A "Literature" & "Literature and Language" - an explanation!

[Sandwich]

So this new change from:
Language A1 & Language A2 --> Language A: Literature, Language A: Literature and Language and Language A: Literature and Performance
... it's a bit confusing and I think especially confusing for people doing the new syllabus who aren't clear about what's going on in their own minds - and are now being extra-confused by seeing old content on this forum! So, read on and hopefully understand a bit more about what's going on...

Quick Reference...
1. Background">Background
2. So what's happened to A2?">So what's happened to A2?
3. What's the difference between Lit&Lang and the old A1 course?">What's the difference between Lit&Lang and the old A1 course?
4. What's covered by "Language"?">What's covered by "Language"?
5. How is the assessment different for L&L?">How is the assessment different for L&L?
6. Is the Literature course any different from the old A1?">Is the Literature course any different from the old A1?
7. Which should I do, Literature or Language&Literature?">Which should I do, Literature or Language&Literature?
8. Will Universities care if I do L&L instead of the Literature course?">Will Universities care if I do L&L instead of the Literature course?
9. Should I be worried about doing a course my teachers have never taught before?">Should I be worried about doing a course my teachers have never taught before?
10. What are World Literature Essays?">What are World Literature Essays?
11. What is Literature and Performance?">What is Literature and Performance?

USEFUL LINKS:
Language A: Literature (Syllabus)
Language A: Language and Literature (Syllabus)


1. Background : A1 and A2, or how it used to be BEFORE "Literature & Language"...

So, back in the day (until very recently, I believe the first candidates for this strange new syllabus are taking their exams in May 2013) the syllabus had languages split into 4 categories. A1, A2, B and AB. Your A1 language was your compulsory main language in which you were fluent, technically, and this formed "World Literature" which is what this forum used to be for, and many of the old posts regard this.
Your A2 language was an optional language in which you were not originally a native speaker but in which you were highly competent, and doing an A2 language meant you could get a bilingual diploma. For instance if I were German but studied in the UK and did all my exams in English, I might want to take A1 German and A2 English. Clearly doing B English is to seriously underestimate the level of my English!

2. So what's happened to A2?

To very roughly describe it, if you consider that the old A1 course is now called Language A "Literature", then the old A2 course for highly competent but foreign speakers is now called Language A "Literature and Language". So the A2 language level has been promoted so that now native speakers can take what used to be A2 but yet still count it as their main (previously A1) language. Confusing? Well in short, what used to be the optional A2 course can now be taken as an A1 course and fulfil your compulsory main language requirement.

3. What's the difference between Lit&Lang and the old A1 course?

The main difference is actually in the title. It's not just about Literature any more. The old A1 course was 100% literature and analysis, and therefore a more complex and challenging course than A2 which required a much higher level of language proficiency. The new Lit+Lang course, however, is not just about literature but a strange kind of 4-part hybrid:
2 parts are still Literature-based, although you have to study much less literature (also less world literature) and less intensely, and 2 parts which are now based on "Language".
To use an IB-related analogy, it's a bit like doing SL Maths versus Maths Studies.

4. What's covered by "Language"?

For people who haven't taken English/(Other!) Language as a course separate from Literature before, Language can be cynically summed up as the study of the bleeding obvious. In the new L+L course it's going to be split into two like so:
Part 1 (Language in a cultural context) to include the language of gender, sexuality, political power, history and evolution of the language, multilingualism, bilingualism, identity etc.
Part 2 (Language and mass communication) to include textual bias, persuasive language, stereotypes, media institutions (that's posh speak for TV Channels, internet search engines...)
Sources for these are not taken from literature but from day-to-day things like adverts, recipe books and posters.
This basically means dippy stuff like discussing gender issues in an article called "Mother, Wife, Career-woman and maid - what is a woman's work?" - identifying the stance of the article and how language is used to express an opinion. Hard to believe, but that's a real example from the syllabus.
So yes, if you've never done "Language" before, be not afraid. I don't think it's going to test you too much!

5. How is the assessment different for L+L?

For L+L (HL) you must do:
INTERNALLY
- an oral commentary (15 mins)
- an interactive group/class oral which is individually assessed
EXTERNALLY
- a Written Assignment (Part 1) a creative response (Part 2) a critical response, both of 800-1,000 words
- Paper 1 Written Exam, comparative analysis of 2 unseen texts (2 hrs)
- Paper 2 Written Exam, Literary Essay (2hrs)
Plus 6 literary texts overall.

For L+L (SL) you must do:
INTERNALLY
- an oral commentary (15 mins)
- an interactive group/class oral which is individually assessed
EXTERNALLY
- a Written Assignment (Part 1) a creative response of 800-1,000 words
- Paper 1 Written Exam, an analysis of one of two unseen texts (1.5hrs)
- Paper 2 Written Exam, Literary Essay (1.5hrs)
Plus 4 literary texts overall.

So to sum up the difference between Literature versus L+L, you do less texts, less extensive and much shorter analytical coursework (indeed at SL you do none at all) BUT you have to do compulsory creative writing. Roughly speaking.

6. Is the Literature course any different from the old A1?

They're actually very similar. Two major differences:
1. the IOC (Oral Commentary) is now a 10-minute commentary on poetry specifically and then a discussion on one of the other 2 works studied [for HL] and for SL just the 10-minute commentary on an extract from one of the two texts studied.
2. the World Lit essays are gone! These have been replaced with a single ambiguously named "Written Assignment" that consists of a 1,200-1,500 word literary essay (so a bit like the old-school WL2 essay) on a single work studied from Part 1, accompanied by a 300-400 word reflective statement. There is no comparative essay.

7. Which should I do, Literature or Language&Literature?

Language & Literature is probably the one to go for if you struggle with your main language or have always hated it and just want to do an easier version. Or, in fact, if you would have wanted to take the old A2 course! To be honest I'm not sure why they scrapped A2 it was very popular and well-liked. It also took into account the fact that it wasn't your first language. Anyway! If your main language has never been the thing for you, certainly consider L+L.

If you want to study English/your language at University, you really like English, hate waffly hit-your-head-against-a-brick-wall-obvious crap about how we are swayed by advertising (join the club...), love literature, dislike creative writing OR are just very proficient in your language and want to take a course to challenge yourself, do Literature.
(Both of these are based on my opinion )

8. Will Universities care if I do L+L instead of the Literature course?

This is very speculative but to be honest unless they're the English Department (in which case you should really be doing Literature!), probably not. There is a small chance that if you apply to the UK where the A Level system is split into English Literature and English Language that they will realise the word "Language" implies it's a bit less challenging, however given that L+L also has the word Literature in there, then they're equally as likely not to notice or care.
Essentially, if we (people doing the IB) don't really understand the difference, why the hell would an admissions department even know, let alone care unless it's their subject??

9. Should I be worried about doing a course my teachers have never taught before?

In short, yes. If your teacher is very good and you trust them to have read the syllabus and be really clear on what you're going to be marked on and what to aim for, then perhaps. Generally it's always a dangerous move to be the guinea pig for an untried and untested course. Obviously somebody has to do it, but you don't really want it to be you! The only caveat to this is if you're in the UK or any other country where there is also a similar-level (e.g. A Level) English Language course, in which case you can probably safely assume that if your teacher also teaches Language, you may well be in safe hands. Exercise caution!

10. What are World Literature Essays?

You may seem them mentioned a lot on the forum, but if you're doing the new syllabi, they are a thing of the past. In L+L there is no equivalent. In the Literature course, the 2 WL essays have been replaced by a single "Written Assignment" which is an analytical essay (plus reflective statement) on a single text, so similar to the old WL2 essay. There is no longer a comparative essay in the course at all. Cause for celebration or not? You decide

11. What is Literature and Performance?

In short: a mysterious new SL-only course that also claims to be a Language A which I can find very little information about!


RIGHT this is certainly unfinished and although I've tried very hard to verify the facts as I've gone along, I can't find an official copy of the syllabus for L+L (nor can I find a version of the new Lit syllabus?) SO if people who are doing the new syllabus could please kindly add to this, amend things or anything else by replying below, that would be much appreciated. I think it'll really help people out!
EDIT: Okay found the copies of the syllabi thanks Gaby. No idea how I missed those!

[Gaby]

Great post. I think both of the syllabi are in the files section.

Edit:

No problem, I just looked for the syllabi some time ago so I knew they were there.

I can add information on the course as I go through with it, I'll update on what is going on in the class, what we're doing. Basically, now we're doing the 4th part of the course (I'm in L&L) which is essentially the same as in the old syllabus. We have to write something called Written Task for this part, which is basically creative writing: 800-1,000 words (plus a rationale) in any form we like (I'm probably going to write a short story or a letter) which has to be "as if it could be fitted into some place in a book/series of poems that we've read". So, as we've read a book on Soviet Gulag camps, if I want to, I can write a letter as one of the prisoners to his wife. But it has to be a prisoner that was mentioned in a book, who has a wife to write to etc. It has to be something that could be true for the characters in the book. I hope I explained it well. As I move on to the next part of the course, I'll update you.

I also have an IOC in March on the works studied in the Part 4.

Edited December 29, 2011 by Gaby

[Guest Soiboist]

Great post and summary!

Just to clarify, for both HL and SL "an interactive group/class oral which is individually assessed" is a bit more complicated. Students are to make at least 2 Further Oral Activities on Part 1 and Part 2 of the course respectively. One could view them as a more creative form of IOPs that ought to show understanding of texts covered in class. These are internally assessed and not recorded, but the subject guide says that they still are externally moderated. Do you have any idea, Sandwich, how moderators are to grade something that they haven't seen?

[kinguncaged1]

How do you think the IB will partition the mark bands for the Lang and Lit standard level course? For example, in History HL only 2% get a 7. What percentage of people do you speculate will get a 7 on Lang and Lit Sl.

[Guest Soiboist]

Grade boundaries change every year depending on student performance, so it is quite unpredictable when it comes to one specific year. However, over a period of several years the boundaries only fluctuate mildly, so that the difference constitutes a few percentage at most. You can see the grade boundaries for the old A2 course, they will supposedly be rather similar to Language and Literature.

[SKaigo]

I couldn't disagree with your insistence that L+L is for those who are less comfortable with their level of fluency. Both courses are suitable for fluent speakers, and both contain very challenging topics. To say that if your language skills aren't up to scratch you should do L+L is a horrible and misleading comment that might be the downfall of any IB students reading your post... I myself take English L+L and frequently compare the course to English Lit and find them both to be challenging, but in no way is L+L far easier.

[Sandwich]

I couldn't disagree with your insistence that L+L is for those who are less comfortable with their level of fluency. Both courses are suitable for fluent speakers, and both contain very challenging topics. To say that if your language skills aren't up to scratch you should do L+L is a horrible and misleading comment that might be the downfall of any IB students reading your post... I myself take English L+L and frequently compare the course to English Lit and find them both to be challenging, but in no way is L+L far easier.

Neither course is really intended for a non-fluent speaker, but I didn't mean to imply that and apologise if I did. If you really aren't fluent, I would suggest doing the B Language. Relative to each other, Literature & Language versus Literature alone, Literature is a more rigorous course. However both require you to have a command of the language you're doing it in - after all, both do have aspects of literature in and you have to be sufficiently capable in order to read literature in the chosen language. The main point of this post was to give people some ideas as to which they might want to go for in terms of choosing between them as opposed to choosing between an A course and a B level course.

When I said that if you struggle in your main language, I do mean struggle in the sense of not getting great grades in/being that good at it before - not literally struggle to speak it and not be fluent! I'd assume that everybody would be fluent in their 'main' language, or they would literally be a person without language and basic communication skills.

[yomanyomo]

I would say that the major difference between Language and Literature and Literature course are the type of texts you look at throughout the course.

'Lang and Lit' doesn't only focus on books/novels/poems/etc (50% of the course does), however, it also focuses on media/articles/newspaper/speeches/etc.

It is much more varied. The type of the texts you look in the 'Literature' part of the course is exactly the same as what you look at in Language A: Literature.

I know about this because curently I am doing English: Language and Literature. However, I just changed from Literature, so I know about both courses.

If you were to choose between the two, I would say, go for Lang & Lit because you will be more exposed to different types of texts and learn how to analyse any type of text, which would also be useful in the Literature course.

Although, if you want to study English in the future, go for the Literature course because English at University level focuses mainly on books/novels/poems rather than media/articles/etc.

[Zahra Salehí]

Hey guys.... I need help.

Could anyone pleeease tell me if it's possible to take up Self-taught Language and Lit classes?

I recently moved to another country and My new IB Coordinator told me to self-study literature, but before I had Language and Literature, not only Literature (L+L is easier for me) so I checked the guide but couldn't find anything about self-taught students.

So... is it possible?

[crimson.threads]

Honestly, I don't think it's fair at all to say that LL is 'easier' than Lit!

A better comparison would be how traditional they are, which would probably explain your (perceived by me) bias towards Lit, since Lit is generally received better by English departments; I do agree with that sentiment of yours!

LL would probably be more appropriate if you intend to study Media- just putting my two cents in here

[Blackcurrant]

Golly! You found the 2013 Guide only now?

What to do. Well, read it, I say!

If there is anything unclear or that you are unsure about, then come back to the forum and ask.

Edited August 19, 2013 by Blackcurrant

[Gaby]

Heey, I need help too.

I am (apparently, my school is a chaos) doing the L+L HL in Spanish for the November examinations, but we've been working with the Old guide and doing like a lot of the old work (Like the comparative essay, the creative text and the oral commentary in poetry), and we happened to find TODAY, 1 month before due date, the guide for the 2013 examinations. What should we do? :/

Sue the school...

[dora95]

Thank you so much everyone! You've actually helped me decide between the two courses!

 

Just wondering if it's ok to take two language As? (I'm completely fluent in both English and German, so I'm thinking of taking English A literature and German A language and literature, both at higher level.)