If your students are anything like mine, they’re probably pretty good at finding evidence from a text for their essays but terrible at using it effectively once they’ve found it. They tend to drop it into a paragraph like a brick, occasionally introduced and perhaps cited correctly, but not explained. If you’re already nodding your head, I needn’t go much further describing the problem.
I recently had that a-ha-lightbulb-not-quite-transcendental-but-close moment in class.
Before I describe the breakthrough, a little background. Trafalgar Castle School has been implementing a tailored-to-age version of the University of Chicago’s Little Red Schoolhouse (LRS) writing programme, and I recently settled on the wording for the 5 elements of effective argumentation that we discuss. (The elements themselves have been filtered through the LRS, based on Toulmin’s theory, augmented with George Hillocks, Jr., and others, massaged and handed over to me by a wonderful former colleague, Theresa Fuller, who is now at Branksome Hall.) It’s the fourth element that’s relevant here. (The other questions are for another post at another time.)
4. Have…?
As in “Have you explained your thinking?”, which can be expanded to, “Have you explained how your evidence supports your reason and how your reason supports your claim?” In order to show the importance of this question, I usually require my Grade 12 students to write their first essay on a short piece, so they’re forced to deal with the same bits of evidence, no matter what they’re arguing.
Song lyrics work well for this assignment, especially for students who find poetry intimidating. So does Theodore Roethke’s brilliant “My Papa’s Waltz”. I ask my students to argue if the poem is generally positive or negative. What makes it a fantastic subject is that students can–and do!–use the exact same excerpts of text as evidence for both sides.
If one can use the exact same piece of evidence to argue one side or the other, it prioritizes the explanation.
If one can use the exact same piece of evidence to argue one side or the other, it prioritizes the explanation. The student can no longer just go, “Here” and drop in the evidence. They must analyze the text and make their thinking visible.
I had a breakthrough with the same concept, but with a different group: Grade 9s, many of whom are English language learners. During a break in a lesson, some students were discussing a photo of one person kissing another on the cheek, and the question arose as to whether they were just friends or more than just friends. So we made that the lesson.
What do you think: Are they just friends? Yes or no? Why do you think so?
The only evidence to analyze was the picture, yet the class was pretty much split 50/50. If the same evidence was the foundation for opposing claims, then differences must arise with the analysis and explanation of the evidence.
With longer texts, the temptation is to use different bits of evidence to argue opposing views; with a short poem, song lyrics, or photograph, the evidence doesn’t change.