Intro Quiz: Summarising ideas across two texts: Between a Rock and a Hard Place – Aron Ralston and Touching the Void – Joe Simpson

Video: Summarising ideas across two texts: Between a Rock and a Hard Place – Aron Ralston and Touching the Void – Joe Simpson

﻿I'm Mrs. Crompton. Welcome to today's English lesson. Our focus today is summarising ideas across two texts. You will need a pen and paper. Take a moment to make sure you've cleared any distractions away, and have everything you need to hand. So in terms of the skill of a summary, what we are looking to do is to select key details across two texts. However, we're going to start with two images. So what I would like you to do for one minute is to write down as many similarities and differences that you can see between these two images. So take a piece of paper, grab your pen and your one minute starts now. Just finishing off now, last few ideas, and pens down. So first thing that I can see as a similarity on my list would be both images, involve outdoor pursuits. And then my first difference might be that in one image, it seems to be a solitary pursuit. And in the other one, it seems to be really quite dependent on two individuals. So those would be my observations straight away. Now, once we've got the scale of just identifying and that's literally all we're doing. Identifying key bits of information dependent on the focus that we are given and a question. We then need to be able to write up our observations. So what I have given you here is a slide with a series of comparative phrases that we could use. And what I would like you to do again is just to practise this time for two minutes, using some of these phrases. So it doesn't have to be an exhaustive exercise, but what I would like you to practise both images depict. And then using some of this language, whereas image A shows, image B shows, similarly in contrast, using some of the language. In particular, what I would like you to do is to try and get a similarity, a difference down, and then work your way down to the final point. both images demonstrate... And this is where we're going to step out of the literal and think about an inference. So we are looking at what they tell us, what do we learn from the images? And that's where we might bring in a big picture idea. So both images demonstrates the desire of individuals to conquer their environment or something of that nature. But at that point, it's not something literal that we can see, or in the case of a text that we could actually pick out as a piece of evidence. It is something that we are inferring. So I would like you to have little though of practising , shaping a few comparative phrases. You have two minutes to do that. So it's not a long time. However, it's just to get you warmed up with some of this language. Okay. So again, I'll give control to you. You can decide whether you'd like to look at the image more, or whether you would like to look at the comparative phrases. We'll start again here, pause as you need to, when you're ready, begin the task again, but only two minutes, you don't need longer than that. Well done. So we've got this idea then that summarising is about selecting key pieces of information from across two texts and thinking about a connection between those two bits of information. So we're either looking at it's similarity or a difference. We're now going to try and apply that scale to our texts. We have got the Aaron Rolston text, and we're going to work with the Joe Simpson text. As I've mentioned previously. You're going to see the extracts again. So please don't worry if you haven't got everything with you today, but as I have mentioned previously, it's good to keep that for the next two lessons, having all of your information and being able to flip back and have a look at what you've been thinking about the text as we've moved on. However, for today, let's just focus on our instructions. We're now going to read an extract from both texts again. And the way this is going to be presented is that you're going to see Source A, Aron Ralston first time to make some comments on that before you then move on to Source B. So you're not going to have to remember all in one go. And we have a focus to our question. Let's have a look at that together. We are going to summarise what we learn about the differences in the environments. So we are concentrating on differences, and we are considering the environment. So it's a very specific focus, it's looking at the landscape. It's looking at the environment. when we come to writing this up, what we're going to do is to break it down, and summarise one text at a time. So at the end of your extracts, which you can see there with the prompts at the bottom, this slide will appear again. So you will have opportunity to pause and go through this. So you are going to then summarise what you have learned about the environment. The environment is ... and think about what you want to put in there as an adjective. And then you're going to select, relevant supporting quotations. I've put twice. Okay. So you're going to work through this process twice. The environment is X, supporting quotation and an inference that is built out of that quotation. And then you repeat it and do the same again. And then you going to think of a second point and a second quotation. Okay. So the aim is to try and get to two pieces of evidence, two inferences about the environment as you work through. So that you can see the extract is there for you at the end of the extract, you will get a screen again. So you're working through, that's quite lots of extracts, but remember we're only focusing on the environment. So you've got to be really precise in selecting the relevant detail. Control is then over to you. Welcome back. So we are now going to repeat the same process, and you can see the same slide up, but this time we've switched it to Simpson. Okay. So we're going to get Simpson's perspective and we are going to be working through the extract again. Aiming for two key quotations about the environment. And what you might have found that it's a little bit tricky to create an inference that's different. Maybe that's caused a little bit of anxiety with the previous one. Don't worry about that. Work your way through. Think about what the environment is portrayed as. Think about the relevant supporting quotations so you're making a very distinct comment about the environment. And then if it has to be that the inference is similar for both of the quotations, then that's absolutely fine. We'll look at how that will look when we write it up in a moment. So don't worry about that. But the aim is to try and go statement, evidence, inference X2. That's your basic formula so to speak, for working with the text. So we've got the same thing focusing on the differences. And now you can also start to think about what you found in the previous extract and how Simpson's environment is similar or different. Okay. So you've got the initial environment comment. You are now sharpening that with your observation of well, this is different because. So we're starting to think about those ideas. Okay. Control is over to you, have little work through the extract. Welcome back. So we've had a look at the two extracts. You have got your information together. And the first one you've looked at Ralston's environment and you've thought about the key bits of information. And then you've concentrated on the differences in the landscape between the two. What we're going to do is to look at how we could write this up. I'm going to show you a couple of options, before I give you control of the screen. So what we could do is use option one. One differences is that in Source A, the landscape is quotation is. This suggests. However in contrast conversely, in Source B evidence which suggests. And you do that X2. So work through that formula. Sometimes people find that a little bit tricky, and you might prefer to do it this way. Select two quotations, build them into a little bit of an analysis about Source A. So in Source A, the environment is presented as inhospitable, quotation, quotation. This suggests. Whereas in source B, and you're synthesising and comparing and thinking about a similarity or difference, and you work your way through. So for some people it's easier, if your inference is the same to actually write your two quotations at one time. The main thing to remember is, you are just using, supporting evidence. You do not need to analyse the language, zoom in at any point you are just thinking about, statement, quotation, interpretation. As a frame, we can start to build a little bit further. So that's the body of your response. We could have at the beginning, both texts are set in environments that are inhospitable. Couldn't say that then. Both texts are set in environments that are inhospitable. And having an overview creates the frame to your piece of writing. You then choose either option one or option two for the middle parts. And then at the end, we can have our final conclusion. What we learned from the text is that. And we can have a big picture idea about man verses nature, for example, or, and this is an interesting idea. What we learned from the text is that despite thinking X, we actually learn Y. And this idea of an ironic observation is quite interesting, because a lots of the time when we are given texts to compare, we usually find that we weren't quite expecting something to happen. And something takes us by surprise. Please do put that in. So what we learned from the text is that despite thinking this would happen, we actually learn that. So that's a really useful consideration for your conclusion. Okay. So those are the components of how we are going to write it up. You've got your introduction and conclusion. You've got your options, choose which one works, in fact, play around with both and find out which one is going to suit you the best. Okay. Take your notes then. So you've got all of your notes for the separate texts, and now you're coming to writing up experimenting with the different frameworks, and deciding on which one works best for you. Well done. So we've had a look out at summarising text. We've experimented with our comparative framework, and we've started to think about holding these two texts together in our minds. So thank you for your focus today. All that remains for me to say is enjoy the rest of your learning.

Completed: Summarising ideas across two texts: Between a Rock and a Hard Place – Aron Ralston and Touching the Void – Joe Simpson

In this lesson, we will be considering what the skill of summary requires by working with our two non-fiction texts, Between a Rock and a Hard Place and Touching the Void. We will look at how we need to understand the focus of the question and select relevant supporting evidence to answer our question. Crucial in the skill of summary is the idea of synthesising information across the two texts and showing what we have understood / can infer. During the course of the lesson, we will break down the process and experiment with sentence stems to support our written responses.

English

Y9 English

Key Stage 3

Year 9

Summarising ideas across two texts: Between a Rock and a Hard Place – Aron Ralston and Touching the Void – Joe Simpson

Non-Fiction Texts and View Point Writing

UNIT

Reading unseen non-fiction texts: Between a Rock and a Hard Place – Aron Ralston

Examining thoughts and feelings: Between a Rock and a Hard Place – Aron Ralston

Exploring the writer’s perspective: Between a Rock and a Hard Place – Aron Ralston

Close analysis of writer’s methods: Between a Rock and a Hard Place – Aron Ralston

English

Summarising ideas across two texts: Between a Rock and a Hard Place – Aron Ralston and Touching the Void – Joe Simpson

Introductory Quiz

Video

Lesson Complete