R. Paul’s Eight Elements of Thought / Paul’s Wheel of Reasoning A useful critical thinking tool to question claims, ideas, perspectives

READING & ANALYSING ARTICLES USING PAUL’S WHEEL OF ANALYSIS* QUESTION AT ISSUE PURPOSE What is the text type? What do you think is the purpose of the article? Why did the writer write this? What is the main issue of the article? What are the related sec. issues? INFERENCES EVIDENCE/ DATA What inferences can be made from the article? What can you infer about the tone and attitude of the writer? What evidence does the writer use to support his point? Does he quote sources? IMPLICATIONS/ CONSEQUENCES ASSUMPTIONS What are the writer’s assumptions on the issue? assumptions of his readers? What are the possible implications/ consequences of the issues inherent in the article? What are the p.i.c.s of the article? CONCEPTS P.O.V. What concepts/ abstract ideas are present in the article? Whose point of view is presented? Which interest group does the writer represent? 8 Possible Points of Entry (P.O.E.) *Based on Joyce Van Tasselbaska’s modification of Paul’s Reasoning Model TWP/ENGLISH/T1WK502

READING & ANALYSING ARTICLES USING PAUL’S WHEEL OF ANALYSIS* TEMPLATE Title of article : _____________________ Writer : ______________________ Article taken from __________________ Issue : _______________________ QUESTION AT ISSUE PURPOSE INFERENCES EVIDENCE/ DATA IMPLICATIONS/ CONSEQUENCES ASSUMPTIONS CONCEPTS P.O.V. *Based on Joyce Van Tasselbaska’s modification of Paul’s Reasoning Model TWP/ENGLISH/T1WK502

Question at Issue When we attempt to reason, there must be a question at issue or a problem to be solved We should be able to formulate the question to be answered or the issue to be addressed when we reason Likewise, we should be able to identify the question at hand in articles when we read.

Purpose When we attempt to reason, there must be an intended goal This goal focuses the message in a coherent (or incoherent) direction Are we able to spot hidden agendas in messages?

Evidence / Data We must be able to support our point of view with reasons or evidence. The presence of evidence distinguishes mere opinions from reasoned judgment. We can evaluate the strength of an argument by examining the supporting data / evidence.

Assumptions We need to be aware of the assumptions we make as well as the assumptions of others Does our audience share our point of view? Do we share the point of view of the writer? Are claims made simply assumptions or supported by evidence?

Point of View As we take on an issue, we are influenced by our own POV and experiences. E.g. $100 for a shirt might be cheap to some, but ridiculously expensive to others We need to identify the POV of the writer and his frames of reference.

Concepts What are the key ideas / theories presented? Are they logical? Are they significantly subscribed to in the academic community?

Implications What are the consequences of the course of path we support? What are, for example, the implications of writing an essay portraying Adolf Hitler as a great, moral leader?

Inferences Are we making reasoned and logical inferences / conclusions based on the raw data that we have?

Tasks: In groups of threes: Analyse the text using Paul’s Wheel of Reasoning Formulate questions, directed at the writer, that will critically examine the shortcomings of the text, and allow him to concede these shortcomings.