Hello everyone, my name is Miss Keller, and welcome to today's lesson.

In this session, we are going to be analysing model answers on conflict poetry.

So, by the end of today's lesson, we will be able to analyse a range of model answers to explore what makes an effective comparative analysis.

So, let's have a look at today's keywords.

We have compelling, ingrained, comparative conjunctions, topic, sentence, and context.

And I'd just like to focus on those last three words and just explore them in a bit more detail because we're going to be using them quite a lot in today's lesson.

So, first of all, we have comparative conjunctions, which are linking words.

Conjunctions are linking words, and they're comparative because they're used to compare.

So, they focus specifically on similarities and differences.

So, these are words like also, which we might be able to use to indicate similarities, or whereas, which we could use to indicate differences.

And then those last two words.

So, these are very important because they are parts of an analysis paragraph.

So, the best analysis writing always starts with a clear and compelling topic sentence, which is a sentence that expresses the main idea of a paragraph.

So, it introduces the argument and guides the focus of the rest of the paragraph.

And then we've got context as well, which is the information that is linked to a text.

So shapes our interpretation of it.

And an example of something that we could think about as contextual information is when and where a text was published.

Perhaps who it was that wrote the text and what we know about their life, what their potential influences might have been.

These are all things we could consider when we think about context.

So, before we move on, just pause the video here for a moment and take some time to read these definitions in detail and familiarise yourself with these words because we will be encountering all of them in the rest of today's lesson.

So how is today's lesson going to look? Well, in order to analyse these model answers, we're going to start by thinking about how we would compare key ideas in our anthology poems. And then, when we've done that, we're going to think about writing detailed and nuanced analysis paragraphs.

So, the first thing we need to do when it comes to planning and writing a comparative analysis is to start by identifying an overall argument.

So, let's start by exploring what a comparative analysis question might look like.

So here is an example question.

Reread, "No Problem." Choose another poem from the anthology.

Compare how the psychological impact of conflict is presented in the two poems. In your answer, you should comment on how the poets use language, form, and structure, and how the context of each poem shapes our interpretation.

So, I'd like to start off today's lesson with a discussion, thinking really carefully about what the question is asking us to do.

So, I'd like you to discuss the following three questions.

Number one, what is the focus of the question here? Number two, which texts should you focus on in your response to this question? And number three, which aspects of the poem do you need to focus on? So, pause the video here while you take some time to discuss this with the people around you, or if you're working on your own, that's okay, just make some notes on your paper or in your exercise book.

Pause the video, and when you're ready to be back together, click play, and we'll carry on.

Welcome back.

So, number one, what is the question focus? So well done if you picked up on the idea that the question focus here is how the psychological impact of conflict is presented in the two poems. And the best way to be able to identify a question focus is to think about what might change if we had a few of these types of questions here together.

So, for example, we could still have a question that relates to "No Problem", but it might in fact say compare how racial conflict is presented, compare how interpersonal conflict is presented.

So, there's lots of different things that we could compare.

So that is that focus, it's what specifically, what thread specifically we're looking for in both of the poems. So that second one, then, which texts should you focus on? So, we've got this bit here.

So, we've got "No Problem", so you will always be given one poem in your question and then it will ask you to choose another poem from the anthology.

So that part is up to you.

And question three, which aspects of the poem or poems do you need to focus on? Language, form, structure, and context.

So, these are all really important things to be thinking about when you come to analyse and start comparing your poems. So, let's imagine then that we've been given this question that we were looking at a minute ago and we're going to try and answer it.

So, my first question to you is this, which other poem would you use to compare to "No Problem", and why? So, pause the video here while you take some time to discuss it or make some notes, and when you're ready to feedback, click play and we'll continue.

Welcome back, some really interesting discussions that I overheard there.

So, let's have a look at what some of our Oak pupils would have chosen.

So, Aisha says, "I would choose "Half-caste" because both poems focus on racial conflict," and Alex said, "I would choose "The Man He Killed" because both poems are written in the first person." So just take a moment here to look at these two suggestions, and I'd like you to think to yourself: which student do you most agree with? Who do you think here has made the best choice? So just pause the video while you have a think and take some time to discuss it, and click play when you're ready to continue and discuss it together.

Welcome back, I heard lots of people suggesting that they would be inclined to agree with Aisha, and I would be inclined to agree as well.

I would choose Half-Cast probably as well to compare here because Aisha's right, both poems focus on racial conflicts.

We've got that clear link there in terms of the key ideas, whereas I would argue that in Alex's choice, he's leading here with feature spotting.

So he's actually chosen both of these poems because they're written in the first person, which may provide him with a really great jumping-off point for one analysis paragraph.

But actually, once he's compared the use of first person in both poems, what other things might he then be able to compare? Whereas Aisha, because she's linked these poems around the key idea, that gives her quite a lot of scope to look at the different examples of that and how it's conveyed through the writer's use of language, form, and structure.

So now we have dealt with that first part, we've chosen our second poem that we're going to compare to "No Problem." Let's think about that second part of the question, that focus, so how the psychological impact of conflict is presented.

So using this table below, I would like you to have a discussion with the people around you or make some notes on your paper or in your exercise book.

But I'd like you to think really carefully in each case what is the impact of the conflict in the poem, so who does it impact, what does that impact look like, and then how is it presented? So that's a bit where you're going to be identifying and analysing both poets' use of language, form, and structure.

So how do they convey the impact of the conflict in each case? So pause the video here and take some time to discuss it, and when you're ready for us to discuss it together, click away and we'll continue.

Welcome back, so let's just see how we could have completed this table then.

Starting with "No Problem", so the impact of the conflict in this poem, well we could argue that this poem focuses on the problem of racial conflict and discrimination in the UK.

We could argue that he presents it as subtle, ingrained into society, perhaps something that a lot of people do or believe, or behave in a way that is unconscious, people don't even necessarily realise that they're being racist because it's so subtly ingrained into society.

He also focuses on the way that it is psychologically damaging to the people who have to experience it, and finally, he exposes this idea that blame is often shifted onto the victim.

So over onto "Half-caste" then, so arguably this poem focuses on the problem of racial conflict and the use of outdated derogatory terms such as the word half-caste.

So how is it presented? Well, it's also presented as a subtle and ingrained into our society.

The way that he does this is he exposes that the term half-caste is full of contradictions, it almost defies logic and is nonsensical, and he does this by exploring lots of different examples in music and art, and nature where the mixture or the combination of things is something that we should celebrate.

That is perhaps what we could argue is the message of this poem: diversity and being different is something that should be celebrated, not something that should be discriminated against.

So now we've begun to analyse these poems separately, let's think about comparing them.

So, looking at this information that you've got here in the table, can you identify any similarities or differences between the two poems? So pause the video while you take some time to discuss it and click play when you're ready to continue.

Welcome back, so first of all, we've got that similarity there in the impact of the conflict because both poets imply that the problem is racial conflict and discrimination.

So both of these poems focus on the problem of racial conflict.

We've also got this idea that both poets suggest that it's subtle and it's something that is ingrained into society, so we've got that similarity there as well.

And then on to differences, the rest of this, how it is presented, we've got quite a lot of differences here.

So arguably, although both of the poems are focusing on the same type of conflict and the psychological impact of that type of conflict, racial conflict, they are doing so in different ways.

Zephaniah arguably focuses on the psychological damage perhaps that the victims experience, whereas Agard takes perhaps a more optimistic view.

But he looks at how diversity should be celebrated, so rather than thinking about the negative impact of it, he is almost trying to find that positive, what could we be celebrating, what should we be celebrating.

So Aisha and Alex are attempting to compare the two poems. So Aisha says, "No Problem" explores the impact of racial conflict on those who experience it.

"Half-caste" is fairly similar to "No Problem", it focuses on racial conflict and the use of racist language.

Whereas Alex says, both poems explore the problem of racial conflict and encourage readers to consider their own unconscious biases.

"No Problem" focuses on the emotional damage of racism, whereas "Half-caste" explores the contradictory nature of racist language.

So my question to you is this, whose comparison is most effective and why? So, take some time to read through both students' responses carefully and discuss with the people around you which one you think is most effective.

So pause the video here, and when you're ready for us to feedback together, click play and we'll continue.

Welcome back.

So, I could hear lots of people discussing which comparison they thought was most effective and most people seem to agree that Alex's response was most effective.

But why? Well, both of the responses focused on similarities and differences in the poem, which is exactly what we need to be doing when we do a comparative analysis.

However, Alex's response is more detailed as it uses comparative conjunctions to indicate similarities and differences.

So if we have a look at Aisha's response, she began by talking, and then she moved on to talking about half-caste and actually she ended up with that sort of throwaway sentence there in the middle.

"Half-caste" is fairly similar to "No Problem" because she almost needed a way to link those two points that she was making.

Whereas Alex saved himself a lot of words, which meant that he was able to elaborate a lot further by starting off grouping those poems together.

So both poems, straight away we know that Alex is discussing a similarity, and then later on, when he goes on to discuss a difference we've got that whereas.

So, Alex is really signposting the similarities and differences between those two poems. So, Laura and Jun are doing the same thing.

So, Laura says both poems explore the impact of racism on victims using different approaches.

Zephaniah expresses his frustration, whereas Agard uses playful humour to explore the ridiculousness of outdated racist views.

And Jun says both "No Problem" and "Half-caste" explore how racism is subtly ingrained into society.

Zephaniah focuses on his own experiences growing up whereas Agard uses wordplay to explore the meaning of the term half-caste.

So same question again, then, whose comparison is most effective here and why? So pause the video while you take some time to discuss it with the people around you or make some notes and when you're ready to be back together click play and we'll continue.

Welcome back.

So well done if you picked up on the idea that Laura's was more detailed.

So although both answers use comparative conjunctions, Laura's is more detailed because she focuses on key ideas, whereas Jun focuses too much on retelling what happens in the poem.

So if we notice, Laura is focusing on perhaps the emotional tone of both poets, and how they approach the issue of racism slightly differently, whereas Jun falls into that trap of telling us what happens in each poem and perhaps not focusing on the effects or the ideas instead.

Okay, so now it's time to pause and check our understanding so far.

So, why do we use comparative conjunctions? So, take a moment to read the four possible answers that you've got there and decide which one you think is correct, and when you're ready for me to reveal the correct answer click play and we'll continue.

Welcome back, and well done to those of you who said B to indicate the similarities and differences between the texts.

Okay, so now it's time for the first practise task of today's lesson.

So, I would like you to imagine that you have been given this question.

Reread exposure, select another poem from the anthology, compare how the emotions associated with conflict are presented in the two poems. So, what I would like you to do is write a thesis statement to introduce your comparison of the two poems. So, the success criteria then for this thesis statement.

So, it's really important to use those comparative conjunctions to indicate similarities and differences.

It's really important to lead with key ideas and avoid feature spotting.

It's a really good idea to show you have a good understanding of the poem without simply retelling what happens in it, and finally, it's a great idea to make relevant links to the wider context of each poem.

So, pause the video here while you take some time to choose your poem and write that thesis statement, and when you're ready to feedback together, click play and we'll carry on.

Okay, welcome back.

So, here is an example of what you could have written.

So, we'll read through this answer together and then we'll explore whether it does all these things on the success criteria there on the right.

So, both Exposure and Poppies focus on emotions associated with military conflict.

Owen uses his first-hand experience to capture the psychological impact of the harrowing experience of fighting in the trenches in World War One.

Weir focused instead on the impact of those indirectly affected by the military conflict, exploring the emotional impact on the relatives of soldiers fighting.

Although this poem's title suggests it is also about World War I, we could argue it focuses more on the grief and remembrance associated with war more generally.

So, let's explore how this response meets the success criteria.

Starting off with comparative conjunctions, well, we've got that word both there at the beginning, grouping those poems together and showing a similarity, and then we've got the word instead later on, which indicates that we are about to discuss a difference.

So, does the response lead with key ideas? Yes, it does.

So here Owen captures the psychological impact of the harrowing experience of fighting in the trenches and we are focuses on the impact of those directly affected by military conflict and remember that our question was all to do with impact.

This idea that we're using that word impact shows, and indicates and signposts that we're constantly making sure our response is relevant to the question focus.

So does this response show a good understanding of the poem? Yes, it does because we know that this poem is set in the trenches when we're thinking about exposure, and we also know that Poppies discusses the impact about the relatives of the soldiers, so it doesn't focus necessarily on the soldiers themselves, but it focuses on the people who are indirectly affected by military conflict.

And finally, then are the relevant links to context? Yes, because we've got this idea that Owen was actually a World War I soldier, so it's based on his first-hand experience, and also, we've got that really interesting point at the bottom there that although the title of the poem might suggest that it's about World War I, we know that it actually isn't just about World War I, so picking up on a common, perhaps, misconception about the poem there.

So, we've made it to the halfway point of today's lesson and a massive well done for all your efforts so far.

So in this session, we are going to be thinking about writing detailed and nuanced analysis paragraphs.

So to start off then I want to have a think about what it means to create a compelling argument.

So that is one of our keywords today compelling can you remember what the word means? So, just take a moment to think and perhaps discuss it with the people around you, or make a few notes press pause and click play when you're ready to continue.

Okay, compelling is something that strongly captures attention or interest, often persuading or captivating in a way that is hard to ignore.

So, if something is compelling, it's so intriguing or so persuasive that it's difficult perhaps to ignore that idea.

So, we're really aiming to create an argument that is compelling captures the interest it's very persuasive and captivating.

So, how do we do that? So, that's my next question to you have a little think to yourself how could we ensure that our comparative analysis is compelling.

So, pause the video again while you take some time to discuss it and when you're ready to feedback together click play, and we'll continue.

Welcome back, so let's just summarise some of the main ideas overheard.

So first of all, topic sentences need to be clear, comparative, and linked to that question focus.

Remember, our topic sentence is that first sentence that we use in an analysis paragraph to introduce what we're going to be discussing in the rest of that paragraph.

So it needs to be clear; it needs to start off by comparing it needs to be linked to that question focus.

So once we've done our topic sentence, we need to support these ideas with judiciously chosen evidence from the poems. So, what do I mean by judiciously chosen? Well, I mean chosen with good judgement and if you can see, we've got that link there between the word judgement and judiciously they both start with that j-u-d prefix.

So the idea of choosing a quote judiciously would mean that perhaps we don't necessarily just stop at the first relevant quote that links to our ideas but instead, we think about the whole text and instead choosing the most relevant quote to support our ideas.

Or perhaps if we've got two quotes that we're choosing between we opt for one that maybe has a particular keyword that we know we're going to be able to zoom in on for the rest of our analysis.

Or perhaps we think about how much of a longer quote we need, only focusing on the bit that we're going to be talking about later.

So it's really just using your judgement when you're putting that evidence into your response.

Provide a detailed comparative analysis of each poet's use of language form and structure.

So this is the bulk of our response the bread and butter of our comparative analysis is where we start to compare how the writers convey these key ideas.

So this is where we identify our methods, or patterns in the language form and structure and we begin to compare the effects that these methods create.

And finally, use relevant links to context to strengthen your interpretations because remember, contextual information helps to shape our interpretation and it gives really important clues, perhaps about why a writer might have been influenced in a certain way or maybe what their intentions were with a certain part of the text.

So, it's always really important to consider the wider context.

So, let's build a strong paragraph together step by step.

So, here's our question compare how the psychological impact of conflict is presented in "No Problem" and Half Cast.

So, let's start by thinking first of all then about topic sentences.

So, let's have a look at two topic sentences from our pupils.

So Jacob says, "Both poets implied that the speakers feel frustrated to the point of exasperation by the injustice of racism and discrimination." And Sam says, "Both poets focus on racial conflict and how it is subtly ingrained into our society.

They explore the different routes of racism in everyday life." So in this example, both pupils use comparative language.

They both start with that word both to show that they've got a similarity, for example, but only Jacob's response is linked to the focus of the question, which was the psychological impact of the conflict.

And if we see there that Sam's focusing more on the conflict itself and also the second sentence of Sam's response could be phrased a little bit more clearly.

So, let's choose Jacob's topic sentence for our paragraph then let's start off this is our first sentence.

So, on to this second idea then so now we've got our topic sentence there we need to support it with judiciously chosen evidence from the poets.

So Jacob has chosen these different pieces of evidence, so from "No Problem" he's chosen, I am not to problem and from half-cast he has chosen, excuse me.

What is wrong with Jacob's evidence here? So pause the video while you take some time to discuss it and click play when you're ready to continue.

Welcome back had lots of people touching on the right ideas there.

First of all, something wrong there with his analysis.

He's actually identified incorrect techniques and effects.

First of all, I am not the problem is not an imperative sentence because the imperative sentence begins with a verb, and excuse me, that direct address, which Jacob's implied shows anger, I would argue is perhaps a quite a polite way to begin the poem.

So maybe it gets attention, but I'm not necessarily sure that it shows the speaker's anger and frustration.

So, you've got a bit of an inaccuracy there.

So what evidence could he choose instead? Pause the video here while you take some time to think about it and discuss it with the people around you, and click play when you're ready to feedback together.

Welcome back.

So instead of these quotations, he could have chosen the following.

So from "No Problem", he could have chosen get it right, which is an example of an imperative sentence, and then also he was actually able to find another imperative sentence beginning explain in half cast.

So actually, by choosing evidence more judiciously, it's actually enabled him to identify similarity in both poets use of language as well.

So, let's assemble what we have so far.

So, here we've got that topic sentence, and then we've got that evidence, which I've then embedded into a sentence.

So now we're on to that third step, we need to provide a detailed comparative analysis of each poet's use of language form and structure.

So Jacob says, "Imperative verbs are bossy, which suggests that the speakers feel dominant in this environment." So, my question is this: what is inaccurate about Jacob's analysis here? So, pause the video while you have a think, and discuss it and when you're ready to feedback, click play, and we'll continue.

Welcome back.

Actually, Jacob's analysis was focused on power here, which means he strayed from the question focus because remember our question focus was all to do with the psychological impact.

So, here we've moved on to talking about power, and dominance instead, and it's very easily done, so we do need to constantly make sure as we're going through that, we are sticking to that question focus.

So, how can we help him redraft it then to improve it, so swerving it back towards that question focus? So, pause the video here and click play when you're ready to feedback.

Welcome back.

So to help him redraft, we could have said something like imperative verbs indicate anger because the speaker is demanding answers, not politely asking for them.

So, we're still drawing on that same idea perhaps that imperative verbs show a sense of dominance, but we're thinking about it more in terms of emotions.

So, here we're saying perhaps that that dominant language indicates anger because the speaker is demanding answers.

So let's add our redrafted analysis, so we've got everything we had up to that point, and then we've got that analysis there on the bottom.

So, the final step: use relevant, tentative contextual links to strengthen interpretations.

So, Jacob had said, "It's obvious that both poets would write about the effects of racism because they are both of non-English cultural heritage." So, what's wrong with Jacob's use of context here? So take a moment to read through and have a think, and when you're ready to feed back together, click play, and we'll continue.

Okay, welcome back.

I definitely overheard somebody saying the word tentative language, so well done if that turned up in your discussions as well because he wasn't using tentative language, which actually gives the impression that he's presenting his opinion here as a concrete fact.

So, he's begun to redraft his contextual link using tentative language, so he says both Agard and Zephaniah spent much of their careers educating people about Caribbean culture, so it's likely that.

So, can you use this sentence stem here to finish off that contextual link? So, pause the video here while you discuss how you might finish off that sentence, and when you're ready to feed back together, click play, and we'll continue.

Welcome back.

So, here is perhaps how we could have finished that contextual link.

So in black, we've got our paragraph up until this point, and then we've got that contextual link at the bottom.

Both Agard and Zephaniah spent much of their careers educating people about Caribbean culture, so it's likely that issues of racism and discrimination are ones they feel passionately about.

Arguably, both poets imply they have been victims of racism and so we could infer that this frustrated tone exhibited in both poems links to each poet's first-hand experience of racial trauma.

So, let's check our understanding then.

Can you complete the missing words from the list below, thinking really carefully about those success criteria that we've been working through? So, pause the video here while you have a think.

And when you're ready for me to reveal the correct answers, click play and we'll continue.

Welcome back.

So, let's have a look at filling these gaps in then.

So number one, topic sentences need to be clear, comparative, and linked to the question.

Number two, we need to support ideas with judiciously chosen evidence.

We need to provide a detailed comparative analysis of each poet's use of language, form, and structure.

And finally, we need to use relevant links to context to strengthen your interpretations.

So, well done if you managed to remember all of those missing words.

So, on to our final practise task of today's lesson.

We're going to have a look at one of Alex's analytical paragraphs: Both poets use lots of negative emotions in their poems. In Exposure, Owen shows how the soldiers feel sad and lonely out on the battlefield.

He questions, "What are we doing here?" implying that the soldier feels hopeless and like war is a futile waste of his life.

Owen was a soldier in World War I who suffered with PTSD, so it's likely he based this poem on his own experiences.

Whereas in Poppies, Weir also focuses on negative emotions but instead chooses to explore feelings of grief and regret.

The speaker describes how she is brave as she accompanies her son to the door when he leaves for war.

This suggests she's feeling overwhelmed by the thought of losing him.

So, now we've read Alex's paragraph, what I would like you to do is this: I'd like you to review Alex's response against the checklist we were using earlier and give him some even better if feedback for anything that he missed.

So, here is a reminder of that checklist.

So, pause the video while you give Alex some feedback.

Take some time to read through his response again and click play when you're ready for us to give feedback together.

Okay, welcome back.

So, here is what you might have said, if you were reviewing Alex's response against this list: So, I think Alex's topic sentence was quite clear, comparative, and definitely linked to that question.

And I think that his use of evidence was also judiciously chosen and well supported those ideas.

However, I do think that he needed to provide a much more detailed analysis, and he could have done this by perhaps zooming in on the methods that the poets use.

And also, I think that context was another EBI for Alex because he only linked to the context of one poem, so it would be really great if he could find that equal balance and use some relevant context from both of the poems. So, this is my final challenge to you: Take some time to redraft Alex's response so it meets all the success criteria.

So, pause the video here while you help Alex to redraft that response and click play when you're ready to continue.

Welcome back.

So, I hope you have had some time there to help Alex redraft that response.

So, one final discussion question: I would like you to share with the people around you what you did to meet these two EBIs.

So, what did you have to add in? So, just share some of the great redrafting work that you've been doing with your peers.

Or if you're working on your own, that's okay, perhaps just annotate the work that you've done and explain why you made the choices that you did.

Pause the video here for one last time and click play when you're ready to continue.

Okay, so we've made it to the end of today's lesson, and well done for all your hard work.

I really hope that you've enjoyed today's session, and you also feel a bit more confident when it comes to writing a comparative analysis.

So, let's just summarise what we've covered in this session.

Topic sentences need to be clear, comparative, and linked to the question.

Relevant quotations from the text are used to justify arguments.

Relevant contextual information can be used to develop arguments.

Responses should focus on the intention of the author to avoid retelling the story of the poem.

And finally, comparative conjunctions should be used to compare key ideas as well as language, form, and structure.

Thank you very much for joining me in today's lesson.

I hope you have a fantastic day and I look forward to seeing you again soon.