Hello, everyone.

It's lovely to see you here for this lesson on comparing ideas of displacement and belonging in the Edexcel Belonging Anthology.

My name's Dr.

Clayton and I'm here to guide you through your learning journey today.

We're going to be looking at three poems today.

We're gonna be looking at Zephaniah's "We Refugees", Hardi's "My Mother's Kitchen", and Rumens' "The Emigree".

We're going to be thinking about how we can compare these poems and how they convey ideas of displacement and belonging, because all three of these poems are about people who have been forced to leave their homes.

So we're gonna think about how we can compare their ideas of heritage, their homes, belonging, hostility, and displacement.

Once we've compared the similarities and difference between how each of these poems present these ideas, we're then going to think about how you can articulate those ideas through your comparative topic sentences.

Now you'll need a copy of the Edexcel Belonging Anthology with you for this lesson.

So make sure you have that with you.

So if you're ready, grab your pen, laptop, whatever you're using for this lesson, and let's get started.

So by the end of this lesson, you'll be able to identify similarities and differences between "We Refugees", "My Mother's Kitchen", and "The Emigree".

So we have five words today we're going to focus on as our keywords.

They've been chosen to not only help you unlock the learning, but also to give you some vocabulary to use when you write about these poems. They're identified in bold throughout the learning material.

And I'll try to point them out to you as well, so you can see them being used in context.

So our first keyword is displacement, which means the action of moving something from its place or position.

Our second keyword is belonging, which means a feeling of being happy or comfortable as part of a particular group.

Our third keyword is refugee.

And this means a person who's forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution or natural disaster.

Our fourth keyword is hostile, which means showing or feeling opposition or dislike, something unfriendly.

Our fifth and final keyword is heritage, and that means the history, traditions, practises of a particular country or society.

So I'll just give you a few moments to write down these keywords and their definitions.

So pause the video and write them down now.

Fantastic.

Let's get started with the lesson.

So we have two learning cycles in our lesson today.

For our first learning cycle, we're going to focus on the ideas of displacement and belonging and how they're presented through the three poems. Within those discussions, we're also going to consider ideas of hostility, heritage, and how ideas of displacement might be connected to a hostile environment, as well as the disconnection from one's heritage.

For our second learning cycle, we're going to take our ideas in the first learning cycle, consider how we can articulate them through our comparative topic sentences.

So we're going to consider how we can use comparative and correlative conjunctions to create effective comparative topic sentences.

So today we're going to be comparing Hardi's, "My Mother's Kitchen".

Rumens' "The Emigree", and Zephaniah's "We Refugees".

Now, before we start considering some of the nuances within their ideas, let's first conceptualise how we might think about a comparison.

When you're comparing poems, it's useful to think of the poets as being in conversation with each other.

And I think this is a really useful analogy, because when we're having a conversation, it's typically a focal point to the discussion.

So we can think about the poets writing about a similar topic or similar theme.

However, within a conversation you don't necessarily agree with all of the ideas of the other person.

There are likely to be subtle differences in those opinions, and this is very similar to comparing poems because they won't be exactly the same.

We're not just looking to note down how they're similar.

We're looking for the subtle differences between them and how they present the overall theme or topic of conversation.

Therefore, we might imagine that Zephaniah, Rumens and Hardi are having a conversation about displacement and the experience of refugees.

Now, refugee is one of our keywords.

It means a person who's been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution or natural disaster.

And displacement is another of our keywords, which means the action of moving something from its place or position.

So these poems are all about people being forcibly moved from their home, from their position.

So what I'd like you to begin by doing, is think about what overall big idea do you think they'd all agree on? So what is similar about the way that all three poets present the concept of being forced away from their home? Now if you're going through this with someone else, you might talk about your ideas with them.

If you're going through this by yourself, you might just think about your ideas.

So pause the video, consider what overall big idea you think all three poets would agree on.

Welcome back, everyone.

It was great to see people sharing summaries of the poems, considering what might be similar and different.

Now, our Oak pupil, Laura said, "I think they would all agree on how negative the experience of displacement is on refugees." Now there are subtle differences within this negativity and how it presents itself.

We're going to explore those later in the lesson.

But all three poems suggest displacement has had some form of negative impact on refugees' lives.

So now that we've identified the overarching similarity between the poems, we can start to look deeper into the smaller details of what the poems might be saying about displacement and belonging.

In order to do that, we're going to consider them a language within the poems. Remember that when you're writing about a poem or poems, you're building an argument.

So you always want to bring it back to how you've reached your conclusions.

What is it in the poem that's made you think that? So what I'd like you to discuss is what are the similarities and differences between the connotations of these words? By connotation I mean the feelings or ideas the words give you.

So our words are: "lost" from Hardi's "My Mother's Kitchen", "lie" from Zephaniah's "We Refugees", and "accuse" from Rumens' "The Emigree".

So pause the video, consider what is similar and different between the connotations of those three words.

Welcome back, everyone.

Some fantastic discussions there.

Let's talk through some ideas together.

Now in terms of similarities, you might have thought that all three words have negative connotations.

They all create a sense of not belonging.

So not feeling happy or comfortable.

"Lost" implies you don't know where you are or how to get back to where you want to be.

"Lie" creates a sense of mistrust.

And "accuse" suggests a hostile atmosphere.

In terms of differences.

we might see "lie" and "accuse" as negativity coming from a hostile external source.

It implies people don't believe you or your story.

On the other hand, "lost" seems more internal because it suggests a lack of purpose.

You don't know where you are, or how to get back to where you want to be.

I think that really speaks to the impact of upheaval.

So now that we've considered what the subtle differences might be, let's just quickly summarise them before we think about the significance.

It's always a good idea to collect your thoughts as you go through conceptualising a comparison because it'll help you stay focused and build a deeper understanding of what the poets are doing.

So pause the video, consider how you would summarise the similarities and differences within the three poems and how they present the negative ideas of displacement.

Welcome back, everyone.

Some great ideas there.

I'm going to share one of our Oak pupils, Sofia's summary with you.

Sofia said, "The words 'lost', 'lie' and 'accuse' all imply that refugees face a negative environment after displacement.

However, 'We Refugees' and 'The Emigree' specifically suggest a hostile environment, while 'My Mother's Kitchen' focuses on the internal impact of upheaval." So we have the overarching similarity of negativity and then the subtle differences within that negativity.

Now, we want to think about what the significance and purpose behind that difference might be.

Always keep in mind a poem is a construction that's designed to elicit a reaction from you.

So pause the video, think about what the significance might be and how the poets are presenting those negative connotations.

Welcome back, everyone.

Some great ideas there.

Now our Oak pupil, Sofia said, "Perhaps Zephaniah and Rumens are challenging people to be more welcoming of refugees, while Hardi might be trying to show people the domestic reality of displacement." So all three poems are trying to raise awareness, we might say, but Zephaniah and Rumens are arguably trying to raise awareness of how people are treated.

Whereas Hardi's trying to raise awareness of the internal struggles facing refugees.

Now for a quick check for understanding.

What I'd like you to do is tell me whether the following statement is true or false.

So is it true or false that all three poems suggest that refugees face a hostile environment due to displacement? Pause the video and make your selection now.

The correct answer is false.

So very well done if you've got that right.

Now I'd like to tell me why it's false.

So what is it about the language that suggests that not all three poems imply a hostile environment? Pause the video, take a few moments to consider.

Welcome back, everyone.

Now you might have said: "While words such as 'lie' and 'accuse' from "We Refugees".

and 'The Emigree' imply that refugees face a hostile environment, 'My Mother's Kitchen' instead focuses on a lack of purpose through words such as 'lost'." So very well done if you got that right.

Now let's consider how we might tie those ideas to ideas of belonging.

Remember that belonging is one of our keywords, it means a feeling of being happy or comfortable as part of a particular group.

Now, Zephaniah's "We Refugees", Hardi's "My Mother's Kitchen" and Rumens' "The Emigree" are all part of the Edexcel Belonging Anthology.

Therefore, they've all been chosen to be part of this anthology and we can therefore see the concept of belonging as a thread that binds all of these poems together.

We want to consider the similarities and differences between how they're presenting this theme of belonging.

In order to do so, I want you to consider the following three words and think about what the similarities and differences are between the connotations of the words.

Remember that connotations means ideas, feelings, or emotions.

So our three words are "home" from "My Mother's Kitchen", "place" from "We Refugees" and "city" from "The Emigree".

So pause the video, consider what the similarities and differences are between the connotations of these words.

Welcome back, everyone.

Now you might have noticed that all three words suggest a sense of place and location.

So that's a similarity that connects them all.

However, they have different connotations when it comes to how we might feel about those places.

"My Mother's Kitchen" is the only one of the three poems to use the word "home".

And when we think of home, we think of somewhere we feel happy and comfortable.

It's somewhere we belong.

However, "place" and "city" don't have those same happy and comforting connotations.

So we might infer that both "We Refugees" and "The Emigree" are suggesting that displacement causes people to lose that sense of belonging, because places are simply locations rather than somewhere we feel happy and comfortable.

Now let's just take a moment to have a closer look at the language in "The Emigree" and this idea of place and belonging.

So though "The Emigree" doesn't refer to their country as home, they do refer to it as "my" and they do personify the city.

So they attribute human characteristics to the city.

What I'd like you to do is think about why that might be? What might the significance be in terms of belonging? So pause the video, take a few moments to consider.

Welcome back, everyone.

Some fantastic ideas there, particularly around how personification implies a sense of an emotional connection between the speaker and the place because we're attributing those human characteristics to it.

As our Oak pupil, Laura says, "I think the speaker's acknowledging they'll always have a connection to their home, particularly through the word 'branded' as it suggests a permanent mark, but they cannot return and therefore they don't belong there anymore." So they don't feel happy or comfortable there, even though they know they'll always be connected to it.

Now for another quick check for understanding.

So Hardi's "My Mother's Kitchen" is the only one of the three poems to use the word "home".

What does this imply? Is it A: That the mother doesn't feel connected to her home country anymore? B: the mother feels as if she still belongs in her home country? Or C, the mother feels connected but doesn't feel as if she belongs in her home country anymore? Pause the video and make your selection now.

Now, we think of home as somewhere we feel safe and comfortable.

So the correct answer is B: the use of home implies the mother feels as if she still belongs in her home country.

So very well done if you got that right.

Now we're going to take those ideas about belonging.

We're going to expand them to think about heritage.

Now heritage is another one of our keywords.

It means the history, traditions, practises of particular countries and society.

And I think this is a thread that runs through the Belonging anthology because I think there's a connection between where we feel happy and comfortable and where we feel a connection to our family history and our traditions.

Now in order to think about how we might consider how each of the poems considers ideas of heritage, I'd like you to think about the following ideas from each of the poems. So in "We Refugees", the speaker describes their home country as a forest, but the imagery quickly shifts and the forest becomes a field.

In "My Mother's Kitchen", the speaker's final acknowledgement is that she will not inherit her mother's trees despite how much love and care the mother put into her plants before they were forced to leave.

In "The Emigree", the child's toy is called "hollow".

We might connect toys to our family history because it connects to our childhood and our sense of how we grew up.

So what I'd like you to think about, is what you think these poems might be suggesting about the impact that displacement has on belonging and heritage.

Pause the video, take a few moments to consider.

Welcome back, everyone.

Some fantastic ideas there.

It was great to see people notice the similarities in the imagery of "We Refugees" and "My Mother's Kitchen" in terms of metaphorical trees.

So shared imagery implies a shared idea.

Now I'm going to share with you one of the ideas of my Oak pupils, Laura.

So Laura said, "I think they're all using metaphors to suggest that becoming a refugee means you lose this connection to your heritage and therefore you lose part of your sense of identity and your belonging." So both "We Refugees" and "My Mother's Kitchen", suggest that trees have been lost, which suggests a sense of family connection and history being lost, while the "hollow" child's toy in "The Emigree" could suggest the speaker has no connection to their childhood anymore and therefore no connection to how they grew up.

Now for a quick check for understanding.

What I'd like you to do is tell me whether the following statement is true or false.

So is it true or false that all the poems imply the connection between refugees and their heritage is damaged through displacement? Pause the video and make your selection now.

The correct answer is true.

So very well done if you got that right.

Now I'd like you to tell me why.

So what is it about the imagery and word choice of the poems that suggests the refugees' connection to their heritage is damaged through displacement? Pause the video, take a few moments to consider.

Welcome back, everyone.

Now you might have said, "The metaphors of lost 'trees', a fallen 'forest' and a 'hollow' child's toy might suggest that refugees have lost a connection with their heritage." So very well done if you got that right.

Now let's consider the form and structure of the poems. I often think this is something that feels harder to connect to than the language because we're so used to interpreting images and words, but I'd really encourage you to see the form and structure as offering a pattern to the reader and a journey through the poem.

And I think they'll make it easier to connect to what the poets are trying to express through their use of form and structure.

So what I'd like you to do is look at the poems. You don't have to read anything, just look at how they appear on the page.

And I'd like you to consider what is similar about how they all appear on the page.

So pause the video, take a few moments to consider.

Welcome back, everyone.

I know it feels a bit odd to just look at the poems, but often it's a great way to start thinking about the patterns that the poet is creating and then we can start to analyse why they've chosen that particular pattern.

So you'll notice that all the poems are split into separate stanzas, so they all have breaks between the groups of lines within the poem.

Now, I'd like you to think about what that might mean.

So what might the significance be? Think about what we said earlier, about the big idea about displacement, that all three poems are saying.

Pause the video, take a few moments to consider.

Welcome back, everyone.

It was great to see people using that starting point of negativity in regards to displacement, to consider how we might interpret this pattern within the poems. As our Oak pupil, Sofia said, "Perhaps it suggests a fragmented nature of existence due to displacement? How people never feel settled anywhere because they're always being moved?" So the breaks between the lines might represent how their lives are constantly being disrupted and changed.

Now as well as looking at how the poems appear on the page, another structural technique that I think is often overlooked is a really powerful way of communicating the poet's message.

is to consider our journey through the poem.

So where do we start and where do we end up? And why might the poet want us to start and end in those particular places? In the case of where we start, all three poems use "I" in the opening line.

What I'd like to do is think about what the significance of that might be.

Why would they all begin with "I"? Pause the video, take a few moments to consider.

Welcome back, everyone.

It was great to see people making a connection between "I" and the subjects of the poems, because it suggests we are hearing the voices of the refugees and therefore we might suggest potentially they're trying to foreground the personal experience of refugees within their poems. Now because we're comparing poems, we want to think about the subtle differences within their similarities.

So while all the poems begin with "I" in the first line, "We Refugees" then switches between "I" and "we" throughout the poem, while the other two poems stay with "I".

What might the significance be? Pause the video, take a few moments to consider.

Welcome back, everyone.

It was great to see people noticing the collective pronoun of "we" and how we might link the overall message of "We Refugees".

Now Zephaniah is potentially trying to say we could all become refugees, while "My Mother's Kitchen" and "The Emigree" are trying to help us see the experience of displacement through the refugees' eyes.

So now that we've considered our starting point, the journey through each of the poems, let's consider the end point.

What I'd like you to do is read the final lines of each of the poems and then consider what your final impression of the poem is.

So that might be a concept or an emotion.

Pause the video and take a few minutes to consider.

Welcome back, everyone, some fantastic discussions there around the mood that each of the poems leaves you with.

I think this is why looking at the final lines is so important.

It gives us an insight into how the poets want us to emotionally respond to their ideas.

So in terms of the three poems, you might have said: "My Mother's Kitchen" leaves us with a melancholic feeling, a sad feeling, because of the idea the speaker feels disconnected from their heritage and their family tree.

In "The Emigree", the image of sunlight might suggest a more hopeful tone.

And I think the image of sunlight moving through "The Emigree" is one my favourite images within the anthology because I love how it becomes more tangible every time.

So to end on such a concrete idea of sunlight, really enforce this sense of positivity.

In "We Refugees", the concept of ending on the word "somewhere", I think creates a sad tone for me, because it suggests that people feel a sense of disconnection from where they are and a lack of belonging because it's merely somewhere rather than home.

We also might consider the word "we" in the final line and that might be Zephaniah's way of reminding us we are all human and part of this collective humanity.

Now for a quick check for understanding.

What I'd like you to do is tell me whether the following statement is true or false.

So is it true or false that arguably, all the poems reflect the fragmented nature of existence of refugees through their form? Pause the video and make your selection now.

The correct answer is true.

So very well done if you've got that right.

Now, what I'd like you to do now is tell me why it's true? So why is it true that all of the poems arguably reflect this fragmented nature of existence of refugees through their form? Pause the video.

Take a few moments to consider.

Welcome back, everyone.

Now you might have said all the poems use multiple stanzas which could reflect the idea that refugees are continually having to stop and restart their lives elsewhere.

So very well done if you've got that right.

Amazing work so far, everyone, we're now at the first task of the lesson.

Now when we're thinking about comparing poems, you'll often be asked to compare two poems because there's similarities and differences in how they present a certain theme.

And it's up to you to pick which poem you think will offer you the best chance to discuss those subtle differences within a theme.

So we're going to use everything we've discussed in the lesson so far and use that to consider which poem you'd compare with Zephaniah's "We Refugees".

So imagine you've been asked to answer the following question: Compare the ideas of displacement in Zephaniah's "We Refugees" and one other poem.

And I'd like you to consider whether you would choose Rumens' "The Emigree" or Hardi's "My Mother's Kitchen" as your comparative poem.

Why would you pick that one? So pause the video, take a few minutes to consider.

Welcome back, everyone.

Some fantastic ideas there.

What I'd like you to do is consider the discussion of two of our Oak pupils, Sofia and Laura, and think about how well their ideas align with your ideas.

So what are the similarities and differences within the ideas? So Laura said, "I would choose Rumens' 'The Emigree' because I think I'd focus on the hostile environment implied by both poems. And use that to talk about wider ideas in society." And Sofia says, "I would choose Hardi's 'My Mother's Kitchen' because I think the similarities within the 'tree' metaphors show how displacement affects ideas of heritage and belonging." So pause the video, think about how well your discussions align with Laura and Sofia's discussion.

Well, welcome back, everyone.

It was great to see people reflecting on their discussions because I always think it's useful to see how other people express themselves verbally because it gives us a chance to consider how we express our ideas and how we might able to grow and develop that.

Amazing work so far, everyone.

We're now on to the second learning cycle.

We're going to think about how we can express our ideas for effective comparative topic sentences.

Now a topic sentence will introduce the main idea of your paragraph.

So it's essential to construct a clear topic sentence because it shows the reader what your argument is.

It allows them to understand your argument.

So an example of a topic sentence might be: "'We Refugees' explores the negative experience of refugees." So we know from this opening, your argument is that Zephaniah presents the experience of refugees as negative.

Now a comparative topic sentence fulfils the same purpose that's introduced in the main idea of your paragraph, but it'll offer a similarity or difference in relation to the two poems that you are comparing.

So an example might be: Both "We Refugees" and The Emigree" explore the hostile environment experienced by refugees following their displacement.

Here we have a similarity.

We know the argument's going to explore how both poems present this idea of hostility towards refugees.

Now in terms of the construction of your comparative topic sentence, there are two types of conjunction you can use when writing comparative topic sentences.

So a conjunction essentially is a word or a phrase that connects ideas together.

There are two main types you can use within a comparative topic sentence.

You might use a comparative conjunction and they can be used to compare ideas in a sentence and to show difference.

You might also use correlative conjunctions and they are pairs of words that work together to connect ideas within a sentence.

Now we're going to talk through some examples now of how you might use these conjunctions before you then have a go at constructing your own comparative topic sentences.

Now, as we just said, comparative conjunctions can be used to compare ideas within a sentence and to show similarities and differences.

So you start with your first idea, then you insert a comparative conjunction, then you express your second idea, in order to show the connection between the two ideas.

So an example might be: "My Mother's Kitchen" implies that refugees still feel as though they belong in their home country, and "We Refugees" depicts a disconnection between refugees and their home country.

Now these ideas suggest a difference.

Therefore, we want to show that through a comparative conjunction.

We might use words such as "however", "contrastingly", "whereas".

And therefore, our complete sentence might be: "My Mother's Kitchen" implies that refugees still feel as though they belong in their home country; however, "We Refugees" depicts a disconnection between refugees and their home country.

Now you'll notice in terms of how to insert your comparative conjunction, you want to use a semicolon after your first idea, and then a comma after your comparative conjunction before moving on to your second idea.

You can then interchange "however" with "contrastingly" or "whereas".

And you want to try and use a variety of comparative conjunctions throughout your writing so it doesn't feel monotonous to the reader.

Now for a quick check for understanding.

So which two statements use comparative conjunctions to create a comparative topic sentence? Is it A: Zephaniah depicts the hostile environment experienced by refugees; whereas, Hardi focuses on internal lack of purpose, B: Both Hardi and Rumens imply that refugees still feel a connection to their home country; however, Hardi's language implies a sense of belonging, C: All three poems use "I" in the opening line to potentially foreground the experience of refugees, or D: "We Refugees" explores the hostile environment experienced by refugees.

Hardi also depicts a sense of hostility felt by refugees? So pause the video and make your selections now.

Now, the correct answers are A and B.

A uses the comparative conjunction "whereas" to express the differences between the ideas; while B uses "however" to express that difference.

So very well done if you got that right.

Now, as well as comparative conjunctions, you also might use corelative conjunctions.

So these are used for expressing similarities between text.

Now these are constructed in a different way to a comparative topic sentence, they use comparative conjunctions.

To use correlative conjunctions, you want to start with the two poems, what you think they're doing similarly.

We then express that by stating both the poet's names, in this case Zephaniah and Rumens, and we have the idea that refugees face hostility.

Now we add in a correlative conjunction.

In this case we think "both" and "and".

So our complete sentence is: Both Zephaniah and Rumens imply that refugees face hostility.

A second example might be: They don't know if refugees can return home after displacement, though neither of the poems suggest that.

So you might use the correlative conjunction "neither" and "nor".

And our complete sentence would be: Neither Zephaniah nor Rumens suggest that refugees can return home after displacement.

Now, for a quick check for understanding.

What I'd like you to do is select the sentence which uses correlative conjunctions.

Is it A: "We Refugees" depicts a lack of connection between refugees and their heritage, B: Rumens implies that the speaker still feels a connection to their home country.

Hardi suggests that the mother still feels that she belongs in her home country, or C: Both Zephaniah and Hardi use metaphors to depict the lack of connection between refugees and heritage? Pause the video and make your selection now.

The correct answer is C because it shows a connection between ideas, but using the correlative conjunction "both" and "and" to say that both Zephaniah and Hardi use metaphors to depict the lack of connection between refugees and their heritage.

So very well done if you got that right.

Fantastic work so far, everyone.

We're now on the final task of the lesson, where I'd like you to write two comparative topic sentences using conjunctions.

So I'd like you to use the sentence starters and key ideas to help you.

So examples of comparative conjunction you might use are "however", "contrastingly", "on the other hand" and "whereas".

An example sentence might be: "Hardy depicts the mother's continued sense of belonging; contrastingly Zephaniah implies a lack of belonging." For corelative conjunctions, you might use both X and Y, neither X nor Y, whether X or Y, just as X, so does/is Y.

And your example sentence might be: Whether it's hostility or a lack of purpose, "We Refugees" and "My Mother's Kitchen" depict the negative impact of displacement." And then here are some of the key ideas we discussed in our first learning cycle.

"We Refugees" and "The Emigree" suggest hostility faced by refugees.

All three poems depict the fragmented existence of refugees.

Arguably, all three poems suggest a lack of connection to refugees' heritage.

So use the key ideas and example sentences to construct two of your own comparative topic sentences.

Pause the video, take a few minutes to complete the task.

Welcome back, everyone.

It was great to see people using the examples as their guides because that's why we give you examples, in order to give you a template to construct your own work.

Now I'd like you to read our Oak pupil, Laura's comparative topic sentence.

And I'd like you to give it a what went well and an even better if.

So, Laura's comparative topic sentence is: "Both 'We Refugees' and 'The Emigree' use 'I' in the opening line of their poems; however, 'We Refugees' then changes between 'we' and 'I' throughout while 'The Emigree' continues with 'I'." Now remember, a topic sentence is designed to introduce the main idea of your paragraph to the reader.

So pause the video, give Laura's topic sentence of a what went well and an even better if.

Welcome back, everyone.

Now, for what went well, you might have said that Laura has used comparative and correlative conjunctions correctly to show differences and similarities.

So Laura has used the correlative conjunctions "both" "and" and she uses the comparative conjunction "however" to suggest similarities and differences between the poems. However, if I even better it, you might have said that Laura has compared the poets' methods in a topic sentence.

Topic sentences should lead with big ideas in relation to the question focus to ensure a meaningful comparison.

Distinctions regarding form and structure can be discussed later in the paragraph.

Now what I'd like you to do is read back through your work and consider whether you focus on ideas or whether you've compared methods techniques in your comparative topic sentences.

If you have, I'd like you to edit your comparative topic sentence so they focus on big ideas instead.

So pause the video and read back through comparative topic sentences now.

Well, welcome back, everyone.

It was great to see people reading back through the work and editing it, because our work is never the finished product.

We can always go back and make small changes and improvements to make our arguments as clear to the reader as possible.

You all did amazingly well today, everyone.

Here's a summary of what we covered.

Rumens, Zephaniah, and Hardi all explore the impact of displacement on refugees and their sense of belonging.

Zephaniah and Rumens may use language to reflect the hostile environment that refugees experience.

In contrast, Hardi may be focusing on the upheaval and lack of purpose that displacement causes.

Arguably all three poems imply that displacement affects the refugees' connection to their heritage.

I really hope you enjoyed the lesson, everyone.

I hope see you for another lesson soon.

Goodbye.