The Word-Count Trap in a Comparative Essay
A student drafting a comparative analysis of two short stories is told the response must be 1200 words, with the comparison itself worth 60% of the marks and discussion of each text individually worth 40%. The student's first draft runs 1450 words: 900 words summarising plot from Story A, 300 words summarising plot from Story B, and only 250 words actually comparing the two. The teacher says the draft is 'long but thin'. The student's instinct is to cut the longest section, the 900-word Story A summary, to get under the limit.
1. Should the student simply cut the Story A summary to reach 1200 words? Explain what the draft's real problem is and what a better revision plan looks like.
Read the worked answer
Cutting the longest section is the wrong first move, because it treats a proportion problem as a length problem. The draft is 1450 words but only about 250 words (roughly 17%) do the comparing that carries 60% of the marks. Even trimmed to exactly 1200 words, the essay would still be mostly summary, so it would remain 'thin'.
The real issue is imbalance: the student has written two separate descriptions rather than an analysis that puts the texts in dialogue. A better plan is to reallocate rather than merely delete. Reduce the two plot summaries to perhaps 250-300 words combined, since the reader knows the stories, and redirect roughly 500-600 words into comparison: shared themes, divergent techniques, and how each author's choices produce different effects. Summary should exist only to support a comparative claim.
The lesson is that word count is a budget for argument, not a target to hit. Marks follow where the words are spent relative to the weighting.
2. The student argues that summarising both stories is necessary so the reader understands the comparison. How should the student decide what summary to keep?
Read the worked answer
The student is partly right: some shared context is needed, but 'necessary' summary is only what the comparison depends on. The test is relevance, not completeness.
A workable rule: keep summary only where a comparative claim would otherwise be unclear. If the essay argues that both stories use an unreliable narrator but to different ends, the reader needs just enough about each narrator to see the contrast, not the whole plot. Details that do not feed a comparison should go.
So the student should draft the comparative claims first, then ask of each summary sentence: 'Does a comparison stand or fall on this?' If not, cut it. This keeps the essay proportionate to the 60/40 weighting and stops summary from crowding out analysis.