C ONNECTING E VIDENCE TO A C LAIM : S TRATEGIES FOR A RGUMENT W RITING HTTPS :// SITES. GOOGLE. COM / SITE / NWPCRWP / HOME Jean Wolph February 2015 Jean.

CONNECTING EVIDENCE TO A CLAIM:

STRATEGIES FOR ARGUMENT WRITING

HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/NWPCRWP/HOME

Jean WolphFebruary 2015

Jean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

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)

In this mini-unit, we’ll practice ways that writers use sources to develop their arguments:


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

First, we’ll read articles to help us understand the issues about RECYCLING.


One problem writers sometimes have is using evidence effectively.

Today we’ll focus on connecting our evidence to the claim.


Let’s try an example.

Claim:

Our school should increase its recycling efforts.


Our Evidence:Statistics and facts about recycling and about the school’s practices

Our task is to CONNECT them to our claim.

Joseph Harris calls

this

FORWARDING. In

this mini-unit,

we’ll look

especially at

ILLUSTRATING,

AUTHORIZING,

and COUNTERING.


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 $246.60 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.


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 $246.60 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.


Source:

T. Pragya, “Recycling Facts for Kids”


(what we will forward to advance

our argument.)


(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


Source:



(what we will forward)

Connection to claim: Our school should increase its recycling

efforts.


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


Source:



(what we will forward)



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


Source:



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


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?


Source:


Claim:

Connection to Claim:

Outcome:

Illustrating Explaining the relevance


Imagining the impact

Let’s add one more step to “connect the dots” for our reader.

Next Steps: Work on your draft

Each row in the planner can be turned into a paragraph for your draft. Later, you’ll connect the paragraphs with transitions.


fromIntroduce 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?

FEEDBACKHow well did we connect our evidence to our claims? How well did we use the facts for our own purposes (support our claim)?

PQP


SOMETIMES WE DISCOVER WE NEED MORE INFORMATION IN ORDER TO EFFECTIVELY CONNECT THE EVIDENCE TO OUR CLAIM.

PERSONALIZING THE DATA CAN HELP.


Digging Deeper / Honing our Skills

How might we personalize our evidence in order to make an even stronger connection to our claim?


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.”

Example: 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.

Illustrating


Source: http://www.recyclenow.com/recycle/recycle-school/get-your-recycling-collected/how-much-does-your-school-waste. Evidence:


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.

Our own survey helps us improve our connection to the claim:


http://www.recyclenow.com/recycle/recycle-school/get-your-recycling-collected/how-much-does-your-school-waste




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.

Next, let’s draft what we could say about this personalized evidence.




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.

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.

Illustrating



“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!).

Another statistic (our school’s size) helps us improve our connection to the claim:




“Recycling a ton of paper saves 17 trees.”

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!!!!



“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.

Putting the connection into words is the next step:




Source:


Claim:

Connection to Claim:

MY KEY FACTS

How I’ve made these key facts relevant to my claim

Illustrating

Post-it© with notes on

the research I need to do

in order to further

personalize these facts.


Try it with your texts and claim.


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?


HOW COULD WE USE AUTHORIZING TO ENHANCE OUR ARGUMENT?

Digging Deeper!


What will we do when we are…??? ???

Authorizing: Refer to an “expert” to support the claim


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.


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.

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 7-26-14 from http://www.worldsweeper.com/Disposal/v6n2landfills.html.

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.


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, http://www2.epa.gov/recycle/how-do-i-recycle-common-recyclables#gla


http://www2.epa.gov/recycle/how-do-i-recycle-common-recyclables#gla



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”?


Next Steps: Authorize!

Then revise your draft to include this new text in which you use authorizing to enhance your argument.


Step

Step

Step


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?


COULD WE COUNTER SOME OF THE EVIDENCE THAT OPPONENTS OF RECYCLING MIGHT OFFER?

Digging Deeper!


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)


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.


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)


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.


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 7-26-14 at http://www.worldsweeper.com/Disposal/v6n2landfills.html.

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.

Turn and

TalkJean Wolph, Louisville Writing Project, for NWP CRWP funded by the Department of Education

http://www.worldsweeper.com/Disposal/v6n2landfills.html

http://www.worldsweeper.com/Disposal/v6n2landfills.html

• 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:

Choose one passage. With a partner, draft sentences about landfill capacity that

Be ready

to share

what you

came up

with!


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”


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.


Next Steps: Return your draft

Then revise your original flashdraft to include this new text in which you counter their argument.


Step

Step

Step


How will we apply it to our own research in order to make a stronger connection between our evidence and our claim?


QUESTIONS?


C ONNECTING E VIDENCE TO A C LAIM : S TRATEGIES FOR A RGUMENT W RITING HTTPS :// SITES. GOOGLE. COM / SITE / NWPCRWP / HOME Jean Wolph February 2015 Jean.

Documents

school year

department of education

louisville writing project

nwp crwp

school o

pounds of lunch waste

wastefree lunch

pounds of waste