Idea Transcript
Instructional Module 9: At - A - Glance Bridge to Exposition Extending Ideas in Multiple Sources Overview and Culminating Tasks In this module, students will culminate their study of persuasive arguments, evidence, appeals, and devices and apply their new understandings to informational reading, writing, and speaking tasks in Instructional Component 2 - Exposition. 1 .cs.son Overview
Culminating Tasks
Parti • Students will write an essay that explains why the Students will view the film 12 Angry Men to jurors side with Juror No. 8 in 12 Angry Men and evaluate the credibility of an argument. In this film, why his argument is effective. The essay should Juror Number 8 (a character played by Henry end with an assertion and an explanation about Fonda) is the only man on a 12-member jury who is whether or not you would have been persuaded to leaning toward acquittal during jury deliberations change your verdict and side with Juror No. 8 if for a murder trial. After viewing, discussing, and you were sitting on the jury. analyzing the film and this character in particular, • Students will develop a persuasive argument students will analyze the development and about the author's perspective (Juror No. 8) on credibility of Juror No. 8's argument, the one of the following issues: justice, ethical comprehensiveness of his evidence, his ability to beliefs, shared beliefs, fairness, or empathy. address counterclaims, and appeals to his audience, Support your argument with quotes from die text his fellow jurors. Structure your ideas logically, use specific rhetorical devices to support assertions, defend positions with precise and relevant evidence, and address readers' concerns. Arguments can be presented in writing or orally. fart 2 Students will read "A Defense of the Jury System," a persuasive essay written by an assistant district attorney, that takes a position defending America's trial by jury system. After reading this essay, students will evaluate the credibility of the author's argument by critiquing the relationship between generalizations and evidence, the comprehensiveness of the evidence, and the way in which the author's intent affects the structure and tone of the text
• Students will generate relevant questions about the reading and extend ideas presented in primary and secondary sources. Students will pose questions that can augment their arguments in the culminating tasks for 12 Angry Men. • Students will revise one culminating task from Part 1 of this lesson to add mis outside research information to their evidence.
IC1-196
Instructional Module 9: At - A - Glance Standards Addressed R 2 3 Generate relevant questions about readings on issues that can be researched. R 2.8 Evaluate the credibility of an author's argument or defense of a claim by critiquing the relationship between generalizations and evidence, the comprehensiveness of evidence, and the way in which the author's intent affects the structure and tone of the text (e.g., in professional journals, editorials, political speeches, primary source material). Bridge to Instructional Component 2 - Exposition R 2.5 Extend ideas presented in primary or secondary sources through original analysis, evaluation, and elaboration. Teacher Resources Texts • 12 Angry Men - 1957 feature film starring Henry Fonda; story written by Reginald Rose (not provided) • "A Defense of the Jury System" by Thomas M. Ross, Esq.
/f^v
Graphic Organizers • Evaluating a Persuasive Argument • Evaluating a Character's Argument • Detennining the Credibility of an Author's Argument • Evaluating an Author's Argument • Generating Relevant Questions Additional Resources • Evaluating an Argument: And the Verdict Is.. . • Reading Check Questions, Short Constructed Response, Answer Key, and Rationales
/SfP&K
IC1-197
Instructional Module 9: At - A - Glance
Text Summaries Summary of 12 Angry Mem Heralded as one of the all-time great theatrical releases, 12 Angry Men focuses on a jury's deliberations in a capital murder case. A 12-man jury is sent to begin deliberations in thefirst-degreemurder trial of an 18-year-old Latino accused in the stabbing death of his father, where a guilty verdict means an automatic death sentence. The case appears to be open-and-shut: The defendant has a weak alibi; a knife he claimed to have lost is found at the murder scene; and several witnesses either heard screaming, saw the killing or the boy fleeing the scene. Eleven of the jurors immediately vote guilty; only Juror No. 8 (Mr. Davis, played by Henry Fonda) casts a not guilty vote. AtfirstMr. Davis' bases his vote more so for the sake of discussion after all, the jurors must believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. As the deliberations unfold, the story quickly becomes a study of the jurors' complex personalities (which range from wise, bright, and empathetic to arrogant, prejudiced, and merciless), preconceptions, backgrounds and interactions. That provides the backdrop to Mr. Davis' attempts in convincing the other jurors that a "not guilty" verdict might be appropriate. Summary of "A Defense of the Jury System": In this essay by Thomas M. Ross, Esq., the author's argument is in defense the jury system. The author, an assistant district attorney, first addresses some typical criticisms that jurors base their decisions on emotion rather than reason and that jurors cannot be trusted to understand complex issues. He then compares people who criticize jurors to people who criticize voters for making irrational or ill-informed choices, recognizing that these systems have obvious imperfections, but stating that he wouldn't advocate abolishing either one of them. Having acknowledged that the jury system is fallible, the author states that most criticism of juries is unjustified. As evidence, he cites surveys of jurors and judges, showing that most of them would prefer to be tried by a jury panel rather than by a judge. The author also points out that relying on the verdict of a judge does not guarantee fairness because judges are subject to human error. A jury, however, reflects the makeup of a community and helps ensure that a verdict will not be based on one person's biases or lack of understanding. The author concludes that though the jury system has problems, it is the best system ofjustice for a democracy because it guarantees that the perspectives of all citizens will be respected
/ %
^ )
/•mtjk
IC1-198
12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose Instructional Focus R 23 Generate relevant questions about readings on issues that can be researched. R 2.8 Evaluate the credibility of an author's argument or defense of a claim by critiquing the relationship between generalizations and evidence, the comprehensiveness of evidence, and the way in which the author's intent affects the structure and tone of the text.
Instructional Focus Emphasis: Ethical Beliefs; Shared Beliefs; Fairness; Empathy This acclaimed literary work pivots on the multiple facets ofjustice. Overarching questions might include: • • • • • • • •
What is justice? What are the ethical and shared beliefs that we have about justice? What is meant by "liberty and justice for all"? In what ways does justice shape a society at a given time in history? Is justice absolute or conditional? What are the implications of persuasion on justice? In what ways does perception influence justice? How are expert opinions, logic, reasoning, ethical beliefs, emotion, biases, facts, commonly held beliefs, and ethical beliefs related to justice?
, j
Plot Summary for 12 Angry Men (1957) The defense and the prosecution have rested and the jury is filing into the jury room to decide if a young Spanish-American is guilty or innocent of murdering his father. What begins as an open-andshut case of murder soon becomes a mini-drama of each of the jurors' prejudices and preconceptions about the trial, the accused, and each other. Based on the play, all of the action takes place on the stage of the jury room. Summary written by pjk fPETESIDffiVNET.IBM.COM}
Instructional Application Novels and screen plays evolve. However, most students do not have the skills required for close reading, interpretation, and analysis. It is therefore highly recommended that this literary work is taught in comprehensive pieces and that students are given the time they require for digesting the
IC1-199
/"*%.
text Even a film version should be viewed, discussed, and written about with scaffolding. These might include: • Think Alouds • Proposition/Support Outlines • Summary Mapping • Character Quotations • Focused Dialectical and Interactive Journals Detailed information on these and other standards-aligned strategies may be found in Strategic Teaching and Learning, a California Department of Education publication.
Analyzing a Persuasive Argument The author of 12 Angry Men develops his story around the claims, questions, and appeals of Juror No.8. Instructional Conversations: Students will evaluate the credibility of Juror No. 8's argument by developing a chart that includes each of the following: Key Claims Logical Appeals Emotional Appeals Generalizations Loaded Words Commonly Held Beliefs Ethical Appeals For each of the above, students should explain Juror No. 8's purpose, evidence, if any, and the result.
Writing Tasks Task#l: Students will write an essay that explains why the jurors side with Juror No. 8 in 12 Angry Men and why his argument is effective. The essay should end with an assertion and an explanation about whether or not you would have been persuaded change your verdict and side with Juror No. 8 if you were sitting on the jury. Task #2: Students will develop a persuasive argument about the author's perspective (Juror No. 8) on one of the following issues: justice, ethical beliefs, shared beliefs, fairness, or empathy. Support your argument with quotesfromthe text Structure your ideas logically, use specific rhetorical devices to support assertions, defend positions with precise and relevant evidence, and address readers' concerns. Arguments can be presented in writing or orally.
IC1-200
Evaluating a Persuasive Argument Directions: Complete the chart below to help yon evaluate a persuasive argument I'urpnM'
Kviilnicc
Claim -
Logical Appeals
Emotional Appeals
Generalizations
Loaded Words
Commonly Held Beliefs
Ethical Appeals
IC1-201
Kcsull
Evaluating a Character's Argument /f^\V
... Develop a chart of statements made by the main characters) and what these statements might add to your essay. Ask and answer questions that interpret and/or analyze the statements. Include an assertion that explains the significance of each statement. ( 'II;II;KIC r*,s Nliilniu'iil
Illloipicialioi) /Aim lysis
1. Character:
Question:
Statement: Answer:
Assertion:
2.
-
3.
4.
IC1-202
Determining the Credibility of an Author's Argument *-./"^%K
Evidence is specific information or proof that supports the reasons/assertions in an argument Evidence must be precise and relevant clearly related to the argument. Types of evidence include: analogies, anecdotes, case studies, definitions, expert opinions, expressions of commonly held beliefs, facts, hypotheses, quotations, scenarios. Rhetorical devices (appeals to emotion, ethical beliefs, and logic) are also used to support an author's position. Directions: Determine the author's position for the passage you read. Complete the chart below. Then answer the questions that follow. Author's Position:
What would be an appropriate counter-argument?.
What is your evaluation of the author's argument?
Los Angeles Unified School District
IC1-203
Instructional Focus R 2.8 Evaluate the credibility of an author's argument or defense of a claim by critiquing the relationship between generalizations and evidence, the comprehensiveness of evidence, and the way in which the author's intent affects the structure and tone of the text Bridge to Instructional Component 2 - Exposition R 2.5 Extend ideas presented in primary or secondary sources through original analysis, evaluation, and elaboration.
Instructional Focus "A Defense of the Jury System," by Thomas M. Ross, Esq., is a persuasive essay that defends the jury system. The author, an assistant district attorney,firstaddresses some typical criticisms that jurors base their decisions on emotion rather than reason and that jurors cannot be trusted to understand complex issues. He then compares people who criticize jurors to people who criticize voters for making irrational or ill-informed choices, recognizing that these systems have obvious imperfections, but stating that he wouldn't advocate abolishing either one of them. Having acknowledged that the jury system is fallible, the author states that most criticism ofjuries is unjustified. As evidence, he cites surveys ofjurors and judges, showing that most of them would prefer to be tried by a jury panel rather than by a judge. The author also points out that relying on the verdict of a judge does not guarantee fairness because judges are subject to human error. A jury, however, reflects the makeup of a community and helps ensure that a verdict will not be based on one person's biases or lack of understanding. The author concludes that though the jury system has problems, it is the best system of justice for a democracy because it guarantees that the perspectives of all citizens will be respected. Instructional Application After reading this essay, students should be able to evaluate the credibility of the author's argument by critiquing the relationship between generalizations and evidence, the comprehensiveness of evidence, and the way in which the author's intent affects the structure and tone of the text. Bridge to Instructional Component 2: Exposition Students will connect the ideas in this essay to the ideas presented in Twelve Angry Men. Students will generate relevant questions about the reading and extend ideas presented in primary and secondary sources. Extension: To Kill A Mockingbird, a novel by Harper Lee, can also be used as a contrast with 12 Angry Men and "A Defense of the Jury System."
IC1-204
-'"*^\
Evaluating an Argument: And the Verdict Is... An argument is a series of statements designed to convince you of something. When you evaluate an author's argument, you act somewhat like a juror serving on a trial. Like a juror you need to analyze the evidence presented to you and decide whether the argument is sound. The following tips and the chart below will help you determine whether an author's argument is credible, or believable: 1.
Understand the claim, or opinion. First, read through the argument to make sure that you understand the matter being discussed. Identify what the author is trying to prove, which is called the claim, or opinion. Often the author's opinion is stated in the form of a generalization, or a broad statement that covers many situations. For example, the following statement is a generalization that expresses an opinion: All jurors should be allowed to take notes during a trial. Try to restate the author's opinion in your own words.
2.
Identify the support. An author must provide support for a claim in order to creat? " ^ a persuasive argument. Here are some common types of support that authors usev^ Logical appeals. To show that their opinions are valid, authors present reasons, statements that explain why the author holds an opinion. For example, the following statement provides a reason for the author's opinion: All jurors should be allowed to take notes during a trial because notes can help them remember important information for reaching a verdict. Evidence is the information that authors use to support their reasons. Every generalization, to be believable, should be backed up by evidence. There are several types of evidence: •facts • statistics (number facts) • examples • quotations from or opinions of experts Sometimes writers use analogies, another type of logical appeal, to help them explain a point. An analogy is a type of comparison in which writers usually explain something complex or unfamiliar in terms of something familiar. Emotional appeals. To win readers over to their opinions, authors sometimes appeal to readers' emotions rather than their reason. Writers, for instance, might want their readers to feel outrage over an injustice or to feel sympathy for a victim. Emotional appeals can be effective tools, but watch out for arguments that rely . from Holt Elements ofLiterature, Fourth Course, online supplemental materials.
IC1-205
heavily on emotion at the expense of logic. It's usually a sign that an argument is weak. Emotional appeals include
c
• •
loaded words (words with strong emotional connotations) anecdotes (brief stories)
3.
Evaluate the evidence. An argument is only as strong as its evidence. Ask yourself: "Does the evidence directly support the author's reasons? Does the author present sufficient evidence to back up generalizations and to prove the claim? Has the author loaded the argument with emotional appeals instead of providing valid evidence?"
4.
Identify the author's intent Finally, think about why the author is making this argument As far as you can tell, has the author carefully weighed all the evidence before arriving at an opinion? Does the author, instead, seem to be biased or prejudiced? Note how the author's intent or purpose, influences the tone of the argument. For example, if the author wants to urge readers to take action, the tone might be strongly emotional.
5.
Create a chart. To help evaluate an argument, make a chart like the one shown on the next page. Such a chart will help you see the strengths and weaknesses of an argument.
/^N
from Holt Elements of Literature, Fourth Course, online supplemental materials.
IC1-206
PERSUASIVE ESSAY
A Defense of the Jury System Thomas M. Ross, Esq. The jury system is often attacked for delivering seemingly irrational verdicts in both criminal and civil cases.1 Much of this criticism stems from some wellpublicized verdicts that the public has felt were
Evaluating an argument - Note that the author begins his essay by pointing out criticism of the jury system. Why do you think he does this?
unjustified and unreasonable. For example, when a fast-food company was forced to pay $2.7 million in damages in a case brought by a woman who had spilled a cup of coffee on her lap, the verdict was widely ridiculed. One congressman remarked, "Most people say this doesn't make a lot of sense." Juries are criticized for deciding cases based upon their prejudices or emotions, rather than
.^^\
rationally applying the law to the evidence presented in a case. They are also criticized for being incapable of understanding the complex financial and scientific issues that sometimes arise in today's court cases. For example, a jury in one case awarded a small company $35 million in damages from a communications conglomerate2 for a patent infringement.3 A lawyer involved in the case remarked that the jury of "unemployed laborers and housewives
Evaluating an argument - In your own words, explain the author's two main generalizations in this paragraph.
didn't understand that stuff." Evaluating an argument What analogy does the author make in this paragraph? How does the author use this analogy to state his opinion or claim?
People who make these criticisms, however, are very much like people who criticize voters for being irrational or ill-informed. Critics claim that many voters have only a superficial grasp of the issues and, accordingly, are easily
swayed by simplistic slogans and "thirty-second sound bites"4 that obscure the complexity of the issues. Despite these criticisms of voters, hardly anyone advocates abolishing the vote.
/**%\
After all, it has been said that "democracy is the worst form of government—except for all the from Holt Elements ofLiterature, Fourth Course, online supplemental materials.
IC1-207
JPV
others." The same can be said of the jury system: Ifs the worst system of justice—except for all the others. Much of the criticism of the jury system is unjustified and stems from unfamiliarity with the system. When people actually serve on a jury, they usually find that the cases receiving widespread negative publicity are atypical—most of their peers perform their duties conscientiously, honestly, and fairly. For example, a survey of eight hundred jurors by the National Law Journal in 1993 revealed that 75 percent of them would prefer to be tried by
Evaluating evidence - What type of evidence is presented in this paragraph?
a panel of their peers rather than by a panel of judges. Even judges themselves, who observe juries daily, have confidence in most jurors. A survey of state judges in Texas found that 98 percent believed that juries do at least "moderately well" in reaching a "just and fair" verdict. Furthermore, if those judges were a party in a civil lawsuit or were accused of a crime, 60 percent said that they would rather have their civil case decided by a jury than by a judge, and 80 percent said they would rather have their criminal case decided by a jury.
Evaluating an argument What reasons does the author give to support his opinion that judges would be no better than juries?
Some people believe that having cases decided exclusively by judges would improve our justice system. However, like jurors, judges are human beings, capable of making misjudgments. Relying on judges, instead of juries, to decide cases does not guarantee that every
verdict will be considered fair by all. Furthermore, judges are not representative of society as a whole. Although more women and minority members are being appointed as judges—as more women and minority members enter the legal profession itself—judges are still mostly Caucasian and male. Moreover, most judges, like most lawyers, generally come from middle-class and affluent backgrounds. Thus, the experiences and perspectives of women, minorities, and poor and working-class people would be underrepresented in a system in which all cases were decided by judges. On the other hand, jurors are drawn from both sexes, all ethnic groups, all economic backgrounds, all adult ages, all religions, and all neighborhoods within a jurisdiction.8 (Indeed, the only qualification a person needs to be a juror is the ability to be fair and from Holt Elements of Literature, Fourth Course, online supplemental materials.
IC1-208
impartial.) Consequently, a jury will reflect diverse viewpoints and experiences, rather than just the viewpoint and experiences-of a^singie judge. The jury system thus helps ensure that a verdict will not be based on an individual's biases or lack of understanding of particular people's experiences. Human beings are not perfect—we make mistakes, and sometimes we are swayed by our emotions—and that means that the jury system is also not perfect. Despite its flaws, the
Evaluating arguments - In your own words, state the author's main claim, or opinion, in this essay.
jury system is the best means we have for maintaining justice in a democracy. No other system guarantees that the perspectives of all citizens will be represented.
Enrichment - How might the author's position in the legal system influence his purpose in arguing for the jury system?
The author is an assistant district attorney in Kings County (Brooklyn), New York.
,->^!K
from Holt Elements ofLiterature, Fourth Course, online supplemental materials.
IC1-209
Claim, or opinion:
Logical appeals Reason 1: Evidence:
Reason 2:
I
Evidence:
Emotional appeals Loaded words: Anecdotes:
Tone:
IC1-210
Generating Relevant Questions --^"^11.
Directions: Generate relevant questions about readings on issues that can be researched. Question 1.
Answer and research source
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
IC1-211
Pi-actice
1. Which statement best expresses the author's claim, or opinion? A A few highly publicized cases prove that the jury system is not fair. B
Many judges believe that the jury system is fair.
C
There is nothing wrong with the jury system, and it should not be replaced.
D
Despite its problems, trial by jury is the fairest system of justice.
2. The author's comparison of the jury system to the popular vote is an example of—
/0f&*.
A
a fact
B
an anecdote
C
loaded words
D
an analogy
3. To support his claim, the author relies most heavily on — A
reasons and facts
B
experts' quotations
C
anecdotes
D
loaded words
4. What conclusion does the author want you to draw from the statistics he presents in the essay? A
Jurors and judges trust juries.
B
More criminal cases than civil cases are decided by judges.
C After serving as jurors, most people feel that the jury system is not effective. D
Surveys are a good way to learn about the jury system.
^•v from Holt Elements of Literature, Fourth Course, online supplemental materials.
IC1-212
5. Which of the following phrases from the essay is an example of loaded language? A
"simplistic slogans"
B C
"unfamiiiarity with the system" "like most lawyers"
D
"an individual's biases"
6. Which word best describes thetoneof the essay? A
sarcastic
B
comforting
C
reasonable
D
resentful
Short Constructed Response Imagine that Ross's essay was published in your local newspaper. Write a letter to the editor in which you tell whether you think Ross's argument is credible. Explain your point of view by evaluating the claim and supporting evidence in his essay. How strong or weak do you find his argument?
from Holt Elements of Literature, Fourth Course, online supplemental materials.
IC1-213
Standards Review Answers
Answer
l.D
2.D 3. A 4. A 5. A
6.C
j
Rationales A expresses an opinion that the author disagrees with; B is evidence supporting the author's overall opinion; and although the author does not think it should be replaced, he admits that there are things wrong with the jury system (C). D is clearly the right answer, because the comparison does not use facts (A), anecdotes (B), or loaded words (C). The author does not use loaded words (D), anecdotes (C), or experts' quotations (B), so A is the correct answer. The statistics the author presents all measure the trust jurors and judges have for jurors. Only A contains words with strong emotional connotations. All the other phrases are neutral. The tone of the essay is not sarcastic (A) or resentful (D). While some readers may find the message comforting (B), the overall tone of the essay is reasonable (C).
/(P8^
from Holt Elements ofLiterature, Fourth Course, online supplemental materials.
IC1-214