In the essay “What Written Knowledge Does: Three Examples of Academic Discourse”, Charles Bazerman presents a four part model through which we can analyze written works (Bazerman 24-26). The model includes the object under study, literature of the field, anticipated audience, and the author’s own self. Furthermore, we can apply Bazerman’s framework to different works. These works, though facing a difference in subject matter, nevertheless fit into this framework. The framework can be used to compare two different pieces, “Connecting natural landscapes using a landscape permeability model to prioritize conservation activities in the United States” by David M. Theobald, Sarah E. Reed, Kenyon Fields, and Michael Soulé as well as “Gender and Wilderness Conservation” by Kimberly Jarvis.
All four parts in the framework are of immense importance, as we can use them to determine their purposes of each article. Consequently, we can compare the ideas and arguments made in these two essays, notwithstanding their difference. Additionally, we will learn through said comparison how each article seeks to persuade the readers that conservation is a virtuous task which which one should choose to involve himself in.

The first essay, “Connecting natural landscapes …show more content…
It specifically describes the influence of women in the conservation movement of Progressive Era of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. This information is relevant as women are ordinarily forgotten in the conservation movement, with men historically taking the vast majority of the credit for the movement’s successes. However, to subtly imply through exclusion that women played no role in the conservation movement is immensely inaccurate. Carolyn Merchant, referenced later in Jarvis’s essay, profiles prominent females in the cause of environmental