourself, what do you like about this? Was this done well? Is there anything you can see in this response that you think I can already see areas where I might improve it? Let's just take a moment.

Take it in.

Right, let's read the second response.

This is Lucas's response.

He wrote, "Arguably, Stevenson highlights Jekyll's selfish nature through the protagonist's apparent decision to prioritise exploring his own dual nature over the safety of others.

Indeed, in chapter four, Hyde hails a storm of blows on the unsuspecting Carew, mauling the MP to death.

It could be argued that the vicious semantic field of weather, coupled with his continued transformations to Hyde, could illustrate Jekyll's lack of care for others.

However, some may view Jekyll's decision to lock himself away, like some disconsulate prisoner in chapter seven, as a sign of both Jekyll's remorse and his internal struggle with duality." All right, whose analysis felt more confident to you? Was it John or was it Lucas? All right, pause the video if you've got a partner that you may wish to discuss with them.

Otherwise you can think through this by yourself and obviously if you want to look at John's paragraph, then do please just rewind the video slightly.

Okay, pause the video, have a discuss, have a think about whose analysis is more confident and why, and press play when you are ready to continue.

All right, some really nice discussions there and really impressive to hear people using specific words and phrases from the pupil's response to help them justify their decisions.

Okay, let's compare the discussions we just had with the Oak pupils then, shall we? So Aisha said, "Personally, I found John's argument more confident.

He had a really clear viewpoint and he felt strongly about Jekyll's selfishness.

Lucas felt less confident at times.

He sounded unsure.

He used words like 'could' or 'may.

'" Let's see what Jacob said.

Jacob said, "I disagree.

Lucas's use of tentative language produced a more confident analysis because he didn't lock himself into one specific interpretation.

Phrases like 'arguably,' and 'it could be argued,' suggest Lucas is evaluating different arguments." All right, pause the video.

Who do you agree with? Aisha or Jacob? Who do you think has kind of nailed this on what confident analysis should look like? Pause the video, have a think, and press play when you're ready to continue.

Yeah, well done if you said Jacob.

I can see why I can understand Aisha's viewpoint that it sounds really confident when you have a viewpoint and you stick to it and you just argue it and you are really kind of definitive in everything that you say.

But I do think Jacob is right here.

Actually confident and particularly evaluative analysis when we are writing essays does look at weighing of different arguments.

Does look at acknowledging that not all people will interpret a text in the same way.

So this language that Aisha says sounds unconfident, this could, this may, is actually what we would call tentative language and can be used alongside words like arguably.

And it could be argued to show that hey, different people might have different interpretations here and some people might find Jekyll incredibly selfish and that's completely understandable if they do.

But others may say, okay, now I can see that perspective, but why don't we look at this perspective? Well actually says actually he was quite remorseful of the crimes that were committed and actually by locking himself away, he was trying to protect the world or he potentially, arguably, was trying to protect the world from the dangers of Hyde.

So well done if you identified that like Jacob using tentative language actually produces more confident analysis overall.

Okay, let's check our understanding then.

True or false, tentative language makes you sound unsure in your analysis and is best avoided.

Is that true or is that false? Pause the video, have a think, and press play when you're ready to continue.

That is, of course, false.

Well done if you got that right.

Let's now justify this.

Tentative language allows you to extend your argument, it makes it sound more sophisticated, or tentative language allows you to be more evaluative, weighing up different arguments.

Pause the video, have a think about which of those is the right justification, and press play when you're ready to continue.

Well done if you said B, it allows us to be more evaluative because we weigh up different arguments.

All right then, let's see if we can identify where there is tentative language in Lucas's response.

All right, we've read through this together already, so I'm not gonna read it to you again.

Why don't you pause the video and have a little bit of a think, have a discuss if you've got a partner or just think through this independently.

Can you see any examples of tentative language in Lucas's response? All right, over to you.

Pause the video and press play when you're ready to continue.

Great job on that.

Hopefully you found lots of examples there.

So you can see them now highlighted in teal, arguably, apparent decision, could, we see that a couple of times, some may view.

So well done if you spotted that tentative language.

Okay, over to you now for our final task in today's lesson.

You are gonna rewrite John's paragraph below.

Okay, so this is a new paragraph so we are gonna want to improve it.

Let's quickly read through it together.

"By the end of the novella, Stevenson depicts Jekyll as a sympathetic character destroyed by the dual nature of man.

Stevenson uses an ominous simile like the Babylonian finger on the wall to be spelling out the letters of my judgement to describe Jekyll's fear on realising he could no longer control his transformations.

The biblical illusion implies Jekyll is fully aware of his imminent downfall like King Belshaazar.

No matter his crimes, all readers will have a sense of sympathy for this tormented soul." All right, so this, John here is looking at a simile from chapter 10 from the end of the novella where Stevenson uses a biblical illusion.

This reference to the writing being on the wall, your fate has already been cast, and basically shows that Jekyll, by the end of the novella, knows that he's completely lost control of his transformation and that he's now doomed.

All right, what I want to do to improve John's paragraph, I want you to make sure you include tentative language here.

John is being very, very specific that there is only one interpretation here, that all readers are gonna have a sense of sympathy for Jekyll.

So I want us to be a bit more tentative and when we start being tentative, that's gonna allow us to introduce a different viewpoint.

So I want you to extend Jun's response by thinking, okay, might other people, might people view this slightly differently? All right, pause the video, over to you, and press play when you're ready to continue.

Really, really great work there.

It was fantastic to see so many of you writing with confidence.

All right, what I'd like you to do now is if you've got a partner that you're gonna share your work with them and you're gonna use Oak's pupil's guidance to have a discussion about the improvements you've made.

So you can see Aisha saying, look, here are some examples of the tentative language I've used.

And then when you are looking at your partner's work, I want you to or when you're explaining your work to your partner, sorry, I want you to say why this allowed you to be more evaluative.

What different perspectives did you look at? So what was the second interpretation that you considered? You can see that in Jacob's work.

If you're working independently, this might be a fantastic opportunity to find someone else in your household and show them the brilliant work that you've done.

But if there isn't someone, and then don't worry, you can just work through these questions yourself and just say to yourself, look, what tentative language have I used and what different perspectives has it allowed me to analyse? All right, pause the video, have those discussions, reflect on your work, and press play when you're ready to continue.

Okay, that's it.

We've reached the end of today's lesson, some fantastic work done today.

It was a pleasure learning alongside you.

On the screen, there is a summary of everything we have covered.

Let's quickly go through that together.

So we looked at topic sentences and we talked about how they should focus on intention, not methods.

We thought about how we can use judicious quotations from across the text to create compelling arguments.

We talked about how using an adjective to introduce a writer's method allows us, allows succinct evaluation of the effect.

And finally, we discussed how tentative language should be used to evaluate different interpretations of a text.

If there's anything in that list that you are struggling with, then please do go back and re-watch sections of the video.

I want you to leave this lesson feeling really, really, really confident.

All right, it's been a pleasure having you in today's lesson, and I hope to see you in one of our lessons in the future.

Have a great day.

See you all soon.

Goodbye.