1 / 30

COMPARISON/CONTRAST

COMPARISON/CONTRAST. Definitions. *To compare is to show similarities (likenesses). *To contrast is to show differences. COMPARISON/CONTRAST Two Techniques. Strategies for organizing information Establish meaningful similarities/differences Subjects in the same class

bradley-manning
Download Presentation

COMPARISON/CONTRAST

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. COMPARISON/CONTRAST Definitions *To compare is to show similarities (likenesses). *To contrast is to show differences.

  2. COMPARISON/CONTRASTTwo Techniques • Strategies for organizing information • Establish meaningful similarities/differences • Subjects in the same class • Helps us make informed decisions based on facts • Comparison/contrast is used for different topics and purposes. • Comparison/contrast may be separate or combined.

  3. COMPARISON/CONTRASTTitle Unfortunately, the title will not be clever but routine. Possible titles for a comparison/contrast essay about Grant and Lee are the following: Grant vs. Lee Grant and Lee Two Outstanding Generals

  4. COMPARISON/CONTRASTPart-By-Part or Point-by-Point or Alternating Paragraph 1 (introduction)—lists (series using commas) the two subjects that are being contrasted in 3 areas. Note: A transitional word or phrase must be used, such as On the other hand, conversely, in contrast … to show the shift from the first subject to the second.

  5. COMPARISON/CONTRAST SAMPLE INTRODUCTION Even though Grant and Lee were two distinguished generals in the Civil War in 1865, (one similarity) they were significantly different in terms of their background, perceptions of leadership, and the sense of loyalty to their own region. (three differences)

  6. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Part-by-Part Method Paragraph 2: Discusses subjects 1 (Grant) and 2 (Lee) in terms of the first difference (background), giving facts and using transitions.

  7. COMPARISON/CONTRASTSample Paragraph 2 Grant was a middle-class man from humble beginnings in the mountains. He was tough, self-reliant, and independent, believing that he alone was responsible for his fate. Only his skills, efforts, and perseverance would determine if he would be successful. Because he was dissatisfied with the status quo, he believed in democracy and competition. In contrast, (transitional phrase), Lee was an aristocrat from a family of landowners. He believed there should be an inequality in the social structure, and that society should be tied to the land as the chief source of wealth. Since Lee was satisfied with the status quo, he feared change.

  8. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Part-by-Part Method Paragraph 3: Discusses subject 1 (Grant) and subject 2 (Lee) in terms of the second difference (leadership), giving facts and using transitions.

  9. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Part-by-Part MethodSample Paragraph 3 Grant believed any man could become a leader, provided he had the ability, skills, and was able to assume the position. He wanted only to be able to improve himself and to prove what he could accomplish. Nevertheless (transition), Lee thought otherwise; he believed that only wealthy landowners could be leaders because they had a stake in their community. As a leader, Lee was accountable to those men in his region because they looked to him as a role model for higher values.

  10. COMPARISON/CONTRAST Application of Part-by-Part Method Paragraph 4: discusses subject 1 (Grant) and 2 (Lee) in terms of the third difference (loyalty to their region), giving facts and using transitions.

  11. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Part-by-Part MethodSample Paragraph 4 Grant had no sense of loyalty to his region. As far as he was concerned, every many had an equal chance to show how far he could rise. He believed in competition. Privileges had to be earned, not given. On theother hand (transitional phrase), Lee was tied to his region because of his position, and he would fight to the limit to defend it because it was what gave his life meaning.

  12. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Part-by-Part Method Paragraph 5 (Conclusion): states that one man is superior to the other, or that both men are equal.

  13. COMPARISON/CONTRAST SAMPLE CONCLUSION Despite the fact that both Grant and Lee were rivals on the battlefield and Lee lost the war, both men exemplified perseverance, courage, and patience when they finally agreed to negotiate the terms for peace in 1865 at Appomattox Court House after many lives had been lost in the Civil War.

  14. COMPARISON/CONTRASTMethodology of Whole-by-Whole Method • Topic: 3 differences and one similarity between Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. • Lee • Paragraph 1: Establishes two subjects (Grant and Lee) are being compared and • contrasted. This is the introduction, which lists one similarity and 3 differences. • Note: This essay is based on the story “Grant and Lee” by Bruce Catton. • Paragraph 2: Grant (name of first subject.) Subject 1 is discussed in terms of the • following: • Background • Perceptions of leadership (who was best qualified to lead) • Sense of allegiance to his region

  15. COMPARISON/CONTRASTMethodology of Whole-by-Whole, Divided, or Subject-by-Subject method Paragraph 3:Lee (name of second subject). Subject 2 is discussed in terms of the following: • Background • Sense of allegiance to his region • Perceptions of leadership (who was best qualified to lead?) Paragraph 4: (Conclusion) states that one man issuperior to the other, or that both are equal.

  16. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Part-by-Part, Point-by-Point, or Alternating Method Paragraph 1: Establishes that two subjects (Grant and Lee) are being compared and contrasted. This is the introduction, which lists one similarity and three differences. Note: This is based on the story, Grant and Lee by Bruce Catton and is identical to the whole-by-whole method. (Introduction) Paragraph 2: Discusses Grant and Lee in terms of their background in the same paragraph with supporting facts. Note: A transitional word, such as On the other hand, conversely, in contrast …) must be used in the first part of the paragraph to show that the writer is shifting from Grant to Lee.

  17. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Part-by-Part Method Paragraph 3: Discusses Grant and Lee in terms of their perceptions of leadership with supporting facts. Note: You must use a transitional word to show the shift from Grant to Lee. Paragraph 4: Discusses Grant and Lee’s sense of loyalty to his region with supporting facts. Note: You must use a transitional word to show the shift from Grant to Lee.

  18. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Part-by-Part Method Paragraph 5:(Conclusion) states that one man is superior to the other, or that both men are equal.

  19. COMPARISON/CONTRASTSAMPLE CONCLUSION Despite the fact that both Grant and Lee were rivals on the battlefield and Lee lost the war, both men exemplified perseverance, courage, and patience when they finally agreed to negotiate the terms for peace at Appomattox Court House in 1865 after many lives had been lost in the Civil War.

  20. COMPARISON/CONTRAST Advantages and Disadvantages of Part-by-Part Method • Better for short essays • Differences are easier to spot because they are lined up • Can be short, choppy, and disorganized without proper transitions, such as however, on the other hand,conversely …

  21. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Whole-by-Whole Method Paragraph 1 (introduction)—lists one similarity and three differences between subject 1 (Grant) and subject 2 (Lee).

  22. Even though Grant and Lee were two distinguished generals in the Civil War in 1865 (one similarity), they were significantly different in terms of their background, perceptions of leadership, and their sense of loyalty to their own region. (three differences) COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Whole-by-Whole MethodSample Paragraph 1

  23. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Whole-by-Whole Method Paragraph 2 – Discusses Grant in terms of all three differences (background, leadership, and loyalty to the region), giving facts.

  24. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Whole-by-Whole MethodSample Paragraph 2 In terms of background, Grant was a middle-class man from humble beginnings in the mountains. He was tough, self-reliant, and independent, believing that he alone was responsible for his fate. Only his skills, efforts, and perseverance would determine if he would e successful. Because he was dissatisfied with the status quo, he believed in democracy and competition. Grant also believed any many could become a leader, provided he had the ability, skills, and was able to assume the position. He wanted only to e ale to improve himself and to prove what he could accomplish. Moreover, Grant had no sense of loyalty to his region. As far as he was concerned, every man had an equal chance to show how far he could rise. Privileges had to be earned, not given. Life was competition.

  25. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Whole-by-Whole Method Paragraph 3 – Discusses Lee in terms of all three differences (background, leadership, and loyalty to the region), giving facts.

  26. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Whole-by-Whole MethodSample Paragraph 3 In contrast, Lee was an aristocrat from a family of landowners who owned slaves. He believed there should be an inequality in the social structure, and that society should be tied to the land as the chief source of wealth. Since Lee was satisfied with the status quo, he feared change. In his mind, only wealthy landowners could be leaders because they had a stake in their community. As a leader, Lee was accountable to the men in his region because they looked to him as a role model for higher values. Lee was tied to his region because of his position; he had a solemn obligation to these men because of his financial ties to his community, and he would fight to the limit to defend it because it was what gave his life meaning.

  27. COMPARISON/CONTRASTApplication of Whole-by-Whole Method Paragraph 4 (Conclusion): states that one man is superior to the other, or that both men are equal.

  28. COMPARISON/CONTRASTSAMPLE CONCLUSION Despite the fact that both Grant and Lee were rivals on the battlefield and Lee lost the war, both men exemplified perseverance, courage, and patience when they finally agreed to negotiate the terms for peace in 1865 at Appomattox Court House after any lives had been lost in the Civil War.

  29. COMPARISON/CONTRASTAdvantages and Disadvantages of Whole-by-Whole Method • Better for longer essays when background information is needed or when the reader wants to display a lot of information at a glance • Can be viewed as a separate essay if no transitions are used • Takes longer for readers to see the difference, since they are unaligned

  30. COMPARISON/CONTRAST Determining the Organizational Pattern • The writer determines how he/she wishes to organize the material for proper effect. • The writer needs to consider the topic, purpose, and how much an audience knows about the subject matter. Remember: Your purpose is to inform. As a writer, you must assume your readers have some information about the topic, but they are not “experts.” Finally, you are to mention only one similarity but three differences between the subjects. The focus of this essay is on differences, not similarities!

More Related