This is a great guide illustrating the changes in the new curriculum for VCE English 3/4 - I do want to offer a few alternate points of view though.
The first is with regards to analysing argumen. The study design sounds mostly the same as with language analysis, but it does mention at one point analysis of the quality of "reasoning", which suggests to me that ~perhaps~ there might be some necessity to look at the logic of the piece and assess the soundness and validity of its argumentation (e.g. Are there gaps? Do they make logical leaps? Etc). I say perhaps because this would be a massive change and I think they would make a much bigger deal about it if it was a legit focus, but the frustrating thing about VCAA is that they're often vague until the next year's examiners report comes out so who the hell knows what the deal is.
The second thing I want to say is I actually strongly disagree with Lauren on comparative essay structure. I think it is a perfectly viable choice to have one paragraph (or even two) focus exclusively on one text in comparative; I did this in VCE Classical Studies (which had a comparative component much like this), where I got a 50, and did so in my university literary essays (and have read professional critics who do the same). The reasoning behind this approach is that sometimes, before you can get into the nitty gritty and thoroughly compare things, it is important to establish the "big picture" first.
For example, let's say 80% of both texts (let's say The Crucible and Year of Wonders) suggest devastating conflict arises from hysteria; in this case, it might be worthwhile to first flesh out the core ethos of the texts, and look in detail at the main picture they present through a thorough analysis of each. Often, when I did it this way, I'd have a paragraph on the first text in pure isolation, and then one on the second text focusing on it but with comparisons to the first sprinkled throughout the essay (some something like the 80-20 approach suggested by Lauren...but more like 90-10 really). Then, after you've done a paragraph (or two), you could have one, two, or even theee (preferably two or three tbh) going more microscopic and saying something like "in spite of the broad similarities, however, the two texts differ in that..." etc.
The other strength of this approach is that it guarantees you go into sufficient detail on both texts to real give your analysis depth. From experience, a common issue people have when they constantly compare both texts in their essays in all paragraphs is that they aren't ever able to really fully flesh out analysis of one text, as they have to move on before they say something particularly interesting.
Note that I also think you can do an essay where you constantly compare throughout - I just want people to be wary of being prescriptive with their approach and saying there's only one right way of doing things (or that one approach is necessarily "pedestrian"), without considering the merits of both things.