RI. 8.8. I

CAN

DELINEA

TE AND

EVALU

ATE TH

E

ARGUMENT A

ND

SPECIFIC CLA

IMS IN

A

TEXT,

ASSES

SING

WHETHER

THE

REASONIN

G IS SOUND

AND THE EVIDEN

CE IS

RELEVANT A

ND

SUFFICIEN

T;

RECOGNIZE W

HEN

IRRELEV

ANT EVIDEN

CE

IS INTR

ODUCED

• 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 SORTNOT AN AUTOMATICALLY ACCEPTED TRUTHNOT TOO BROADDOES NOT INCLUDE EVIDENCECAN 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:

FRAMEWORKhttp://learnzillion.com/lessons/2074-evaluate-an-argument-in-a-text:58 seconds