Hello and welcome to today's lesson.

It is great to see you today.

My name is Mr. Barnsley, and today we're gonna be continuing our study of "The Strange Case of Dr.

Jekyll and Mr. Hyde." And we're gonna be specifically looking at two skills that are really important to writing really coherent essays, and they are writing excellent introductions and conclusions.

Okay, let's get started.

So by the end of today's lesson, you are gonna be able to write really well structured introductions and conclusions, thinking about them as a really important part of our overarching argument.

Now, our five key words today are all really useful words when talking about the text, "The Strange Case of Dr.

Jekyll and Mr. Hyde." They are duplicitous, so this is acting in a tricky way or saying one thing, but meaning another.

And I'm sure you can think of many moments where more than one character acts in a duplicitous way.

The second word is bourgeois, which means basically typical of middle life.

It's where people value material things, but also have very conventional attitudes to life.

So again, when we think about this text, we can think about how Stevenson is being quite critical of this bourgeois attitude.

Third word is psyche, and that is your mind and your feelings.

It's the inner you.

So, again, really useful when we're talking about Jekyll's battles with his internal desires.

Pertinent is when something is directly related to or important to a topical situation.

So when we look at our conclusions later, we'll be thinking about are there any messages that are really pertinent, really important, that come from the the novella, but might still be pertinent or important today.

And finally, facade is the front of something.

Okay, it's the outer facing.

We often use it to talk about a building's outer appearance, but we can use it also to talk about our characters.

Maybe they're presenting one facade to the world outside, but actually what's going on inside, what's going on with their psyche might be very different.

Okay, let's have a look at our learning lesson outline then.

So this lesson is all about introductions and conclusions.

It might come as no surprise that our two learning cycles today are gonna focus on, firstly, introductions and then conclusions.

So let's get started straight away with introductions.

So you are gonna be writing an introduction and conclusion to this question today, "Starting with Chapter 10, to what extent does Stevenson present Jekyll as a duplicitous character?" So pause the video and think about how would you annotate this question.

We know annotating the question before we start is really important it make sure we really understand what's being asked for us.

What would you underline and highlight in this question and why? Pause the video.

If you've got a partner, you can discuss it with them.

Otherwise, you can just think through this to yourself, Over to you.

Press play when you're done.

Yes, well done.

If you underlined that "Starting with Chapter 10," some questions may direct you to a specific part of the text that they want you to focus on.

Not all questions, but some may.

Okay, and if you do, then you must remember to talk about that chapter or that section of the text.

So this is telling us we are gonna have to talk about that final chapter, Henry Jekyll's full statement of the case.

"To what extent," again, this phrase always tells me that I'm gonna have to do some evaluating, some weighing up, some maybe looking at more than one perspective.

"Stevenson," I'm underlining this 'cause it reminds me that I've always got to focus on the writer's intention.

Okay, it might be asking me about a character or a theme, but if I don't centre all that through the writer and their intentions and their perspec- and what the messages they were trying to, they were trying to put across in their text, then I'm gonna be missing a trick and my analysis won't be anywhere near as sophisticated.

Okay, "Jekyll," I'm gonna highlight this because it's gonna be a reminder that this is the character that I'm focusing on.

It doesn't mean I can't talk about other characters, but I do need to make sure I have a really clear focus on Jekyll.

And this idea that I'm gonna be looking at is duplicity.

Basically, I'm gonna be focusing on this idea that characters, particularly Jekyll, you know, not always being truthful.

So introductions, when we write a really good introduction, they can follow this three-part structure, and this structure moves from the general to the specific.

Okay, so there are three parts to it, often broken down into three sentences, and we start with something really quite general and we move to something really specific.

So our general is a sentence about the text as the whole.

It's always worthwhile starting by opening with a sentence about the text, the whole, what's the text about, who wrote it.

Okay, we then want to move and have a a slightly more specific sentence which focuses on either the chapter or the section of the text, the themes, the ideas, the characters, whatever it is that the question is asking us to focus on.

But then we move to our most specific, and we finish with our most specific piece, which is the thesis statement and that's our overarching argument.

So we go text as a whole to a sentence about the focus of the question to our very specific argument that we are working on in our essay.

That's the structure.

Let's have a look at this in action then, shall we? Well, Lucas has been writing an introduction to this question, it's "Starting with Chapter 7, to what extent does Stevenson present Jekyll as a sympathetic character?" So let's have a look at Lucas's first draught of his instruction.

"Stevenson's novella tells the story of a man who creates a new, evil alter ego.

In Chapter 7, we see that Jekyll is feeling sorry for himself.

This might make a reader feel sympathetic for him." Here's the feedback that he was given.

"This statement is almost too general." Yes, we said we want a general statement about the text, but it could be, this could go in absolutely any question.

Okay, it doesn't really tell me about the question that I'm being asked.

So I think Lucas's opening statement about the text as a whole could be modified to be a little bit more specific and closely linked to the question.

So he's done really well for mentioning the chapter, the character, and the idea.

So we know this is a question about Chapter 7, about Jekyll, about sympathy, but it still feels very vague.

I think he could be a little bit more specific here.

Okay, tell me a little bit more about why Jekyll is feeling sorry for himself in Chapter 7.

Okay, but be a little bit more specific.

And finally, this isn't a thesis.

Hopefully you've already done some work on thesis statements, so you can remember what they are.

But this isn't one.

Okay, it needs to be an overarching argument that can be proven through many moments in the novella, not just in this one specific moment in Chapter 7.

Okay, so Lucas has given, taken our feedback onboard, and he has redrafted, and he's written this much more impressive introduction.

Let's read through it together.

"'The Strange Case of Dr.

Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' by Robert Lewis Stevenson is a gothic novella exploring Victorian bourgeois values of respectability and restraint and the impact of repressing desire on the human psyche.

In the chapter 'Incident at the Window,' Jekyll is presented as an almost sympathetic figure, a tortured soul whose personality is starting to disintegrate.

By illustrating the internal struggle Jekyll is experiencing, Stevenson forces the reader to consider how sympathetic they feel for him.

Is Jekyll's torment his own fault? Or is it a reflection of how the value system forced people to live duplicitous lives by hiding aspects of their personalities from the public?" Wow, what an improvement.

This is such a sophisticated introduction.

Can you tell me though, how has Lucas responded to feedback? What improvements can you see and where? Pause the video, have a discussion, and press play when you're ready to continue.

Okay, I heard some great ideas there.

Let's shine a spotlight in some of those things that you might have said.

So well done if have you said this opening statement about the novella is interesting and it's detailed and it starts to link to this question.

It's, you know, it gives me a little bit more information than this is a book written by Stevenson.

Okay, it tells me this is a book about values of respectability and the impact that this had on humans and their inner them, the human psyche, The sentence about the chapter is more specific and it starts to also consider why Jekyll could be conceived, perceived as being sympathetic.

So "In the chapter 'Incident at the Window,' Jekyll is presented as an almost sympathetic figure." He's "a tortured soul whose personality is starting to disintegrate." Okay, it's just expanded on that first sentence that Lucas wrote in his first draught, and it's starting to give me a little bit more detail.

Now, this is a really specific thesis.

It focuses on the idea of sympathy, but it gives me the opportunity to explore the writer's intention.

I'm taking this idea of sympathy and saying, okay, why might Stevenson have presented Jekyll as potentially sympathetic? I think it's because he's asking questions of his reader.

He's trying to make us think, okay, do we feel sympathetic? Is it all Jekyll's fault? That might be one way, but some people might feel sympathetic and is that because of the society that Jekyll lives in, where men were forced to behave in these duplicitous ways because they were forced to hide aspects of their personality from the public.

A really, really specific thesis.

But give me plenty of things to talk about in my essay.

And actually, you might have noticed here that throughout each of my three sentences, you see, they are all linked to my thesis.

So this idea of respectability and restraint, this idea on repressing desire, being a tortured soul, internal struggle, the value system, all of this links to the argument that I'm gonna be making about Jekyll.

Are we sympathetic for him because of the society he lives in? This is a fantastic introduction.

So well done if you managed to pick out some of these brilliant things that Lucas did.

Okay, let's do a check then, check that we are understanding how introductions work.

I would like you to pause the video and I'd like you to tell me can you identify each section of the three-part structure of an introduction? Pause the video and press play when you're ready to continue.

Right, let's have a look at what you said.

Well done if you said that the general, the first thing you should do, is a sentence about the whole text.

Well done then if you said a sentence focusing on the theme or the character or an idea.

And well done if you said the final part of an introduction should always be that overarching thesis statement, our overarching argument.

Fantastic if you got that right.

Okay, over to you now.

It's time for you to write your own introduction, answering the following question, "Starting with Chapter 10, to what extent has Jekyll been presented as a duplicitous character?" Three parts of this introduction.

Give this a go.

Give yourself plenty of time, pause the video, good luck, and press play when you're ready to continue.

Great work there.

And some, I really, I saw it was really nice when some of you rewinding the video slightly, looking at Lucas's example and see if there were words or phrases that you could use in your own.

Okay, it's now time for you to self-assess your introduction.

So I want you to use the three-part structure to guide you.

So do you have a general statement about the text which links to the question? Do you have a general statement about either the chapter or the character which links to the idea of duplicity? Or do you have, and do you have a thesis statement which can be used to develop throughout your essay? All right, pause the video, reflect on your own, and if you need to make any changes to your introduction, now's the time to do so.

Over to you.

Press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic job.

Time for us to now move on to our conclusions.

So whilst an introduction moves from the general to the specific, a conclusion moves from the specific to the general.

So we're gonna flip that triangle on its head.

So we're always gonna start our introduction by a really specific response to our thesis.

Thinking about that overarching question that we, an argument that we set in our introduction.

How have we shown that, you know, have we shown that we were right? How have we shown it? How can we summarise what has happened in our essay to prove that that thesis is correct? We then need to start broadening out and thinking, okay, well what have we learned over the course of this essay about the writer's purpose? What was Stevenson trying to do? What have we learned from Stevenson? And then finally, that general.

What's the impact of this novella today? Why are we still learning about it in schools? What are the important messages that are gonna impact our lives going forward? So when we consider the impact of a text today, what we're really thinking about is are there any timeless or pertinent messages? Are the messages that are still relevant today? So I want you to pause the video and have a think.

What are the messages from.

What are the messages from "The Strange Case of Dr.

Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" that might still be relevant today? Pause the video and if you've got a partner, you can discuss it with them.

Otherwise, you can just think through this question to yourself.

Press play when you're ready to continue.

Okay, welcome back.

I heard some really great discussions there.

What I want to do now is a little check for understanding and see if you identified some of the key ideas and the key ways that this novella might be considered timeless or the message is still very pertinent today.

So I've got four examples on the screen.

I want you to decide, there might be more than one here, which of these are, yeah, these are messages that were written by, that were maybe Stevenson's intention at the time of writing that are still really important for us today.

So is it A, it taps into the deep psychological fears of the human psyche? Is it B, it's a realistic representation of scientific development? Is it C, every human has an alter ego like Hyde? Is it D, it shines a light on hypocrisy in society? Pause the video, have a think, and press play when you are ready to continue.

Remember, there may be more than one.

Okay, welcome back.

Well done if you identified A and D.

I think both of these are examples about why this text is still is so successful, why it's so loved and well read, why we still study it in schools.

First of all, it taps into these very real fears about human nature.

This idea of good and evil.

This idea of kind of, kind of how some people might feel have to repress themselves and can't be their true selves.

So these ideas are still relevant today.

People still battle with these things today.

It also shines a light on hypocrisy in society.

This is something that hasn't necessarily changed over time.

Perhaps you can think of some examples where you can see people in society being hypocritical, behaving in one way or telling people to behave in one way, but actually not behaving the way that they expect of others.

Okay, both of those are relevant ideas, fears, or interesting topics that could still be discussed today.

Hence why this is such a timeless, classic novella.

Okay, so we've thought about what the structure of a conclusion is.

Let's have a look at Lucas's conclusion.

"Ultimately, it's easy to see why some readers will feel sympathetic to Jekyll, who Stevenson arguably presents as a victim of a repressive society.

Throughout this timeless classic, Stevenson demonstrates the upper classes are duplicitous in the manner that they view themselves and how they treat others, thus creating a punitive society," a society that punishes, "where they are both the gatekeeper and victims to repressive social values." So really interesting idea here that the upper classes are repressed by the societal values, but they also judge others, which kind of creates this sense of hypocrisy.

"Stevenson's novella encourages readers to cast a critical eye over societal systems of morality, asking questions still pertinent today, are these more of a facade than a reality?" Okay, pause the video then, have a discussion.

Why is Lucas's conclusion, which is fantastic, why is it so successful? Pause video, have a think, and press play when you're ready to continue.

Okay, let's have a look.

Well, we have a very specific response to the thesis here.

So he's saying, look, I think, you know, I think Jekyll is sympathetic because he's a victim of repressed society.

Okay, notice though, at no point does Lucas say, "I think this," he words it very carefully, but that's really what he's saying.

I think Jekyll can be viewed as sympathetic because he's a victim of a oppressive society.

And that's kind of summarising, going back to that thesis that he talked about.

Like, can we feel sorry for Jekyll? Now, focus on the writer's overall purpose.

So what is the writer's overall purpose? Well, Lucas is arguing that perhaps Stevenson's overall purpose is to be really critical of those people in upper class society who kind of created this expectation or were part of upholding these expectations on how people should behave, which caused people to behave, to feel repressed by these exceptionally high standards.

So it's here about us being Stevenson's purpose being critical.

And finally, the impact of the text today.

Is Stevenson's message still relevant today? Well, arguably it is.

Arguably, people maybe should question when we're being told to behave in a certain way and expectations, we should say, "Well, okay, is everyone behaving in this certain way?" He's asking us to be critical.

He's not saying, or I don't think he's saying that we shouldn't follow moral codes, that we shouldn't behave in a respectable way.

But he's asking us to say, "Look.

Look beyond.

Is everyone who's saying you should behave that way, are they all behaving that way as well?" So really kind of critical question Stevenson might be, that might still be relevant today.

Okay, check for understanding now.

Which part or which section of my conclusion is missing? Okay, pause the video, have a think, and press play when you're ready to continue.

Yes, that is, of course, impact of the text today.

Well done if you've got that right.

Okay, over to you now then.

You are gonna now write your conclusion.

So remember, you are looking at this question.

You're not looking at sympathy.

You are looking at the question, "Starting with Chapter 10, to what extent has Jekyll been presented as a duplicitous character?" Okay, pause the video.

Remember, three steps to your conclusion.

Give yourself plenty of time on this.

Press play when you are ready to continue.

Okay, welcome back.

Time for a little bit of self-assessment now.

Three questions.

Do you have a specific response to your thesis? Have you focused on the writer's overall purpose? Have you explored the impact of the text today? Pause the video, reread your conclusion, and check it against these three questions.

Remember, now is the time to make any changes if you need to.

Okay, great work today.

Not only have we written some fantastic introductions and conclusions, we've had some really interesting discussions about Stevenson's messages and whether they are relevant today.

On the screen, you can see a summary of everything that we have learned.

Do pause the video if you need to.

Read through each of these carefully and there's any of that that you don't understand, go back and watch the video again or certain sections of the video.

But please make sure you feel really confident with all of this before you move on to the next lesson.

It's been great learning with you all today.

I hope you have a fantastic rest of the day whatever you are doing, and I hope to see you all soon in a future lesson.

Goodbye.