… compare ideas; not just details …
EdFN
Comparison Question Type
Comparison questions require you to compare and contrast different aspects of the sources. Some examples of such question type are as follows:
Comparison questions require you to compare and contrast different aspects of the sources. Some examples of such question type are as follows:
- How similar (or different) are the two sources?
- How are the sources different (or similar)?
- In what ways are the two sources similar (or different)?
Step 1:
Read Source A first and figure out a 'big idea' in the source. Do not be overly concerned about the details. Let them sink in and figure out the main idea (refer to this section for the technique) that former PM Lee was trying to get at.
Read Source A first and figure out a 'big idea' in the source. Do not be overly concerned about the details. Let them sink in and figure out the main idea (refer to this section for the technique) that former PM Lee was trying to get at.
Source A
Adapted from a view by Mr Lee Kuan Yew, former Prime Minister of Singapore, on the separation of Singapore from Malaysia.
Adapted from a view by Mr Lee Kuan Yew, former Prime Minister of Singapore, on the separation of Singapore from Malaysia.
From his body language, I knew the Tunku had made up his mind. He said, "There is no other way now. I have made up my mind; you go your way, we go our own way. So long as you are in any way connected with us, we will find it difficult to be friends because we are involved in your affairs and you will be involved in ours."
Credit: Lee, K. Y. (1999). The Singapore Story: Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew. Singapore Press Holdings.
Step 2:
Now, keep that idea ‘floating’ in your head as you read Source B. It is important that you keep this idea in sight and not ‘lose’ it whilst reading Source B. In fact, use that idea like a lens to help you read Source B. In this way, reading Source B becomes a much more focused and purposeful exercise than if you were searching ‘all over the place’ for a possible match. Such a reading technique eliminates the problem of ‘messy-matching’ when you try to locate the similarities and differences from both sources at the same time in your head.
This approach relies on getting the mind to focus on something whilst looking for a match. As this thinking process is done in an obvious manner, the mind is more aware of what to look out for. Thus, the search for the big idea in Source B becomes a more purposeful and productive exercise.
Now, mouse over Source B and read the text.
Now, keep that idea ‘floating’ in your head as you read Source B. It is important that you keep this idea in sight and not ‘lose’ it whilst reading Source B. In fact, use that idea like a lens to help you read Source B. In this way, reading Source B becomes a much more focused and purposeful exercise than if you were searching ‘all over the place’ for a possible match. Such a reading technique eliminates the problem of ‘messy-matching’ when you try to locate the similarities and differences from both sources at the same time in your head.
This approach relies on getting the mind to focus on something whilst looking for a match. As this thinking process is done in an obvious manner, the mind is more aware of what to look out for. Thus, the search for the big idea in Source B becomes a more purposeful and productive exercise.
Now, mouse over Source B and read the text.
Source B
Adapted from a view expressed by Tun Razak, former Prime Minster of Malaysia, on the separation of Singapore from Malaysia.
Adapted from a view expressed by Tun Razak, former Prime Minster of Malaysia, on the separation of Singapore from Malaysia.
It was clear Lee [Kuan Yew] was trying to become the champion of the Chinese against the Malays. Since he could not have everything his own way, he was determined to break Malaysia in two – into a Malay Malaysia and a Lee Kuan Yew Malaysia. He had even gone round the world complaining about Malaysia’s domestic affairs to the leaders of other countries.
Source B
(Do not mouse over until told to do so)
Try to identify the big idea in Source B before you click on the button below to reveal the answer.
Step 3:
Now that you have 2 related ideas from the sources, what can you say about them? Are they similar or different? Try to construct a statement that shows the comparison between the two sources. Click the Unlock icon below to reveal the answer.
Now that you have 2 related ideas from the sources, what can you say about them? Are they similar or different? Try to construct a statement that shows the comparison between the two sources. Click the Unlock icon below to reveal the answer.
The two sources are different in saying who caused the separation. Source A claims that it was the Tunku who caused it whereas Source B says that it was Lee Kuan Yew who caused it.
Note: "... who caused the separation..." is the comparative link between Source A and Source B. Without it, there is no meaningful comparison between the two sources.
Warning:
As this approach relies on using an idea in one of the sources as a 'lens to look for the other matching idea, there is always a risk of 'force-fitting' the first idea onto the second source. In other words, instead of using the first idea to help you find a matching one in the second source, it may influence you so much that you simply assume it tells you the same thing. In that way, you would have misinterpreted the second source.
Note: "... who caused the separation..." is the comparative link between Source A and Source B. Without it, there is no meaningful comparison between the two sources.
Warning:
As this approach relies on using an idea in one of the sources as a 'lens to look for the other matching idea, there is always a risk of 'force-fitting' the first idea onto the second source. In other words, instead of using the first idea to help you find a matching one in the second source, it may influence you so much that you simply assume it tells you the same thing. In that way, you would have misinterpreted the second source.
So, what do we compare?
There are no hard and fast rules regarding what can be compared and what cannot be. There are, however, some 'categories' of comparisons that can be made. These are:
Enter the name for this tabbed section: PROVENANCE
Comparisons of this kind are relatively easy to make and generally not awarded highly.
E.g. The two sources are similar as both of them are said by the Minister of Defence (provenance).
Enter the name for this tabbed section: CONTENT
The examples shown above illustrate comparisons based on content. At this level, comparisons could be made for both similarities and differences.
E.g. The two sources are different in saying who should be blamed (content) for causing the separation between Singapore and Malaysia.
Enter the name for this tabbed section: TONE
Comparison of tone of source is not easy as you have to read 'between the lines' to figure them out. Refer to Section 4.1 to find out more about how to read the tone of a source.
E.g. The two sources are similar in tone as both are supportive (tone) of the government's environmental policies.
Enter the name for this tabbed section: PURPOSE
Every source that is created has a purpose. As such, sources can be compared in terms of their function or what they are 'trying to do'.
E.g. The two sources are different in their purpose as Source A's purpose is to criticise (purpose) the government's transport policies whereas Source B's purpose is to defend these policies.
Enter the name for this tabbed section: MOTIVE
The motive of a source is not quite its purpose, even though both are closely related. The motive of a source refers to the intended impact that it seeks to achieve through its purpose. Thus, it can be said that there cannot be a motive without a purpose.
E.g. The two sources are similar as both wanted to get persuade (purpose)the people to buy (motive) the product.
Challenges of Comparison Questions
A lack of systematic approach in comparing sources results in random 'matching' and produces comparisons that are invalid. Furthermore, valuable time is lost as the content is matched in a trial-and-error fashion. A common approach that is highly ineffective is to read one source after another without knowing what to focus on, hoping somehow a match would just occur in the mind. This is a 'messy' approach, as the information gathered from the sources are not organised prior to the matching process. This often results in inaccurate matching as the content needs to be understood at the same time as it is matched to one another.
This usually happens when the sources are not properly understood and comparisons are made on almost every single detail, no matter how trivial they are. Such comparisons usually are not valid as they may not necessarily convey the main ideas of the sources. Precious time will be lost making comparisons that would not be accepted.
The amount of time needed to complete this type of question is certainly more than most questions. This is partly due to the tedious process of extracting and providing evidence from the sources that are being compared. The amount of time needed is also increased when comparisons are made on the various aspects (provenance, content, tone, purpose and motive). On top of that, those evidence needs to be explained as well. The ability to write fast (not at the expense of legibility) would help.
