ENG 5103-3

C 2 : Reads and listens to written, spoken and media texts worth %20
Adult Learner Evaluation Criteria

What you need to do to
write a successful
comparative analysis
2.1
Decide which text is more
convincing and explain why
2.2
Discuss and analyze the
similarities and differences
between the two texts
2.3
Interpret the meaning of
the text
How will you demonstrate your ability to write a Feedback/Mark
successful comparative analysis?
Support using examples of facts and opinions o 5 – Clearly justifies preference
found in the text: o 4 – Justifies preference
o 3 - Adequate explanation of preference
Support using examples of emotional, general and o 2 – Expresses a tentative preference
stereotypical versus neutral language found in the o 1 – Expresses a vague preference
text:
See sample analysis o 5 – Very perceptive connection
o 4 – Perceptive connection
o 3 – General connection
o 2 – Few related connections
o 1 – Unrelated connections
Refer to textual features: o 5 – Draws extensive meaning
o 4 – Draws thorough meaning
Points of view o 3 – Adequate meaning
Language o 2 – Limited meaning
o 1 – Little meaning

2.3 How is it valuable: o 5 – Offers insightful judgement

Judge why the text is How is it convincing: o 4 – Offers thoughtful judgement
effective or has value How is it important: o 3 – Offers sensible judgement
How is the argument complete: o 2 – Offers a partial judgement
o 1 – Judgement lacks value/Restate the text
Comparative Analysis Commentary:
o Yes, you seem ready for the final exam.
o You are on the right track, but your comparative analysis skills still need some work.
o Please see me.

1
 ENG 5103-3
C 2 : Reads and listens to written, spoken and media texts worth %20
Adult Learner Evaluation Criteria

Comparative Analysis Sample based on text: PRO/CON Is it time to pass tough gun control laws?

The text written by Don Kusler, titled Outrage over Las Vegas must outlive news and election cycles, is more convincing and
effective.
Firstly, the article does not contain many statistical facts, but refers to historical ones instead. For example, he mentions that “The
Second Amendment grants U.S. citizens the right to bear arms”, but does remind readers that this was written a long time ago, and that
times have changed since and that “there were no police protection, and there were no automatic weapons available”. His information
might not be proven in numbers specifically, but he mentions information such as how in the U.S. “deadly weapons are easily
accessible”, and how “the gun industry profits from death”. To continue, when you add this with the emotional language that he uses
to describe the news and election cycles of mass shootings as, “irresponsible, unthinkable and gutless” you cannot help but fully agree
with his argument that it is time to pass tough gun control laws.
Secondly, even though Kusler does not refer to numbers in his article and Stephen Halbrook does, to prove his theory that strict gun
laws don’t work, Halbrook’s numbers are insignificant. For example, Stephen writes that “France has stricter gun laws, yet 130 were
slain, mostly with illegal guns in the 2015 Paris attacks. But why is he only referring to this attack and only this country? Canada has
tougher gun laws, and much less gun violence too. Halbrook’s chosen reference is a poor one.
Thirdly, Kusler points out that freedom from gun violence is a not only a necessity, but a demand from the electors. In fact he is a
director of Americans for Democratic Action. This means that he is suggesting we need tougher gun laws because the people of the
United States are asking for it, and that is enough of an argument to give in to those demands. The U.S.A is a country based on
democracy and a voting system. If the American citizens want tougher gun laws, than that is what politicians should respect.
Lastly, this text has much value because it takes the numbers out of the argument of guns and adds the human aspect to it. We can
debate about the numbers because that information can often be interpreted in many ways, but we cannot really debate principles. In
fact who would go against Neslon Mandela’s quote that “to be free is to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of
others”. Can anyone really argue against the freedom to live?
Don Kusler’s text is the better choice.

2
 ENG 5103-3
C 2 : Reads and listens to written, spoken and media texts worth %20
Adult Learner Evaluation Criteria