RI. 8.8. I CAN DELINEATE AND EVALUATE THE ARGUMENT AND SPECIFIC CLAIMS IN A TEXT, ASSESSING WHETHER THE REASONING IS SOUND AND THE EVIDENCE IS RELEVANT.

RI. 8.8

. I C

AN

DELIN

EATE

AND

EVALU

ATE T

HE

ARGUMEN

T AND

SPECIF

IC C

LAIM

S IN A

TEXT,

ASS

ESSIN

G

WHET

HER T

HE

REASONIN

G IS S

OUND

AND THE

EVID

ENCE

IS

RELEV

ANT AND

SUFFIC

IENT;

RECOGNIZ

E W

HEN

IRREL

EVANT

EVID

ENCE

IS IN

TRODUCED

• I C A N I D E N T I F Y T H E S I D E O F A N A R G U M E N T A N A U T H O R P R E S E N T S I N A T E X T.

• I C A N D E T E R M I N E T H E C R E D I B I L I T Y O F T H E A U T H O R A N D H I S / H E R P U R P O S E ( W H O W R O T E I T , W H E N I T W A S W R I T T E N , A N D W H Y I T W A S W R I T T E N )

• I C A N I D E N T I F Y C L A I M S T H A T A R E S U P P O R T E D B Y F A C T ( S ) A N D T H O S E T H A T A R E O P I N I O N ( S )

• I C A N R E C O G N I Z E W H E N A N A U T H O R I N T R O D U C E S I R R E L E V A N T E V I D E N C E ( U N R E L A T E D O R U N N E C E S S A R Y E V I D E N C E ) T O H I S / H E R A R G U M E N T.

• I C A N D E L I N E A T E A N D E V A L U A T E A N A R G U M E N T U S I N G T H E E V I D E N C E A N A U T H O R P R O V I D E S A N D D E T E R M I N E I F T H E E V I D E N C E P R O V I D E D I S R E L E V A N T A N D S U F F I C I E N T T O S U P P O R T T H E C L A I M .

DELINEATE

The defense attorney delineated the event of the murder with a precise chronological timeline.

PREDICTION:

DENOTATION &ASSOCIATIONS

Delineate: trace; describe or portray something

Nonlinguistical, Analogy,Metaphor, Simile:

EVALUATE

Suspecting that his documents were fraudulent, the Canadian customs officer evaluated the American’s passport, carefully judging whether it was real or fake.

PREDICTION:

DENOTATION&ASSOCIATIONS

Evaluate: to judge or assess by careful appraisal and study.

Nonlinguistical, Analogy, Metaphor, Simile:

ARGUMENT:

She worked for weeks to build her argument to support her claim that the summer holiday should be reduced to two weeks, rather than the full three months, due to loss of brain cells.

PREDICTION:

DENOTATION&ASSOCIATIONS

ARGUMENT IS ABOUT MAKING A CASE IN SUPPORT OF A CLAIM.

1. BEGINS WITH LOOKING AT THE DATA

2. DATA LEADS TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THESIS STATEMENT OR MAJOR CLAIM.

Nonlinguistical, Analogy, Metaphor, Simile:

CLAIM

The student’s claim was that the lack of nutritional lunch offerings and the lack of entertainment had caused the eighth grade to be academically and physical lethargic.

Prediction:

DENOTATION&ASSOCIATIONS

A CLAIM IS:

A PART OF THE MAIN ARGUMENT

BASED ON EVIDENCE OF SOME SORT

NOT AN AUTOMATICALLY ACCEPTED TRUTH

NOT TOO BROAD

DOES NOT INCLUDE EVIDENCE

CAN BE EXPLICIT OR IMPLICIT

Nonlinguistical, Analogy, Metaphor, Simile:

COUNTERCLAIM

THE STUDENT PROVIDED AN ADEPT, A VERY THOUROUGH AND INSIGHTFUL, COUNTERCLAIM TO THE STUDENT’S CLAIM THAT THE GROUP, ONEDIRECTION, WAS INDEED THE BEST BAND OF THE 21ST CENTURY.

PREDICTION:

D E N O T A T I O N & A S S O C I A T I O N S

A solid and reasonable argument that opposes or disagrees with your claim.

Nonlinguistical, Analogy, Metaphor, Simile:

REASONING

The Stanford admission’s officer found the student’s reasoning to be incredulous; the student’s belief that he would be accepted to his dream school was based on his flawed reasoning that his dad thought his son was the smartest in Northeast Ohio.

PREDICTION:

DENOTATION&ASSOCIATIONS

REASONING: THE FOUNDATION OF YOUR ARGUMENT IS THE REASONING YOU USE TO EXPLAIN HOW YOUR EVIDENCE SUPPORTS YOUR CLAIM.

COMMENTARY

Nonlinguistical, Analogy, Metaphor, Simile:

SOUND

Bill Clinton is taller than George W. Bush, and Jimmy Carter is shorter than George W. Bush. Therefore, Bill Clinton is taller than Jimmy Carter. This is a sound argument because the premise or basis and the conclusion are true.

PREDICTION:

DENOTATION&ASSOCIATIONS

SOUND: A SUCCESSFUL ARGUMENT OF ANY KIND; logical.

Nonlinguistical, Analogy, Metaphor, Simile:

SUFFICIENT

The reporters knew that the prosecutors would win the case; they had presented a hefty body of evidence, sufficient to support the claim that teachers, especially English teachers, should be worshipped and idolized.

PREDICTION:

DENOTATION&ASSOCIATIONS

SUFFICIENT: HAVING ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO PROVE A CLAIM. AVOID: 1. CLAIM NOT FOLLOWING LOGICALLY FROM THE

EVIDENCE PROVIDED. 2. SPEAKING TOO BROADLY. 3. IGNORING OR NOT ADDRESSING OTHER POSSIBILITIES.

Nonlinguistical, Analogy, Metaphor, Simile

RELEVANT

The students believed the 2015 report from the United Nations for a stronger education was relevant to Mrs. Golem’s claim that Finnish people have a stronger sense of well-being because they studied math for at least two decades.

PREDICTION

DENOTATION&ASSOCIATIONS RELEVANT: Related to the

argument, claim

Nonlinguistical, Analogy, Metaphor, Simile:

IRRELEVANT

The student pleaded his case to the principal, but his pleas were not heard; the evidence he used was emotional and irrelevant and did nothing to help ease his punishment.

PREDICTION

DENOTATION&ASSOCIATIONS

IRRELEVANT: Unrelated to the argument/claim; does not support the viewpoint, must be excluded.

Nonlinguistical, Analogy, Metaphor, Simile:

FRAMEWORK

http://learnzillion.com/lessons/2074-evaluate-an-argument-in-a-text

:58 seconds