on a single text. Each response: • is a coherent essay, with an introduction, body paragraphs and a conclusion • takes a position on a given essay topic • presents a line of argument about, and a consistent interpretation of, the texts • includes detailed textual evidence, including brief quotations, to support the argument and reasoning.
act – a balance between the two texts, and between writing about an individual text and writing about two texts together. Some of your analysis will focus on a single text, showing your in- depth understanding of characters, plot, narrative and language. Other paragraphs will compare and contrast both texts. This will be particularly important in your final paragraph or two.
three main ways to structure a comparative response. Each structure ensures that your essay is coherent – that is, it develops an argument in a consistent and logical manner. Note that the boxes in the flow charts indicate the overall structure, rather than the number of paragraphs required. The in-depth discussion of each text might cover two or even three paragraphs, depending on paragraph length and the overall length of your essay.
deal with both texts in detail, and that your response focuses on the ideas, issues or themes identified in the introduction. It does restrict your comparison of the two texts to the final paragraph or two, so remember to make this part of the response just as detailed and thorough as the rest.
brief reasons, referring to both texts Discuss ideas, issues and themes in text 1 Discuss ideas, issues and themes in text 2 Discuss both texts, indicating similarities and differences, finishing with one or two concluding statements
of view, or main contention, in response to the topic. You might also wish to add a brief conclusion to sum up and restate your position on the topic. In the body paragraphs, link back to your main contention; the final sentence of a paragraph is a good place to make this link.
texts. • more fluency, as there is a smooth transition from discussion of one text to the next This structure is slightly more complex than the block approach above. If you can become comfortable with it, your responses should have:
side-by-side comparison of the texts, examining both similarities and differences. As in your detailed discussion of each individual text, your comparison of the two texts must be supported by textual evidence. You might emphasise similarities or focus on differences and contrasts, depending on the topic and your interpretation of the texts.
brief reasons, referring to both texts Discuss ideas, issues and themes in text 1 Discuss ideas, issues and themes in text 2 Discuss both texts, in a concluding paragraph In a transitional paragraph, discuss similarities and differences
rather than discussing the texts one after the other. Comparison of the two texts occurs throughout the response, rather than just in particular paragraphs.
brief reasons Discuss one key similarity or difference Discuss another key similarity or difference Discuss both texts in a concluding paragraph Discuss another key similarity or difference
begin with similarities and move on to consider differences, or vice versa. Planning is very important when using this structure, as each key similarity or difference needs to be clearly identified in a topic sentence.
forth between your texts too many times in each paragraph. Write in detail on one text, then discuss the same point in relation to the other You still need to convey a thorough understanding of each text, as well as examine the similarities and differences between them. As in the previous two structures, it is very important that you write in depth and detail on each text.
brief reasons, referring to both texts Discuss ideas, issues and themes in text 1 Discuss both texts, indicating similarities and differences, finishing with one or two concluding statements Discuss ideas, issues and themes in text 2
brief reasons, referring to both texts Discuss ideas, issues and themes in text 1 Discuss both texts, indicating similarities and differences, finishing with one or two concluding statements Discuss ideas, issues and themes in text 2
brief reasons Discuss one key similarity or difference Discuss both texts in a concluding paragraph Discuss another key similarity or difference Discuss another key similarity or difference
understanding of the ideas, characters and themes in both texts. 9-10 Thorough knowledge of the ideas, characters and themes in both texts. 7-8 Knowledge of the ideas, characters and themes constructed and presented in both texts. 5-6 Some knowledge of the ideas, characters and themes in both texts. 3-4 Limited knowledge of the ideas, characters and themes in both texts. 1-2
discussion and critical analysis (using correct metalanguage) of the structures, features and conventions used by each author to construct meaning. 9-10 Well-developed discussion and critical analysis (using correct metalanguage) of the structures, features and conventions used by each author to construct meaning. 7-8 Discussion and some analysis (using correct metalanguage) of the structures, features and conventions used by each author to construct meaning. 5-6 Generalised discussion (using some metalanguage) of the structures, features and conventions used by each author to construct meaning. Little analysis. 3-4 Minimal, if any, appropriate identification of the structures or features or conventions used by the authors to construct meaning. 1-2
argument: ideas are ordered into a logical structure and links are made between paragraphs/ideas. 9-10 Construction of a well-developed, careful comparison and argument: ideas are ordered into a logical structure and usually links are made between paragraphs/ideas. 7-8 Construction of a somewhat pedestrian comparison and argument: ideas may be expressed in paragraphs and sometimes link. 5-6 Generalised comparison of both texts. Ideas are ordered into paragraphs but do not make links between each idea/argument. 3-4 Little evidence of an ability to analyse and compare texts. Retelling rather than analysis. 1-2
evidence to justify the interpretation. 9-10 Careful use of textual evidence to justify the interpretation. 7-8 Suitable use of textual evidence to justify the interpretation. 5-6 Some use of textual evidence to justify the interpretation. 3-4 Limited reference to the text. 1-2
sophisticated control of the conventions of written English. 9-10 Expressive, fluent writing with good control of the conventions of written English. 7-8 Generally expressive, fluent writing with reasonable control of the conventions of written English. 5-6 Coherent writing with some control of the conventions of written English, though there may be numerous errors. 3-4 Simple expression of ideas and limited control of the conventions of written English. Not fluent. 1-2