The Module A extended response is essentially an evaluative response that should ideally balance both texts with even consideration for each. The response needs to evaluate Hag-Seed specifically in how the text has engaged in the various textual conversations with, of and to The Tempest. This post outlines one way to structure that response, what each section might do, and how to approach the integration of both texts. It is not a prescriptive formula. There are many valid ways to write a strong Module A essay, and students are encouraged to take what is useful here and adapt it to their own argument, reading of the texts, and essay question. Treat this as a starting point, not a fixed method.
What Are Textual Conversations?
The Module A extended response asks you to evaluate Hag-Seed specifically in how the text has engaged in the various textual conversations with, of and to The Tempest. Those three prepositions matter. Each one describes a different kind of relationship between the texts:
- A conversation with the original text — Atwood is in dialogue with Shakespeare’s ideas and form
- A conversation of the original text — Atwood is working through or across what the original text contains
- A conversation to the original text — Atwood is responding directly, making choices that are shaped by and directed at the source text
Your response needs to discuss how these conversations operate across the following connected elements: context, text, and the values and ideas of each composer. These three things are always in relationship. Context shapes what composers value; values shape the choices they make in the text; the text is where the conversation between Shakespeare and Atwood actually takes place.
Three Ways to Structure the Response
The Module A response needs to be evaluative and should balance both texts with even consideration for each. There are three valid approaches to structuring it:
| Approach | What it looks like |
|---|---|
| Seamless integration | Each paragraph is controlled by one idea that is viewed through each text, with seamless discussion moving from one text to the other |
| Separate but integrated | Each text has its own paragraph, but there is a consistent and authentic attempt at evaluation taking place, especially through linking words and evaluative connectives |
| Separate and together | Each text has some separate paragraphs, but there is also an evaluative paragraph that brings both together |
Approaches 1 and 2 are the most commonly rewarded at the higher mark ranges. The key in both cases is that evaluation is happening throughout, not just in isolated moments.
Writing the Introduction
A strong introduction for Module A does several things at once. It is not simply a list of what the essay will cover — it establishes the evaluative frame the whole response will work within.
Your introduction should include:
- A statement that explicitly identifies the purpose of the Textual Conversations rubric
- An introduction of both texts (The Tempest and Hag-Seed)
- The idea that connections can be drawn between them, and in what ways
- How a comparative reading of both texts and engagement with textual conversations helps to enrich an understanding of the issues both explore
- A signal toward the first idea or value you will discuss in the body
The opening should not simply summarise plot. It should position Atwood’s reimagining of Shakespeare within a broader argument about what happens when a later composer enters into conversation with an earlier text, and why that conversation produces new or extended meaning.
Paragraph Structure: First Idea
The body of a Module A response typically works through two main ideas or values, with two paragraphs dedicated to each. The first pair of paragraphs works as follows.
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 2
Paragraph Structure: Second Idea
The second pair of paragraphs follows the same logic, working through a different theme or value. The structure mirrors Paragraphs 1 and 2 but builds on what has already been established.
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 4
Writing the Conclusion
The conclusion is a recapitulation of your introduction, not a new argument. It should:
- Use a conclusive tone that states how a reading of each text can help to reshape a reader’s understanding of a text’s concepts and values
- Explicitly reference the ideas you have discussed throughout the response
- Reflect on the relationship between the two texts: what does the conversation between them ultimately reveal?
The conclusion should feel like the logical endpoint of the argument the essay has been building, not a mechanical restatement of the thesis.
Need help with HSC English Advanced Module A? Book a session with Boldtutor — face-to-face in Sydney or online.