Evaluatinganargument 110101145110-phpapp01

737 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Health & Medicine
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
737
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
18
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Evaluatinganargument 110101145110-phpapp01

  1. 1. Informational Text Evaluating an Argument Feature Menu Informational Text Connecting to the Literature Introducing the Informational Text Vocabulary Informational Reading Focus: Evaluating an Argument Evaluating an Argument Assignment
  2. 2. Connecting to the Literature “The Lady or the Tiger?” describes a system of justice in which the fate of the accused is decided entirely by chance. How fair is our own system, trial by jury? Read the following persuasive essay to find out what one expert thinks. [End of Section]
  3. 3. Introducing the Informational Text A Defense of the Jury System
  4. 4. Introducing the Informational Text A Defense of the Jury System If you were charged with a crime, would you rather have a jury of your peers or a panel of judges decide your fate? Read “A Defense of the Jury System” for one author’s views on the jury system in our country. [End of Section]
  5. 5. Vocabulary Vocabulary Development irrational adj.: not based on reason or logic. superficial adj.: not deep or thorough; shallow. obscure v.: conceal; cover up. advocates v.: supports; argues in favor of. conscientiously adv.: carefully and thoughtfully. affluent adj.: wealthy.
  6. 6. Vocabulary Vocabulary Practice Fill in the blanks with words from the Word Bank. irrational superficial obscure conscientiously obscure 1. On rainy days, clouds _________ the mountaintop view. irrational 2. An _________ argument is illogical. 3. Sensitive and attentive, the nurse cared for her patients conscientiously _____________. superficial 4. Someone with a _________ view of life might be called shallow. [End of Section]
  7. 7. Evaluating an Argument When you read an author’s argument—a series of statements intended to convince you of something —you are like a juror in a trial. Like a juror, you analyze the evidence presented and decide whether the argument is sound.
  8. 8. Evaluating an Argument Understand the claim, or opinion. Read through the article to make sure you understand the issue. • Identify the author’s claim, or opinion—the thing the author is trying to prove. • Restate the author’s opinion in your own words.
  9. 9. Evaluating an Argument Quick Check Jurors are drawn from both sexes, all ethnic groups, all economic backgrounds, all adult ages, all religions, and all neighborhoods within a jurisdiction. (Indeed, the only qualification a person needs to be a juror is the ability to be fair and impartial.) Consequently, a jury will reflect diverse viewpoints and experiences, rather than just the viewpoint and experiences of a single judge. The jury system thus helps ensure that a verdict will not be based on an individual’s biases or lack of understanding of particular people’s experiences. —from “A Defense of the Jury System” by Thomas M. Ross, Esq. What is the author’s claim?
  10. 10. Evaluating an Argument Identify the support. To present persuasive arguments, an author must support his or her claims. Look for • logical appeals • emotional appeals
  11. 11. Evaluating an Argument Logical appeals include reasons and evidence. • Reasons are statements that explain why the author holds an opinion. • Evidence is the information that authors use to support their reasons. Evidence includes • facts • statistics (number facts) • examples • quotations from or opinions of experts
  12. 12. Evaluating an Argument Emotional appeals play on readers’ emotions rather than their reason. Emotional appeals include • loaded words (words with strong emotional connotations) • anecdotes (brief stories) Emotional appeals can be effective but shouldn’t be relied on too heavily. Arguments that rely heavily on emotional appeals rather than logic are usually weak.
  13. 13. Evaluating an Argument Quick Check Jurors are drawn from both sexes, all ethnic groups, all economic backgrounds, all adult ages, all religions, and all neighborhoods within a jurisdiction. (Indeed, the only qualification a person needs to be a juror is the ability to be fair and impartial.) Consequently, a jury will reflect diverse viewpoints and experiences, rather than just the viewpoint and experiences of a single judge. The jury system thus helps ensure that a verdict will not be based on an individual’s biases or lack of understanding of particular people’s experiences. —from “A Defense of the Jury System” by Thomas M. Ross, Esq. The author claims that the jury system helps ensure a fair trial. What support does he present?
  14. 14. Evaluating an Argument Quick Check Jurors are drawn from both sexes, all ethnic groups, all economic backgrounds, all adult ages, all religions, and all neighborhoods within a jurisdiction. (Indeed, the only qualification a person needs to be a juror is the ability to be fair and impartial.) Consequently, a jury will reflect diverse viewpoints and experiences, rather than just the viewpoint and experiences of a single judge. The jury system thus helps ensure that a verdict will not be based on an individual’s biases or lack of understanding of particular people’s experiences. —from “A Defense of the Jury System” by Thomas M. Ross, Esq. Does the author use logical or emotional appeals?
  15. 15. Evaluating an Argument Evaluate the evidence. A good argument must be backed up by solid evidence. As you read, ask yourself: • Does the evidence directly support the author’s reasons? • Does the author present sufficient evidence to back up generalizations and prove the claim? • Has the author loaded the argument with emotional appeals instead of providing valid evidence?
  16. 16. Evaluating an Argument Quick Check Jurors are drawn from both sexes, all ethnic groups, all economic backgrounds, all adult ages, all religions, and all neighborhoods within a jurisdiction. (Indeed, the only qualification a person needs to be a juror is the ability to be fair and impartial.) Consequently, a jury will reflect diverse viewpoints and experiences, rather than just the viewpoint and experiences of a single judge. The jury system thus helps ensure that a verdict will not be based on an individual’s biases or lack of understanding of particular people’s experiences. —from “A Defense of the Jury System” by Thomas M. Ross, Esq. How effective is the author’s evidence?
  17. 17. Evaluating an Argument Identify the author’s intent. Think about why the author is making this argument. • Look for bias, or prejudice, on the part of the author. • Pay attention to how the author’s intent, or purpose, influences the tone of the argument.
  18. 18. Evaluating an Argument Quick Check Jurors are drawn from both sexes, all ethnic groups, all economic backgrounds, all adult ages, all religions, and all neighborhoods within a jurisdiction. (Indeed, the only qualification a person needs to be a juror is the ability to be fair and impartial.) Consequently, a jury will reflect diverse viewpoints and experiences, rather than just the viewpoint and experiences of a single judge. The jury system thus helps ensure that a verdict will not be based on an individual’s biases or lack of understanding of particular people’s experiences. —from “A Defense of the Jury System” by Thomas M. Ross, Esq. What is the author’s intent?
  19. 19. Evaluating an Argument Create a chart. Identify an argument’s strengths and weaknesses. Evaluating an Author’s Argument Claim or Opinion: Logical Appeals Reason 1: Evidence: Reason 2: Evidence: Emotional Appeals Loaded Words: Anecdotes: Tone: [End of Section]
  20. 20. Assignment As you read “A Defense of the Jury System,” evaluate the credibility of the author’s arguments. Evaluating an Author’s Argument Claim or Opinion: Logical Appeals Reason 1: Evidence: Reason 2: Evidence: Emotional Appeals Loaded Words: Anecdotes: Tone: [End of Section]
  21. 21. The End

×