Writing an Argument Essay

11/27

Objectives: Students will be able to understand and identify key elements of argumentation through small group presentation and close reading.

W.9-10.1: Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.
W.9-10.5: Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach, focusing on addressing what is most significant for a specific purpose and audience.
W.9-10.9: Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis

Do Now:  What are the key elements of argumentation that you are familiar with?  Ink, pair-share.

Mini Lesson with Guided Practice:

What the elements of argumentation? What do they mean and how they are used in advancing one’s argument?

Use the lesson tool ( Elements of Argumentation with definitions)  and discuss the assigned elements in each small group. Underline the key words or phrase in each definition. Read the  example provided. Use your own words to present your understanding.

Guided Practice: Each group presents.

Independent Practice

The class is divided into two large groups. In each group, students will read an essay on whether companies like Apples should be held responsible for distracted driving.

See the NYTime articles on Room for Debate

Read the article and do the following-

  1. Identify words you don’t know and find out the meaning
  2. Identify an example of each element from the article. Underline the sentence and label it by writing the name of the element next to it.

It’s Impossible to Outsource Our Decision-Making

Katherine_mangu-ward-thumbstandard

You almost certainly already rely on technology to help you be a moral, responsible human being. From old-fashioned tech like alarm clocks and calendars to newfangled diet trackers or mindfulness apps, our devices nudge us to show up to work on time, eat healthy, and do the right thing. But it’s nearly impossible to create a technological angel on your right shoulder without also building in a workaround that is vulnerable to the devil on your left. Put another way: Any alarm clock user who denies that he has heard the siren song of the snooze button is lying.

There must always be an opt-out mechanism and fallible, foolish humans will always use it to thwart original intent of safety measures.

Technology can help us make good decisions, but outsourcing good decision-making to technology, tech companies or the government isn’t just a bad idea — it’s impossible.

People already know that distracted driving is dangerous. They tell pollsters so all the time. Because of this clear customer demand, smartphone makers offer safety conscious drivers a variety of ways to minimize distraction, from handsfree headsets and voice command to mute buttons and airplane mode.

But automatically disabling certain apps in a fast-moving vehicle — as the grieving family of 5-year-old distracted driving victim Moriah Modisette is suing to force Apple to do — won’t work. One of the great glories of the smartphone era is the ability to work, chat and read while on mass transit or riding shotgun, so there’s no way to build an accelerometer-based shut-down unless you also add an opt-out. And if there’s an opt-out, then fallible, foolish humans will always use it to thwart the original intent.

What’s more, legally mandated technological fixes tend to be even less effective than their market-driven counterparts: Think of the “Are You 18?” queries that pop up on sites peddling liquor, cigarettes or other adult products. (Has anyone in the history of the internet ever clicked “No”?) Judges and regulators consistently overvalue their ability to prevent catastrophe and undervalue the costs they impose on innocent users. The most wide-reaching effect of any kind of mandatory distracted driving safety provision will simply be to force every user of every smartphone, on every bus, train and plane to click “I am not the driver” every day unto eternity, without actually dissuading the kind of jerks who are determined to FaceTime while driving down the interstate.

Technology Can Save Us From Drivers Using Social Media

Jason_mars-thumbstandard

While the untimely death of an innocent 5-year-old is tragic, it’s clear that Apple shouldn’t be legally responsible for the irresponsible driver who killed her. Almost any distraction can lead to an accident. If a driver slammed his car into someone because he took his hands off the steering wheel to unwrap a taco, surely we wouldn’t hold Taco Bell responsible, or outlaw the eating of tacos while driving.

That being said, companies do have a social responsibility to be mindful of hazards that arise from misuse of their products and take sensible precautions. In the case of Apple, it would be absolutely reasonable for it to use a non-intrusive mechanism to detect with near perfect accuracy when a user is driving to prevent hazardous distractions.

The challenge that arises here is whether the technology can achieve near-perfect accuracy in driver detection. From a technical standpoint, its straightforward to sense the rate that a phone is moving. For example Apple provides a set of software protocols called CoreMotion that lets programmers glean insights about the phone’s movement and even has an “automotive” property to predict whether the user is in a vehicle. However, detecting whether the user or owner of the phone is the driver or a passenger is trickier with just this approach. In the case of FaceTime and other apps involving a camera, there is an opportunity to use the camera, along with deep-learning algorithms, to literally look at the user and environment and discern whether the user in view is driving. There has been a wealth of research on detecting driver fatigue and other attributes, some of which has been discussed at the IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium. I would expect such a solution to be readily adopted by users if the accuracy is high enough, as mispredictions can create frustration and discourage use.

The state of deep learning technology is at a place where companies like Apple should explore its use for safety purposes. While a staunch libertarian would be opposed to the infringement on freedom, I simply can’t think of a situation where someone should be FaceTiming and driving, ever.

______________________________

11/28/2017

Objectives: Students will be able to make an evidence-based claim

W.9-10.1: Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.
W.9-10.5: Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach, focusing on addressing what is most significant for a specific purpose and audience.
W.9-10.9: Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis

Resources:

Do Now: Each group will share one claim and evidence as well as counter claim, concession and rebuttal from articles you read yesterday abut whether Apples should be responsible for distracted driving.

Mini Lesson:

part 1: What is the difference between a claim and thesis statement? ( page 1-2 in the Argument Tool)

Guided Practice:

The class is divided into 4 groups and each group will read one source about “Should college athlete be paid?” and complete the worksheets( page 3).

Part II: How do we structure an argumentative essay?

Introduction

  • Why is the topic important?
  • What’s the most popular opposing view on the topic?
  • What’s your position? Why( claim) ?( position + claims=Thesis statement)

Body Paragraph 1 ( claim paragraph)

  • Topic sentence: develop the 1st reason into a claim statement.
  • Provide supporting evidence
  • Why does the evidence support the claim? Connect it back to your topic sentence.

Body Paragraph 2 ( claim paragraph)

  • Topic sentence: develop the 2ns reasons into a claim statement.
  • Provide supporting evidence
  • Why does the evidence support the claim? Connect it back to your topic sentence.

Body Paragraph 3 ( counter-claim paragraph)

  • Topic sentence: Introduce the opposing claim and reason.
  • Point out the evidence the opposing side uses to support it claim.
  • Explain why the claim is not valid (prove the reason or evidence used is not valid)
  • Provide evidence to counter argue against the counter claim

Conclusion: Restate your position and claim on the topic.

Independent Practice

Read a sample argument essay based on 3 sources on ” whether athletes should be paid” and label each part as stated in the essay structure.

Homework: Review the elements of argumentation and structure of the essay.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *