Section C feels familiar to many students because it resembles persuasive language analysis tasks they have practised for years. This familiarity is precisely why it is so often mishandled. The 2024–2028 examination materials make it clear that Section C is not a test of technique spotting, nor a test of how many language features a student can name. It is a test of analytical discipline.
Students who underperform in Section C almost always misunderstand what the task is asking them to do.
Section C is an argument analysis task, not a language feature catalogue
VCAA has been explicit in its examination briefings that Section C assesses students’ ability to analyse argument and the ways language is used to position audiences. Language features matter only insofar as they serve argument.
This distinction is subtle but critical. Students who move paragraph by paragraph naming techniques often produce responses that sound analytical but lack substance. They describe what is present in the text without explaining how those choices advance the writer’s contention or respond to audience values.
High-scoring responses foreground argument first, then analyse language as evidence of how that argument operates.
Why listing techniques caps marks quickly
Examiner’s Reports consistently note that mid-range responses identify a wide range of techniques but explain them superficially. Phrases such as “this makes the reader feel” or “this persuades the audience” appear frequently, but they are rarely unpacked.
The problem is not that techniques are mentioned. The problem is that they are not integrated into a coherent analysis of reasoning and positioning. When analysis becomes a checklist, assessors struggle to see sustained thinking.
Strong responses choose fewer examples and explain them in depth, clearly linking language choice to audience response and argumentative purpose.
Audience is not optional context
One of the most common Section C errors is treating audience as an afterthought. Students often mention audience briefly in the introduction and then ignore it for the rest of the response.
The examination transcripts make it clear that audience is central. Every argument exists in relation to an audience, and language choices only make sense when interpreted through that relationship.
High-scoring responses consistently return to audience considerations. They explain why particular language choices are effective for that specific readership, in that specific context.
Purpose must be inferred, not asserted
Students frequently state the writer’s purpose as if it is given. In Section C, purpose is not explicitly provided. It must be inferred from the text itself.
Examiner’s Reports note that students who assert purpose without justification often oversimplify the argument. Purpose should emerge through analysis of contention, reasoning and tone.
When students demonstrate how purpose is constructed through language and structure, their analysis gains credibility.
Visuals are part of the argument, not an add-on
When visuals are included, they are not decorative. VCAA expects students to analyse how visual elements contribute to persuasion alongside written language.
A common error is treating visuals as a separate paragraph or making generic comments about emotional appeal. Strong responses analyse how visuals reinforce, complicate or intensify the written argument and how they interact with audience expectations.
This requires the same analytical precision as language analysis.
Structure matters more than students realise
Section C responses benefit from a clear, logical structure that mirrors the development of the argument in the text. Chronological analysis often works well because it allows students to track how ideas and strategies evolve.
Disorganised responses that jump between examples without clear progression are difficult to assess at a high level, even when individual points are sound.
Structure is not a stylistic choice here. It is an analytical one.
Time pressure reveals preparation gaps
Because Section C is time-constrained, weak habits are exposed quickly. Students who rely on memorised frameworks often struggle to adapt to the specifics of the unseen text.
Those who have practised reading quickly, identifying key arguments and selecting the most persuasive examples perform far more consistently.
Effective preparation focuses on adaptability rather than formula.
What strong Section C preparation looks like
Students should practise analysing a wide range of persuasive texts, not to memorise techniques, but to understand how arguments are constructed for different audiences and contexts.
They should practise writing responses that prioritise explanation over identification and that make audience positioning explicit throughout.
Reviewing Examiner’s Reports with a focus on common weaknesses is particularly valuable for Section C.
An ATAR STAR perspective
At ATAR STAR, we teach Section C as an exercise in disciplined reasoning. Students learn how to read argument strategically, select evidence judiciously and explain language choices with clarity.
For high-performing students, this sharpens precision. For students who feel overwhelmed by Section C, it provides a clear analytical pathway.
Section C rewards students who understand that persuasion is purposeful, contextual and deliberate. The exam is designed to reveal who can see that clearly.