Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Connecting Evidence to a Claim: Strategies for Argument Writing https://sites.google.com/site/nwpcrwp/home Jean Wolph February 2015 What you’ll need:

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Connecting Evidence to a Claim: Strategies for Argument Writing https://sites.google.com/site/nwpcrwp/home Jean Wolph February 2015 What you’ll need:"— Presentation transcript:

1 Connecting Evidence to a Claim: Strategies for Argument Writing Jean Wolph February 2015 What you’ll need: Students should be working on a short argument. You can (1) give students a text set to simulate research and have students identify possible evidence from the articles before teaching this lesson (one is included on the next slide) OR (2) use these lessons (without this text set) as an addendum to another mini-unit in a longer unit on argument. A key skill in this set of lessons is to help students do what Joseph Harris calls “forwarding.” “In forwarding a text, you begin to shift the focus of your readers away from what its author has to say and toward your own project. Writers often describe themselves as drawing on or mining other texts for ideas and examples, but extracting such materials is only part of the job. You then need to shape them to your own purposes in writing.” (2006, p. 38). The thinking move in this mini-unit is to EXTEND the work of others (in this case, facts and statistics about an issue) to “put your own spin” on the information, connecting it to a local context such as our own school. Countering is also introduced in this mini-unit as a possible “digging deeper” extension of the unit. Harris describes countering as a way of drawing attention to “ideas and phrasings that strike you as somehow mistaken, troubling, or incomplete….[A]n effective counterstatement must attend closely to the strengths of the position it is responding to, and thus in many ways depends on representing that position clearly and fairly in order to make full sense. The characteristic stance of the counterstatement is ‘Yes, but…’. This sort of rewriting—in which a writer aims less to refute or negate than to rethink or qualify—seems to me one of the key moves in intellectual discourse.” (2006, p. 6) Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

2 In this mini-unit, we’ll practice ways that writers use sources to develop their arguments:
Illustrating | Use specific examples from the text to support the claim Authorizing | Refer to an “expert” to support the claim Countering | “Push back” against the text in some way (e.g., disagree with it, challenge something it says, or interpret it differently) Selected slides in this mini-unit can be revisited as students work on daily argument writing and/or on other mini-units, to remind students what these moves look like in the context of developing an argument. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

3 First, we’ll read articles to help us understand the issues about RECYCLING.
Positives and Negatives of Recycling: an informational article What Can We Expect for Future Landfill Space and Fees?: a press release from a waste management company Don’t Recycle: Throw it Away!: an opinion piece These articles were selected to give students an opportunity to consider the credibility of the sources. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

4 One problem writers sometimes have is using evidence effectively.
Today we’ll focus on connecting our evidence to the claim. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

5 Our school should increase its recycling efforts.
Let’s try an example. Claim: Our school should increase its recycling efforts. The first example is one that you will show in its entirety, to demonstrate the process. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

6 Our Evidence: Our task is to CONNECT them to our claim.
Statistics and facts about recycling and about the school’s practices Joseph Harris calls this FORWARDING. In this mini-unit, we’ll look especially at ILLUSTRATING, AUTHORIZING, and COUNTERING. A good resource for teaching the Harris moves is Leeann Bordelean’s PowerPoint on the Harris moves. She uses road sign metaphors to explain the purpose for using quoted or paraphrased evidence in an argument. The examples that follow are drawn from Buzzle.com, an educational resource for kids. The site has a feature that allows students to click and hear the article being read, which can be handy for students with special needs. See “Recycling Facts for Kids” and “Positive and Negative Effects of Recycling.” An article that demonstrates how one might counter this claim that we should increase recycling efforts is “Don't Recycle: Throw It Away!” by Roy E. Cordato, who teachers economics at Campbell University (The Mises Institute monthly, December 1995, Volume 13, Number 12. It would be a useful model to read and analyze, as the author selects several commonly-held beliefs about recycling and refutes them. (Retrieved at Our task is to CONNECT them to our claim. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

7 Source: WasteFreeLunches.org  Evidence from research (This is the evidence that we will use or forward, to advance our argument.) Claim: Our school should increase its recycling efforts. “Lunch foods cause a big trash problem. In fact, on average a school-age child using a disposable lunch generates 67 pounds of waste per school year. That equals 18,760 pounds of lunch waste for just one average-size elementary school.” A waste-free lunch could save $ per school year per person. How could we connect this piece of evidence to our purpose, to convince readers that we should increase our recycling efforts? These pieces of evidence will be used or forwarded to ILLUSTRATE why our claim is a good one. Share this first example, reading the evidence and thinking aloud to show how one might connect the evidence to the claim. The next slide will show one way a writer might do this. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

8 WasteFreeLunches.org Evidence from research
Source: WasteFreeLunches.org  Evidence from research (What we will forward, to advance our argument.) Connection to claim: Our school should increase its recycling efforts. (This is where we’ll explain the relevance of the evidence to our claim.) “Lunch foods cause a big trash problem. In fact, on average a school-age child using a disposable lunch generates 67 pounds of waste per school year. That equals 18,760 pounds of lunch waste for just one average-size elementary school.” A waste-free lunch could save $ per school year per person. Students at our school often bring disposable containers in their sack lunches. Encouraging everyone to use washable containers instead would reduce the amount we throw away each day. Share this example or your own “spin” on the evidence. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

9 T. Pragya, “Recycling Facts for Kids”
Source: T. Pragya, “Recycling Facts for Kids” Evidence from research (what we will forward to advance our argument.) Claim: Our school should increase its recycling efforts. (This is where we’ll explain the relevance of the evidence to our claim.) Families throw away 6 trees of paper in a year. How could we connect the evidence to our purpose, to convince readers that we should increase our recycling efforts ? Illustrating Example 2 should be done with students—either in a whole-class discussion or with students paired to work on drafting some text that extends the evidence, connecting it to the specific claim (Our school should increase its recycling efforts) and specific situation (what our school’s context is when it comes to using, wasting, or recycling paper). You might give students a large Post-it© on which to record their attempts to put their own spin on this piece of evidence (collecting them on chart paper for review), or use a tool such as todaysmeet.com to allow students to quickly post their own efforts and see the ways their peers have attempted to extend the evidence, connecting it to the claim. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

10 T. Pragya, “Recycling Facts for Kids”
Source: T. Pragya, “Recycling Facts for Kids” Evidence from research (what we will forward) Connection to claim: Our school should increase its recycling efforts. (This is where we’ll explain the relevance of the evidence to our claim.) Families throw away 6 trees of paper in a year. Some of the paper we use at school is sent home in the form of notes and newsletters. We could reduce the number of notes home by posting most notices on our website instead. Illustrating After students share their attempts, show this example. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

11 T. Pragya, “Recycling Facts for Kids”
Source: T. Pragya, “Recycling Facts for Kids” Evidence from research (what we will forward) Claim: Our school should increase its recycling efforts. (This is where we’ll explain the relevance of the evidence to our claim.) We use 4 million plastic bottles an hour. The average person uses 107 bottles and 160 cans a year. “Reusing saves landfill space. We are running out of places to bury our trash.” How could we connect the evidence to our purpose, to convince readers that we should increase our recycling efforts? Illustrating This set of evidence is provided for an independent “try-it”—students may use any or all of the evidence provided as they draft 1-4 sentences to extend or connect the evidence to the school context. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

12 T. Pragya, “Recycling Facts for Kids”
Source: T. Pragya, “Recycling Facts for Kids” Evidence from research Connection to claim: Our school should increase its recycling efforts. (Explaining the relevance of the evidence to our claim.) We use 4 million plastic bottles an hour. The average person uses 107 bottles and 160 cans a year. “Reusing saves landfill space. We are running out of places to bury our trash.” Preparing cafeteria lunches for students means a large number of bottles and cans are emptied each day. We could reduce the amount of trash sent to the landfill if we recycled them instead. Illustrating Share this slide after students share their own efforts. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

13 How can we explain the process we just used?
How will we apply it to our own research and writing in order to make a stronger connection between our evidence and our claim? Record students’ responses on chart paper for future reference. This anchor chart will be text that the class can return to throughout their work on argument. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

14 Evidence from research
Source: Evidence from research Claim: Connection to Claim: Outcome: Explaining the relevance Illustrating Imagining the impact Let’s add one more step to “connect the dots” for our reader. Students can organize their own charts in their writers’ notebooks. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

15 Next Steps: Work on your draft
from Introduce the evidence, citing the source (author, title). Quote or paraphrase the information you are citing. Explain how this evidence is relevant to the claim you have made. How does it apply? How does it serve as an example? How does it provide proof that what you are proposing will work? Connect the dots for the reader. If we accept your reasoning, what will be the outcome? What impact will this action have on the problem you’ve identified and are try to solve? After practicing the move of countering, it’s time for students to try it in their own drafts using the fast food text set. They will need to re-scan the articles in order to find evidence that someone with an opposing claim might use, then help us think differently about that evidence so that it loses its power to sway our opinion. Each row in the planner can be turned into a paragraph for your draft. Later, you’ll connect the paragraphs with transitions. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

16 FEEDBACK How well did we connect our evidence to our claims? How well did we use the facts for our own purposes (support our claim)? PQP Day 5, continued. Use a student-partner protocol such as PQP (Praise, Question, Polish) to provide students with initial feedback on their charted work (evidence & connection) and/or teacher feedback to lift the quality of students’ connections. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

17 On another day…or in another writing cycle, as this step may not work for all students, depending on the nature of their claim and evidence. Sometimes we discover we need more information in order to effectively connect the evidence to our claim. Personalizing the data can help. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

18 Digging Deeper / Honing our Skills
How might we personalize our evidence in order to make an even stronger connection to our claim? Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

19 How could I find out how many of our students and teachers bring disposable lunches? I could make a count and then calculate an average. Or I could conduct a survey to see how often students bring their lunches. I could also ask if anyone already uses only washable containers. Example: Illustrating Evidence: “Lunch foods cause a big trash problem. In fact, on average a school-age child using a disposable lunch generates 67 pounds of waste per school year.” Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

20 Our own survey helps us improve our connection to the claim:
Source: Evidence: “Lunch foods cause a big trash problem. In fact, on average a school-age child using a disposable lunch generates 67 pounds of waste per school year.” Connection: Our survey shows 39% of our students bring their lunches from home most days. 67 pounds of waste x 233 students = 6088 pounds. 6000 lbs. = 3 tons. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

21 Next, let’s draft what we could say about this personalized evidence.
Source: Evidence: “Lunch foods cause a big trash problem. In fact, on average a school-age child using a disposable lunch generates 67 pounds of waste per school year.” Connection: A school-wide survey showed that 39% of our students usually bring their lunches from home. At 67 pounds of waste per student, we could be keeping about 3 tons of refuse out of the landfill, just by putting our food in washable containers instead of buying food in disposable packs. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

22 Another Example: Hmm…I don’t know how much paper our students and teachers throw away. I could conduct a waste audit so that this statistic would have more meaning. Or I could look for statistics that estimate how much students waste. Evidence: “Recycling a ton of paper saves 17 trees.” Initial Connection: Middle school students and teachers use a lot of paper each day. Much of this ends up in the trash. Attention to recycling could reduce the number of trees that are sacrificed. Illustrating Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

23 22 kg per student x 233 = 5,126 kg of wasted paper
Another statistic (our school’s size) helps us improve our connection to the claim: Source: Evidence: “The average secondary school produces 22kg of [paper] waste per pupil each academic year.” Connection: We have 223 students. 22 kg per student x 233 = 5,126 kg of wasted paper Can we visualize metric measurements? If not, let’s convert: 48 lbs. per student or 11,300 pounds …..(nearly 6 tons!). Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

24 We can now take our original piece of evidence further:
Wow! If our school produces nearly 6 tons of paper trash each year, we could be saving 102 trees annually!!!! “Recycling a ton of paper saves 17 trees.” Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

25 Putting the connection into words is the next step:
Source: Evidence: “The average secondary school produces 22kg of [paper] waste per pupil each academic year.” Connection: While a waste audit would help us know exactly how much our school is throwing away, we can use the average of 22 kg per student to estimate that our school sends 5,126 kg of paper to the landfill each year. That’s 48 lbs. per student or 11,300 pounds (nearly 6 tons!) from our school of 233 students. We could save over 100 trees each year just by recycling. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

26 Evidence from research
Source: Evidence from research Claim: Connection to Claim: MY KEY FACTS How I’ve made these key facts relevant to my claim Try it with your texts and claim. Illustrating Students can organize their own charts in their writers’ notebooks. Post-it© with notes on the research I need to do in order to further personalize these facts. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

27 How can we explain the process we just used?
How will we apply it to our own research and argument writing in order to make a stronger connection between our evidence and our claim? Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

28 How could we use AUTHORIZING to enhance our argument?
Microsoft Engineering Excellence Digging Deeper! How could we use AUTHORIZING to enhance our argument? Another opportunity to introduce a Harris move! Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education Microsoft Confidential

29 What will we do when we are…
??? ??? Authorizing: Refer to an “expert” to support the claim Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

30 Authorizing is another move in argument writing.
First, we select a compelling piece of evidence. Then we identify the source of the evidence. Finally, we show the importance of that source, if it is not obvious. For more information about landfill space, see and Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

31 How is this writer using AUTHORIZING?
We should recycle our old electronics, says John Duncan, a research chemist at the University of Kentucky, because if we send them to the landfill, they release harmful, hazardous chemicals into the environment. It will be helpful to provide students with copies of the quotes on slides Using the framework provided on Slide 34, discuss the following: First, we select a compelling piece of evidence. What is compelling about the information provided in each? Then we identify the source of the evidence. How are the sources identified? Finally, we show the importance of that source, if it is not obvious. What do the writers do to show the importance of the source, if anything? We’ll return to these quotes later when we investigate countering. Some students may notice now, however, that it would be more convincing if an outside agency were pointing to the Chartwell work, rather than a publicist from Chartwell. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

32 How are these writers using AUTHORIZING?
“James Thompson, Jr. is president of Chartwell Information, Inc., one of the first companies in the country to actually collect and publish empirical data about waste disposal and projected needs. In 1991, his company discovered that, rather than running out of landfill space, the United States had enough working landfills for over 18 years at projected capacity, more than enough to handle expected waste.”—”What Can We Expect for Future Landfill Fees and Space?” by Barbara Hudson, Chartwell Information Services. Retrieved from According to the Manhattan Institute’s Center for Energy Policy and the Environment (2008), increased regulation has eliminated many potential sites for landfills, straining our ability to dispose of waste. It will be helpful to provide students with copies of the quotes on slides Using the framework provided on Slide 34, discuss the following: First, we select a compelling piece of evidence. What is compelling about the information provided in each? Then we identify the source of the evidence. How are the sources identified? Finally, we show the importance of that source, if it is not obvious. What do the writers do to show the importance of the source, if anything? We’ll return to these quotes later when we investigate countering. Some students may notice now, however, that it would be more convincing if an outside agency were pointing to the Chartwell work, rather than a publicist from Chartwell. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

33 How might we change this passage to use AUTHORIZING?
“Never dump your used motor oil down the drain — the used oil from one oil change can contaminate one million gallons of fresh water.” —United States Environmental Protection Agency, The writer would need to locate the source of the information that is paraphrased in Buzzle.com, an educational resource for kids. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

34 Try it: Review your text set. Select 2-3 pieces of compelling evidence in which the source is clearly identified. Think: Is the source reputable? In what ways is this person or agency an “expert”? Students might question the goal that Cordato assumes we have. They could point out the number of years that trees take to mature, which Cordato doesn’t address, as being a reason to continue trying to save existing trees. Alternately, they could use the Cordato information to counter Praga’s position. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

35 Next Steps: Authorize! Step Step After practicing the move of countering, it’s time for students to try it in their own drafts using the fast food text set. They will need to re-scan the articles in order to find evidence that someone with an opposing claim might use, then help us think differently about that evidence so that it loses its power to sway our opinion. Step Then revise your draft to include this new text in which you use authorizing to enhance your argument. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

36 How can we explain the process we just used?
How will we apply it to our own research and argument writing in order to make a stronger connection between our evidence and our claim? Capture students’ thinking on a chart that will remain on the wall for use in future argument work. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

37 Microsoft Engineering Excellence
Digging Deeper! Could we COUNTER some of the evidence that Opponents of recycling might offer? Another opportunity to introduce a Harris move! Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education Microsoft Confidential

38 What will we do when we are…
??? ??? Countering: “Push back” against the text in some way (e.g., disagree with it, challenge something it says, or interpret it differently) Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

39 Countering is another move in argument writing.
First, we acknowledge a claim that is in opposition to ours. Example: Others will argue that our school should NOT increase its recycling efforts. For more information about landfill space, see and Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

40 Countering Then, we identify evidence that our opponents might use to support their claim. Example: Those who are against more recycling quote statistics that indicate there is no landfill shortage. They claim that “[i]f all the solid waste for the next thousand years were put into a single space, it would take up 44 miles of landfill, a mere .01% of the U.S. landspace.”—Cordato (1998) For more information about landfill space, see and Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

41 Countering Finally, we suggest a different way of thinking about their evidence: Example: This statistic is extremely outdated, however. A quarter of a century ago, it was the best prediction of future landfill needs. More recent analyses, however, note the problem of increased regulation. These regulations have eliminated many potential sites for landfills, according to the Manhattan Institute , Center for Energy Policy and the Environment (2008). We’re also AUTHORIZING here, as we draw on information from a recognized authority, The Manhattan Institute. For more information about landfill space, see and Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

42 What concerns might a reader raise about these sources?
“James Thompson, Jr. is president of Chartwell Information, Inc., one of the first companies in the country to actually collect and publish empirical data about waste disposal and projected needs. In 1991, his company discovered that, rather than running out of landfill space, the United States had enough working landfills for over 18 years at projected capacity, more than enough to handle expected waste.”—from ”What Can We Expect for Future Landfill Fees and Space?” by Barbara Hudson, Chartwell Information Services. Retrieved at According to the Manhattan Institute’s Center for Energy Policy and the Environment (2008), increased regulation has eliminated many potential sites for landfills, straining our ability to dispose of waste. “Push back” against the text in some way (e.g., disagree with it, challenge something it says, or interpret it differently). For example: Chartwell is publicizing its own work. The study is 23 years old. Manhattan’s work is more recent, but 2008 is still 6 years ago. Have things changed? Using our framework, work as a class to create a few sentences in which you Acknowledge the other side’s claim. Note the evidence they are using that you want to refute. Suggest a different way of thinking about their evidence. Turn and Talk Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

43 Choose one passage. With a partner, draft sentences about landfill capacity that
Acknowledge the other side’s claim: Note the evidence they are using that we want to refute: Suggest a different way of thinking about their evidence: Be ready to share what you came up with! Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

44 Read these conflicting pieces of evidence.
Theirs: “In the paper industry, 87% of the trees used are planted to produce paper. For every 13 trees ‘saved’ by recycling, 87 will never get planted….The lesson is this: if your goal is to maximize the number of trees, don't recycle.”--Roy E. Cordato, professor of Economics, Campbell University, “Don’t Recycle: Throw it Away” (MISE Monthly, 1998, V3, No. 12) Ours: “Recycling a ton of paper saves 17 trees.”–T. Praga, “Recycling Facts for Kids” Students might question the goal that Cordato assumes we have. They could point out the number of years that trees take to mature, which Cordato doesn’t address, as being a reason to continue trying to save existing trees. Alternately, they could use the Cordato information to counter Praga’s position. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

45 Now Try-it: Countering
Acknowledge the other side’s claim. Note the evidence they are using that you want to refute. Suggest a different way of thinking about their evidence. Debriefing: We’ll share our efforts and talk about what worked and what might improve our attempts to counter. Students can work in pairs to draft sentences that do these three things—acknowledge, note, suggest. For more information about landfill space, see and Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

46 Next Steps: Return your draft
After practicing the move of countering, it’s time for students to try it in their own drafts using the fast food text set. They will need to re-scan the articles in order to find evidence that someone with an opposing claim might use, then help us think differently about that evidence so that it loses its power to sway our opinion. Step Then revise your original flashdraft to include this new text in which you counter their argument. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

47 How can we explain the process we just used?
How will we apply it to our own research in order to make a stronger connection between our evidence and our claim? Capture students’ thinking on a chart that will remain on the wall for use in future argument work. Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

48 Microsoft Engineering Excellence
Questions? Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education Microsoft Confidential


Download ppt "Connecting Evidence to a Claim: Strategies for Argument Writing https://sites.google.com/site/nwpcrwp/home Jean Wolph February 2015 What you’ll need:"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google