Hi everyone, this is Mr. Chandrapala here, and I'm really looking forward to this lesson with you today.

Today we're gonna be having a look at analysing model answers.

This is one of the most difficult things I think that we do in the English GCSE curriculum.

I think that you're gonna hopefully find it really helpful to break down the best ways of answering this question.

Comparison is such a key skill when we're thinking about poetry, and if we can see what it looks like when it's done well, we'll be able to apply it really confidently in our own answers.

Let's jump in.

So today we're going to work on recognising excellent writing practise in a model answer.

Our keywords for today's lesson include the verb to compare, which is to note similarities and dissimilarities between two or more things.

We're gonna be thinking about context, which is the circumstances in which the text was produced.

We'll be considering perspective, which is a writer's point of view or attitude towards something, and then we'll be considering the adjective poignant, which means to stir one's emotions, to be emotionally memorable.

So today we're going to start off by reading a comparative response.

So sometimes when comparing poetry, you'll be given a named poem and asked to compare it to a poem of your choice.

This usually happens when you're looking at the anthology poems, so the known poems that you have walking into the poetry exam.

We would really strongly suggest that you choose a poem that matches the poem you've been given thematically.

Whilst it may be tempting to compare by method, actually, because poets are often talking about different ideas or trying to communicate different messages, it's much harder to compare by method, and actually, you're much better looking at something thematically and comparing similar or ideas which are thematically linked, but are saying different things, ultimately.

So for example, if you were given the poem "Dulce at Decorum Est" written by Wilfred Owen, which other poems explore a similar theme in your anthology? Pause the video now and talk to the person next to you.

Maybe jot down some notes, but which poem would you compare to "Dulce at Decorum Est"? When you're ready, hit play.

Some lovely discussions there.

So you could have compared "The Manhunt," or alternatively, "The Soldier," or even "A Wife in London," or "Mametz Wood." All of these poems are linked to the subject of war, they're linked to the subject of conflict, and so they make sense when looking at "Dulce at Decorum Est." We're going to read a model comparison answer which compares the poems "Dulce at Decorum Est," which is our given poem, and "The Soldier," which is the poem that we've chosen to compare "Dulce at Decorum Est." The question we're looking at as part of our model answer is in "Dulce at Decorum Est," the poet explores ideas about war.

Choose one other poem from the anthology that also explores war.

Compare the presentation of war in "Dulce at Decorum Est" to the presentation of war in your chosen poem.

What points of comparison might we want to consider when thinking about these two poems? If we're thinking about "The Soldier," how is it similar to "Dulce at Decorum Est"? Alternatively, how is it quite different? Pause the video now, talk to the person next to you, see if you can jot down your own topic sentences of comparison, and when you're ready, hit play.

Superb work there, everyone, really like the range of ideas.

Let's see what we can discuss in this model answer.

So the first model paragraph of the student model response is what we're going to start with.

Both Owen and Brooke present the experience of war or the imagined experience of war as a life-altering one, however, the poets have understandably different perspectives.

Whilst Brooke's poem exemplifies the optimistic pre-World War I attitude of Britain, Owens reflects the brutal reality of war that only began to emerge when soldiers had started to return home, dismissed with shell shock and life-changing injuries.

These poems represent opposite ends of the spectrum of perspectives on war in the early 20th century, which makes for an interesting comparison on the poets' depictions of war.

I'd just like you to pause here, and I want you to turn the person next to you, or if you're working alone, just jot down some ideas.

What argument is the student making? I want you to identify all words which show comparison between the two texts.

Pause the video again, circle those words which show comparison, and underline where you can find where the argument is being made.

When you've done that, hit play.

Some really interesting ideas.

I'm really pleased with the level of discussion that all of you were getting into, and how carefully you were checking for those comparison words.

So we can see that the first sentence, both Owen and Brooke present the experience of war, the imagined experience of war as a life-altering one, however, the poets have understandably different perspectives effectively summarises the student's argument.

Though the poets have similar themes, the poets have contrasting perspectives.

In terms of our comparative connectives, they're all over the place, and that means that we've got that really consistent comparison between the two poems. Both, however, different, whilst, opposite, comparison, all of these words are linked to comparing these poems and therefore their ideas, which is really important, bearing in mind the nature of our question, which is so focused on comparison.

So let's just have a quick check for understanding here.

Which of the following is not a comparative connective? Is it option A, whilst, option B, both, or option C, furthermore? Once you've selected, hit play.

So excellent work there, everyone.

I can confirm that the word which is not a comparative connective is furthermore.

Whilst and both, excellent comparative words.

Whilst suggests that you're going to explore a difference.

Both suggests that you're going to explore a similarity, whilst furthermore really says that you're going to add emphasis or develop an idea further, not the fact that you're comparing.

So I'm just gonna give you a moment to practise here.

I want you to read the rest of the student response in full once through.

Then I want you to read the response through in full again, but I want you to complete the following activities as you read.

You'll need three different symbols or colours of highlighters.

Don't worry if you don't have any highlighters with you.

If you've just got a pen, you can underline, circle, square bracket.

So you may want to highlight in one colour or underline any reference to comparison that the student makes.

You may want to highlight or square bracket the quotations that the student uses, and their comments on those quotations.

And finally, you may want to highlight or circle any references the student makes to context.

Those are the circumstances in which the poems were produced.

As you are highlighting that response, I really want you to think about what you notice about the response.

I want you to note down any thoughts or observations about how that is being structured, or the ideas being covered.

Once you've done that, hit play.

Some excellent work there, everyone, a really impressive and diligent approach to understanding that model response.

As I said earlier, understanding models is so important because it's the thing that allows us to develop our own really confidently, and to develop our own responses knowing what we're looking to hit.

As we can see here, the success criteria is really simple.

We want that range of comparison, we're looking for quotations and then exploring those quotations, and we're then looking to link our ideas to context, the wider ideas, the circumstances in which the poem was produced.

We're just gonna take some feedback here, and we're gonna think about what our Oak pupils have observed about the model response.

Jun had read it and said, "I noticed that though the student explores the poems separately, they still make little references to the other poem if there is a point of comparison to be made." Whilst Jacob noted, "I noticed that the student indicated whereabouts in the structure of the poem their quotations were from, for example, in the final stanza." Sophia, on the other hand, noticed that the student peppered their analysis throughout.

They tended to focus on bigger methods, and offered a range of analytical comments.

It's worth saying here that Jun has pointed out a real EBI within the piece of work.

We should be looking to create really relevant comparisons all the way through our response.

Notice how when we looked at the first paragraph, there were so many comparative connectives, which were allowing us to see how that comparison was being developed.

It's really great, though, that the student was situating their quote.

As Jacob points out, they were pointing out exactly from where in the text they were pulling their ideas from, which means that they've got a much better understanding of structure, which means that I as an examiner, I'm going to be so much more impressed, because hopefully they'll make comment on that structure.

And Sophia pointing out that issue around bigger methods, there's a real balance to be struck, isn't there? We don't want to not talk about keywords and key symbols, but also it would be a shame to talk about a poem and not talk about an extended metaphor, or not consider actually the switch in perspective of a poem, because that is a really significant idea method for us to be considering.

I want you to select each of these at a time, so maybe start with Jun's EBI, then Jacob's before moving to Sophia's.

Can you find an example of each of these observations in the model? Pause the video now, and using these comments, see if you can find each of these.

Once you've done that, hit play.

Excellent work there, everyone, really pleased with how focused you were all doing that.

Let's keep going.

We're now going to be working on using context as evidence.

So let's just clarify here what context is.

Context is the set of circumstances in which a text was produced.

This might include who the writer was, such as their gender, their personality, their beliefs, or their politics.

It may include what the time period the text was written in, such as the socioeconomic and political context.

It could include the writer's inspiration, perhaps other writers or other texts.

But we need to consider here why does any of this matter? Why is context so important? Pause the video now if you need to take any notes about what we mean when we're talking about context.

Get a note of those in your work.

But then I want you to write down or talk to the person next to you and discuss why is context so significant? Why is it so important that we understand it when we are writing about poetry? When you've done that, hit play.

Excellent work there, everyone, really pleased with the range of ideas when covering that.

So context is really important because obviously it helps us understand the writer's message a little bit more, and it helps us understand from what perspective they're choosing to write.

With what I'm thinking about, Owen, for example, who was a man who had taught abroad briefly before coming back to England and fighting in the First World War, having suffered serious shell shock, he found that his idea of war really changed.

He felt incredibly disillusioned by the way that it had been sold to him, which maybe explains actually how he constructs "Dulce at Decorum Est." The context helps us to ascertain and understand the writer's perspective.

Their perspective helps us to try and understand their aims, what they're trying to achieve when writing their text.

If there's anything you need from this slide, pause the video now and write it down, and then when you've done that, hit play.

Fantastic, let's keep moving.

So when we're using context as evidence, it can be useful when analysing a text to ask, what do I know about this writer, and how might this help me to better understand their work? However, lots of students actually flip this, and they say rather than those questions there, what do I think about the text? Now what can I say about the writer? The issue with this is that it means that context is almost bolted on to our main idea, and really I want our main idea to be our knowledge or our understanding the message of the text to be working in tandem with our knowledge of the writer of the poem.

So this is really important.

I need us to be considering what we know about the writer, and how might this help better understand the text, rather than thinking about the text first, and then what we can say about the writer.

What might the limitations of the second approach be? Why might it not be the best approach to take to analysing text? Pause the video again, discuss that with your partner, and when you've done that, hit play.

So approaching our writing like this can lead to including irrelevant contextual information that does not support our argument.

For example, if I was thinking about "Dulce at Decorum Est," I know that it's really helpful context to bring up the fact that Owen was a man who had fought in the First World War, and having experienced shell shock, felt differently about his perspective on war.

He had felt betrayed, let down, mis-sold a dream by the propaganda of the British army.

What would be less helpful when thinking about therefore his criticism of war propaganda is saying that he died just shortly before the end of the First World War.

He doesn't know that he's going to die, therefore, it makes very little sense.

Or he doesn't know that he's going to die at the moment that he does, therefore, it makes little sense for us to make a note of that when arguing about the message of "Dulce at Decorum Est." So let's look at an example of how we can think about context.

So if we think again about what we know about, well, for Owen, and we need to then think about how that helps us to better understand "Dulce at Decorum Est." So we know that Owen was a soldier who was discharged from service in 1917 because of his shell shock.

We know that he was friends with Siegfried Sassoon, who had encouraged him to write war poetry.

We know this might therefore explain the graphic nature of his descriptions.

He had witnessed things firsthand, and therefore, he understood what war was really like.

Now where do I see this idea that Owen knew the reality of war, the extreme violence and danger soldiers were faced with in the poem? Now, if that's our thought process there, we need to think about how we could write that up, so here is our thought process from earlier written up.

Owen was discharged from service in 1917 with shell shock, PTSD.

At the time, his friend Siegfried Sassoon recommended that he uses poetry as a cathartic tool.

Owen took his friend's advice, stating "all a poet can do today is warn." Owen felt that it was his duty to tell the truth about war and warn those at home who had been deceived by the glamorised depictions of war in the propaganda about what the war was truly like.

This warning or condemnation is most evident at the end of the poem, suggesting, sorry, where Owen refers to "Dulce at Decorum Est" saying as an "old lie," suggesting that he feels that soldiers have been deceived and misled by the propaganda.

What do we notice about the way in which context has been used here? Pause the video and discuss with your partner what this demonstrates to us about how context should be used when comparing poems. When you've done that, hit play.

Well done, everyone.

So what you may notice here in terms of context is when you're using that context to drive forward the argument, we've noted here this key quote about "all a poet today is warn," and then we're thinking about that warning, and then what specifically Owen is trying to warn us about.

The context, therefore, strengthens the argument.

And not only that, I pointed out that quote, the context there is so relevant, it's so specific.

I'm not just saying Owen was a soldier who fought in the First World war.

I'm giving really specific examples of what he believed, what he thought about his time at war.

So let's just have a quick check for understanding here.

What two things should we ensure that we are doing as we use context meaningfully? Is it that we make sure it is relevant, that we make sure that we use it at the end of our argument, that we make sure that it is specific, or that we make sure that we have included facts that other students may not know? Pause the video now, select two of those options, and when you're ready, hit play.

Well done, everyone.

We can say that it is important for context to be relevant and that it is specific.

I really don't need you to know the most niche elements about Owen or anyone else's life for your English literature exam.

It makes no difference to me.

What I need you to be able to do is to relate whatever you know back to your argument to make sure that it's specific, to make sure that it's relevant.

If it's not, then it's a much harder to give you the credit that you deserve for trying to use context.

If we're thinking about "The Soldier," which of the following is an example of using specific context? Is it Rupert Brooke never fought in the war, Rupert Brooke died of infection in 1915 on a ship on the way to the war, or Rupert Brooke's death was a tragedy, and he died around 1917 on the way to war? Pause the video now and select which one is the best specific example of context.

Well done.

We can see that B, Rupert Brooke died of an infection in 1915 on the way to the war is the most specific.

Whilst it could be argued that C is very similar, C is just a knowledge error.

Brooke didn't die in 1917, he died in 1915.

So we need to be careful of that.

We need to make sure that we are specific, but also correct.

So we're going to practise here.

I've got a paragraph from the model answer.

We see Brooke's patriotism most poignantly in the latter half of the first stanza where Brooke personifies England, describing her as a mother figure who was "born, shaped, made aware." Brooke describes the gifts of freedom and beauty that England has bestowed upon him: "her flowers to love, her ways to roam," and describes himself as a physical and spiritual extension of his country, which he's evidently very devoted to.

Here, Brooke's gratitude for his country is evident.

We can infer that his gratitude may motivate his extreme patriotism and consequent willingness to die for his country.

On the following slide, there are going to be some facts about Brooke.

I need you to choose one fact that you think is relevant, and you think supports the argument this paragraph explores.

So this paragraph is thinking about Brooke's patriotism, and actually how that may motivate him to die for his country.

So you could select facts such as the fact that he was born in 1887, the fact that he began writing poetry at an early age and continued to write throughout his education at Rugby School and Cambridge University, the fact that he never sadly fought in the war, as he died of infection in 1915, or the fact that at the outbreak of war, Brooke immediately volunteered and joined the Royal Navy Volunteer Reserve.

Once you have chosen one of those four facts, I want you to add that as context to your selected, the context that you have selected into your paragraph.

I only need to make sure that you use it to support the idea that Brooke was very patriotic and willing to die for his country.

I want you to consider how it may have affected his outlook, and therefore, his perspective of war.

Pause the video now, and select which one you think is most helpful for developing that argument, and then write out explaining how it changes or affects his outlook.

Pause the video now, and have that go for yourself.

Superb work there, everyone, some really thoughtful consideration of what makes good, specific context here, and what's relevant to our argument.

I personally would've been really interested in going for the fourth, so the fact that Brooke immediately volunteered and joined the Royal Navy Volunteer Reserve, or potentially the fact of his education, the fact that he was privately schooled.

Rugby is a private school, and Cambridge University, where sort of often very rich, upper-class members of society would be educated during that period, and therefore, maybe providing him with a certain worldview, maybe changing his outlook on the world.

But the most relevant piece of context is that final one.

At the outbreak of war, Brooke immediately volunteers and joins the Royal Navy Volunteer Reserve.

It makes the most sense, because even that focus on the fact that he immediately did it means that we can talk about how he deeply felt this connection to this country.

So how does this link to his patriotism? We could say the fact that Brooke volunteered immediately showed an innate patriotism.

Brooke did not have to be convinced to join the war effort, as he clearly felt very strongly about defending this country.

This patriotism is evident throughout the poem, particularly in this personification of England.

What I want you to note here about the fact that he personifies England is the fact that actually, what the candidate has been able to do here, or what this example has been able to do is link the wider idea, the contextual idea to a specific method so we can see how his worldview affects the method he chooses, and that's what we're trying to do.

We're really trying to understand how context changes the way that we write, how it changes our choices of method and writing.

You've worked excellently today, so let's just summarise our key learning from analysing model answers.

We now know that when comparing poems, you should choose the poem that matches the poem you've been given thematically.

We know that comparative connectives are needed to structure the response, and we can discuss the poems separately, but ideally, we should make small comparative comments throughout.

We want to pepper that analysis throughout the argument.

We can focus on bigger methods and offer a range of analytical comments.

Finally, we're looking at context, which is a set of circumstances in which a text was produced, we need that context to be relevant, specific, and to support our argument.

You've been absolutely fantastic today, and I've been really pleased to share this half an hour with you.

I've been so impressed by your work.

I hope to see you again soon, and until then, I hope you have a very lovely day.