Arisa Trew Text Analysis

Overview

This is lesson 16 of 24 in Representations of Australian Youth. Students build on prior close reading of the Arisa Trew media article by writing a detailed analysis of how the article represents Australian youth, using precise evidence, evaluative vocabulary and explanation of audience impact.

Learning intentions

• WALT write a detailed analysis of the Arisa Trew media article.
• WALT select strong evidence and explain how it supports an interpretation.
• WALT analyse how language features shape the article’s representation of Australian youth.
• WALT use unit vocabulary and evaluative language accurately.

Success criteria

• I can write a clear analytical point about the article.
• I can include relevant words or phrases from the text as evidence.
• I can explain how the evidence shapes meaning and affects the reader.
• I can use precise vocabulary from the unit and link my ideas to the article’s purpose and audience.

Curriculum links

• Cohesion of texts — analysing how introductions, topic sentences, text connectives and conclusions guide readers.
• Evaluative language — substantiating judgements about a media text through reference to the text.
• Literary and media representations — exploring ideas, points of view and issues concerning Australian youth.
• Comprehension and analysis — questioning, inferring, connecting and summarising information and ideas.
• Language, audience and purpose — analysing how language features shape meaning for readers.

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–7 min · Reconnect and focus. Teacher opens with the opening question and lesson goals and asks, “What representation of Australian youth does the article create?” Students complete a quick-write using one idea from the previous lesson, then share with a partner.

2. 7–17 min · Vocabulary and close reading. Teacher displays the vocabulary and close-reading prompts and revisits terms such as representation, perspective, audience, purpose, evaluative language, evidence, impact, tone, achievement and resilience. Students reread the selected passage from the Arisa Trew article, highlighting one language choice and annotating what it suggests about her and Australian youth.

3. 17–27 min · Model analytical writing. Teacher models a paragraph on the board using the structure: point, evidence, explanation, effect and link. Demonstrate the difference between retelling (“The article says she won”) and analysis (“The achievement-focused wording positions Trew as determined and encourages readers to view young Australians as capable”). Students identify the point, evidence, explanation and reader effect in the model, then improve one weak explanation orally.

4. 27–45 min · Independent assessment writing. Teacher distributes the Text 2 analysis writing organiser and reminds students to use the article rather than unsupported opinion. Students plan and write one detailed analytical paragraph, or two shorter connected paragraphs, responding to: “How does the article represent Arisa Trew and Australian youth?” They select at least two precise pieces of evidence and explain the effect of relevant language, structure or visual features.

5. 45–54 min · Peer review and revision. Teacher displays the peer-review checklist and revision prompts and asks students to exchange work with a trusted partner. Students identify the strongest evidence, underline the explanation, and give one specific suggestion using: “Your analysis is clear when…” and “You could explain the effect of…”. Students revise at least one sentence for stronger precision or detail.

6. 54–60 min · Plenary and submission check. Teacher returns to the final reflection prompt and asks students to complete a self-check before submitting or saving their work. Students write: “The article represents Australian youth as ___ because the phrase ‘___’ suggests ___,” then rate their confidence from 1 to 5.

Resources

• the Text 2 analysis teaching deck
• the Text 2 analysis writing organiser
• Copies of the Arisa Trew media article
• Highlighters or annotation tools
• Exercise books or digital writing platform
• Projector or interactive whiteboard
• Visible unit vocabulary display

Assessment

• During close reading, check whether students can identify a language choice and infer what it suggests.
• Confer with students during writing, checking for a clear analytical point, accurate evidence and explanation of meaning or reader effect.
• Collect the written analysis and use the self-check to identify students requiring further support with evidence, explanation, cohesion or vocabulary.

Differentiation

• Provide dyslexia-friendly copies of the article using a clear sans-serif font, increased line spacing, short sections, accessible contrast and optional text-to-speech or teacher-recorded reading.
• Support students with a reduced passage, pre-selected evidence choices, a vocabulary bank and sentence starters such as “The writer presents…”, “The word ___ suggests…” and “This positions the reader to…”.
• Allow students to dictate ideas, use speech-to-text, or record an oral analytical response before converting it into written form. Accept a typed, handwritten, audio-supported or clearly structured alternative format where appropriate.
• Extend confident writers by requiring comparison of two language choices, analysis of the article’s opening or conclusion, or evaluation of how convincingly the article represents Australian youth.