Armor buys a carrier time, not suitability for surface combat

How would a British armored carrier fare in a surface engagement compared with an American carrier?

It might last slightly longer because of its protection, but both types would be badly damaged because neither was designed for a gun battle.

The armored carrier brings somewhat greater protection and its own guns to the encounter. The exposed upper works of either carrier type would nevertheless likely become a burning wreck under sustained surface fire. Survival would then depend heavily on damage control and the ability to prevent progressive flooding. Armor may delay destruction, but it does not turn a carrier into a battleship or cruiser.