Argument-Driven Comparative Analysis/Synthesis (ELL)

_{Our Essential Lessons are a sequence of lessons that form the backbone of the Writing Program curriculum, illustrating what we want all students to learn across our program’s diverse course topics.}

Bringing two or more texts into conversation with one another is a key aspect of WR 112, and a significant challenge to students, who might be more familiar with surface-level compare/contrast papers. This lesson attempts to complicate what students think they know about comparative analysis, offering multiple ways to bring texts into conversation.

Inclusion

This lesson equips students to make nuanced comparisons; though the focus is primarily on two class texts, students can also apply these insights to making cross-cultural observations that avoid stereotypes or superficial judgments.

Objective

Students will be able to form arguable claims that respond to two texts and evaluate the effectiveness of other claims.

Key Terms

common ground, grounds for comparison, conversation, significance, claim, acknowledgment and response, analysis

Timing

This lesson spans a series of class sessions in the middle of the semester, after the first paper and leading up to the comparative analysis paper.

Conceptual Framework

The Writing Program curriculum consistently emphasizes that all writing is part of a larger conversation. Before students can skillfully synthesize and engage with multiple sources in their own arguments, it is crucial that they learn the rhetorical moves of comparative analysis to develop effective strategies for establishing logical relationships and common ground among sources, even those that may not seem to present obvious connections. This skill is also important with respect to the WR 112 Hub unit for Global Citizenship and Intercultural Literacy, as comparative analysis is an essential element of intercultural communication and competence. Acknowledging common ground for different cultural groups will enhance students’ global understanding and help them become better informed global citizens.

Students’ prior knowledge of comparative analysis commonly centers on standard compare/contrast essays and does not extend much beyond the mere acknowledgment of common ground and the various similarities and/or differences between the texts. For an argument-driven comparative analysis, that discovery is a necessary first step in establishing the common ground between the two texts and clarifying their comparative relationship (their grounds for comparison). Without it, readers will not understand the importance of bringing the texts in the first place (why are these two particular texts being held up for comparison and what can we gain from exploring them further?). Acknowledging the comparative relationships of texts activates students’ consideration of the larger significance and purpose of the conversation, and their own reasons for entering it (what can they contribute to the discussion and why is it important to explore it further?). The establishment of the grounds for comparison facilitates students’ understanding of how to logically frame an argument via the three-part introduction, moving from context to a destabilizing moment/issue, while also considering the larger significance and importance of exploring that issue further, and eventually entering the conversation themselves with their claim.

Lesson

Genre Awareness

While argumentative essays are a logical focal point for text selections in this lesson, students can also establish common ground across other genres of texts. Many narrative and journalistic essays also comment upon themes and issues that are central to the argumentative essays. Likewise, as students move on to the longer work (whether a novel or memoir), they will be synthesizing with previously-read essays based on shared themes as well. The various genres assigned in class can therefore foster important discussions about how the rhetorical situation informs how and why multiple viewpoints are expressed in a text. It is important for students to identify the multiple “voices” in different genres of texts to reinforce when the author is asserting a (subjective) position and/or introducing the views of others, and for what purpose.

Metacognition

Once students have drafted their own claims and critically assessed their classmates’ claims, ask them to consider how their understanding of an effective claim (and, in particular, an effective claim for a comparative analysis paper) has changed throughout this exercise. What obstacles have they faced in moving beyond the grounds for comparison to make an argumentative assertion as a result of placing the two texts in conversation? What greater understanding have they come to as a result of placing these texts in conversation (an understanding that they did not have when considering each text on its own)? What greater insights are they coming to about their own writing? What are their goals and priorities as they move on to the drafting stage?

PART I: MAKING CONNECTIONS

Put two different authors students have read into conversation with each other. You may want to use this exercise as homework; it prompts students to begin placing authors in conversation based on their thematic connections and to establish grounds for comparison. This handout also includes a list of the five comparative relationships and stresses that the students’ establishment of the comparative relationship is not their claim; rather, it is an initial step toward formulating a claim and engaging with and responding to the texts themselves, with the goal of shedding light on a topic, extending an argument or discussion, or potentially resolving a problem.
Discuss students’ ideas, and build on these in class. Interactive mind-mapping tools, such as Mindomo, can be another effective collaborative tool for students to establish common ground among texts/authors; they can create mind maps which they can update throughout the semester.
Brainstorm common ground between two different cultural groups quoted or otherwise featured in class readings and place them in conversation. This exercise can be done for homework, or in pairs in class, and facilitates intercultural competence, dialogue, and exchange as students enter into broader discussions about diversity and global citizenship, the existence of multiple cultural affiliations and identities, and the importance of challenging cultural assumptions and avoiding stereotypes. Students will also develop new ideas for paper topics as a result of this activity.

PART II: MOVING TOWARD CLAIMS

Stress, during a class debriefing session, the conversational nature of academic arguments, especially the importance of acknowledging a problem or question that arises out of the two texts being placed in conversation. This handout offers examples of ineffective and effective questions/problems that could lead to strong comparative claims. When students have appropriate claims, you can move them closer to actually planning comparative analysis essays.
Evaluate sample claims from former students’ papers and rank the claims according to how effective they are, in groups in class. Following this exercise, students will be better equipped to write their own claims for their argument-driven comparative analysis paper.

PART III: THE LANGUAGE OF COMPARISON

Focus students’ attention on particular issues of punctuation and grammar (especially conjunctions) that arise when they are making comparisons. Students will benefit from a workshop on conjunctions and a review of independent vs. dependent clauses and appropriate comma usage. This handout includes sentences from students’ own writing, and each sentence includes errors related to the logic of the selected conjunction based on the textual relationship, the sentence structure, and/or the punctuation placement. Alternatively, or in addition, the exercises below from the Purdue OWL may be of use:

PART IV: CLAIMS AND INTRODUCTIONS

Review the three key elements of introductions with students, and help them decide what to include in their introductions, leading up to their claims. You may want to use this handout for students to fill out (in class or at home) as a planning document, to help them move logically through the three-part introduction form and set up their comparative claim.
Discuss and even peer-review students’ claims and introductions in class.
Share and analyze a sample argument-driven comparative analysis essay, such as this one from the 2019 WR journal, which was written for a WR 112 class and can serve as an effective model for discussing the distinction between the necessary elements of the three-part introduction and the framing of the argument, the comparative claim, and, eventually, the whole paper. The accompanying instructor’s note also offers some helpful suggestions for scaffolding and helping students come up with effective comparative arguments.

Variations and Follow-Ups

Alternative lesson ideas

Have students choose one of the argumentative essays already discussed in class (or you may want to assign a specific essay that engages multiple perspectives especially well) and locate the different “voices” in the conversation, identifying the common ground between those “voices” and the significance of the rhetorical moves of acknowledgment and response and specific methods and structures that the author uses to distinguish their own point of view. This could also lead into a discussion of overall organization of the essay as a whole and/or specific points/paragraphs of comparison.
In connection with the WR 112 Hub unit on Global Citizenship & Intercultural Literacy, students could go outside the classroom and attend different cultural events on campus or off campus, and then establish common ground between the two, facilitating intercultural competence and dialogue.
You may want to introduce a focus on comparative analysis in a multimodal and/or oral format. If you have a class blog, you could post a position from one of the texts and ask students to respond–and respond to each other–using templates from They Say/I Say to enter into the conversation and practice the move of acknowledgment and response. Rather than written responses on a blog, you could also translate this exercise verbally and have students engage in brief debates in class, role-play as authors and debate their points of view, etc.
Note that students do not need to focus on producing an entirely academic essay for the comparative analysis assignment in WR 112. Instead, you may wish to introduce students to the idea of comparative analysis by having them take on the persona of one author and write a letter to another author. What would students say? How would they say it? And why? As students work through these questions, they notice things about the two authors, and they come closer to putting the authors into conversation with each other. You may choose to have students rewrite their author-to-author letters as a formal academic paper (though a shorter one than you might otherwise require), write a reflection on how their letters help them start to think more about comparative analysis, and/or explore comparative analysis in another genre, and count it for this assignment, as you see fit.

Suggested follow-ups

Students will draft their 3-part introduction paragraph, making sure that their comparative argument is motivated by a problem/question and makes an assertion about a greater understanding that they have come to as a result of considering these two texts together.
Prior to drafting the full paper, students can practice the moves of acknowledgment and response via the templates from Chapters 4 and 5 of They Say/I Say in response to a debate-driven question about one of the essays discussed in class (you can provide this question). If you have a class blog, students can also respond to one another (using one of the templates) in the comments to a post.
Finally, students will draft their comparative analysis paper. You may want to ask students to incorporate at least one or two They Say/I Say templates and voice markers in their draft to help them acknowledge and respond to authors and distinguish their points of view. Likewise, you may want to ask students to focus on employing conjunctions to establish logical relationships between voices and points of view.
An in-class peer-review workshop of the draft could function as a type of scavenger hunt for students to identify the various moves, templates, voice markers, and transitions/conjunctions as discussed earlier in the models presented in class.
Revisit this lesson and the primary rhetorical moves when planning and drafting the final paper, which requires conversations among multiple sources.