Hi there. It is always better to "integrate" your response through looking at what is similar between your presribed text and your related texts. That's not to say you can't treat each text in turn (as long as you're comparing them as you go), but markers are looking for essays that bring all the texts together - that means comparing them (Venn diagram anyone?) and finding links between them: links in ideas, what they say, techniques, form, etc.

Basically, to have a well structured essay you need a good thesis. The writing of the essay isn't that hard - once you know what you want to say. Time spent planning your argument (say in an argument map) will help.

"Conflicting perspectives on a personality, event or situation conveys much more than a simple knowledge of the truth"

This essay statement needs to be reworded/processed to make your thesis.
Your JC text will probably focus on conflicting perspectives about the person Caesar. Who are the differing sides in this? Brutus on the conspirators side who see JC as a threat to the Republic, and Antony who has relied on Caesar as friend and his superior - everything he has he owes to Caesar. The best scene for the two perspectives on Caesar: Act 3 Sc1. The rhetoric that Shakespeare has both characters use is masterful!

ALways keep in mind: the composer has the characters do things/say things. Bad essays talk lots about "Antony does this" or "Cassius says that", without acknowledging the composer's part in things. Remember, the composer has shaped the texts (including characters, dialogue, etc) in order to potray conflicting perspectives - you've got to ask the question WHY? Why portray two sides of the argument about Caesar? In Shakespeare's case, he shows how both sides of the argument about Caesar (and why he had to die) are, in a way, right. Shakespeare has Brutus present his reasons in a logical way (btw - in prose rather than verse), whereas Shakes has Antony use emotive language, rhetorical questions,...