Standard 3: Critical Reading and Writing Students will apply critical thinking skills to reading and writing. 

12.3.W.3 ​Students will compose argumentative essays, reviews, or op-eds that:

• introduce precise, informed claims

• include a defensible thesis

• acknowledge counterclaims or alternate perspectives

• organize claims, counterclaims, and evidence in a logical sequence

• provide the most relevant evidence to develop balanced arguments, using credible sources

• use sentence variety and word choice to create clarity and concision

• use style and tone that suits the audience and purpose

Student Actions

Teacher Actions

• Students analyze and evaluate argumentative mentor texts such as essays, reviews, and/or op-eds.

• Students note the author’s defensible thesis statement in each text.

• Students note how authors use evidence (i.e., empirical, anecdotal, and logical) to create rhetorical appeals (i.e., ethos, pathos, and logos) that strengthen the writer’s argument.

• Students annotate argumentative mentor texts, noting how authors organize their argument (e.g., placement of counterclaim, call to action, etc.), how authors use syntax and word choice (e.g., repetition for emphasis, simple sentences for directness, etc.), as well as style and tone to achieve their purpose.

• Students determine which mode of argumentative writing is suited best for their purpose (e.g., an essay may be best for formal argumentative writing, a review may be best for evaluating a current particular topic, an op-ed may be best for a critical opinion to a wide audience).

• Students develop a precise, informed claim that addresses a given topic.

• Students establish a position in order to make a defensible thesis to guide their argumentative writing mode.

• Students address opposing or alternate claims within their writing task.

• Students sequence evidence, including counterclaims, logically in the order that best supports their intended purpose and audience.

• Students reference credible sources using appropriate citation style determined by the writing task.

• Students support claims, defend theses, and establish topics with adequate and thorough evidence of all kinds (e.g., anecdotal, empirical, logical).

• Students use literary elements and devices to enhance anecdotal evidence and to add depth and understanding to empirical and logical evidence.

• Students apply evidence to create rhetorical appeals for a desired effect (e.g., empirical evidence to create ethical appeals, anecdotal evidence to create emotional appeals, logical evidence to create logical appeals).

• Students construct their argument by applying precise language such as detailed imagery, varied and purposeful sentence types (i.e., syntax) and specific and detailed diction to create clarity and concision.

• Students develop the style and tone of their argument to suit a specific audience and purpose.

• Students include a well-developed conclusion that reiterates the claims and position of the argument.

• Teachers provide argumentative mentor texts such as essays, reviews, and/or op-eds for students to analyze and evaluate.

• Teachers include mentor texts with precise, defensible thesis statements.

• Teachers include mentor texts with clear examples of how writers use evidence (i.e., empirical, anecdotal, and logical) to create rhetorical appeals (i.e., ethos, pathos, and logos) that strengthen the writer’s argument.

• Teachers guide students as they annotate mentor texts for organization, syntax, word choice, style, and tone.

• Teachers coach students to determine why an author chose to use the given argumentative mode (e.g., essay, review, or op-ed).

• Teachers assign writing tasks that require students to take a position by developing a claim, establishing a defensible thesis, addressing counterclaims, using supporting evidence from credible sources to create rhetorical appeals.

• Teachers coach students to provide clear, defensible theses in their writing.

• Teachers coach students to include a thesis statement that introduces the reader to their topic and purpose and includes a precise, clear position that can be argued.

• Teachers coach students to avoid simply restating the prompt or stating an obvious truth, but rather take a strong position they will defend throughout the paper.

• Teachers guide students to support claims, defend theses, and establish topics with adequate and thorough evidence of all kinds (e.g., anecdotal, empirical, logical).

• Teachers guide students to create rhetorical appeals through their evidence (e.g., empirical evidence to create ethical appeals, anecdotal evidence to create emotional appeals, logical evidence to create logical appeals).

• Teachers guide students to organize their writing in a logical sequence of events, recognizing that an argumentative organization might use claim, evidence, and counterclaim in various orders given a desired effect.

• Teachers provide a variety of outlines over the same argumentative topic and have students determine which organizational approach would be most effective and why.

• Teachers break a piece of argumentative writing into separate paragraphs, physically or digitally, and shuffle them for students to place in the best order in pairs or groups.

• Teachers create opportunities for students to revise their writing in a different structure to determine the best organization for the purpose (e.g., have students move their counterclaim to determine best placement, have students move evidence paragraphs to place anecdotal evidence at the beginning to hook their audience or at the end to call them to action, etc.).

• Teachers guide students to use literary elements and devices to enhance anecdotal evidence and to add depth and understanding to empirical evidence.

• Teachers guide students to construct their argument by applying precise language such as detailed imagery, varied and purposeful sentence types (i.e., syntax)and specific and detailed diction to create clarity and concision.

• Teachers guide students to select a style and tone appropriate for their given audience and purpose (e.g., an op-ed’s audience may respond better to a less “formal” style and tone as it is meant to be a unique commentary on a specific topic or moment in time). 

• Teachers provide frequent feedback on students’ ability to construct an argument in various modes such as essays, reviews, and/or op-eds.

• Teachers provide frequent opportunities for students to apply argumentative writing skills.

Recommendations

Key Terms & Related Objectives

When students struggle to write defensible theses to support a precise, informed claim, teachers can...

• coach students using mentor texts to recognize that a defensible thesis will indicate the writer’s position on an argument while also providing claims they will prove in through their mode of writing (e.g., essay, review, or op-ed).

• provide examples of theses that are not defensible and ask students to revise them to be defensible.

• provide opportunities for students to highlight portions of thesis statements that make them defensible (i.e. position that must be proven, claims they will prove).

When students struggle to include evidence to achieve a balanced argument, teachers can...

• review substantiated versus unsubstantiated claims and their impact on a reader.

• coach students using mentor texts on how every inclusion of evidence creates an appeal that can impact their argument (i.e., empirical evidence can create ethical appeals, anecdotal evidence can create emotional appeals, logical evidence can create logical appeals).

• have students highlight examples of unsubstantiated claims (within their own writing as well as with teacher-provided examples) and ask them to brainstorm evidence that would substantiate them.

When students struggle to address counterclaims within their argumentative essays, reviews, or op-eds, teachers can…

• share argumentative mentor texts that include counterclaims for students to identify and analyze.

• coach students to introduce a counterclaim as something that someone else may believe, rather than claiming it as right or wrong.

• coach students to use common phrases that help to introduce counterclaims (e.g., “Admittedly, people say…,” “Certainly, some people believe…,” etc.) and transitions that lead back to their original claim (e.g., “However,...,” “Nevertheless…,” etc.).

• Argumentative Writing: writing that requires a student to investigate a topic; collect, generate, and evaluate evidence; and establish and defend a position on the topic in a clear manner.

• Audience: a writer’s targeted reader(s).

• Claim: the central arguable proposal in opinion or argumentative writing

• Counterclaim: a claim made to rebut a previous claim.

• Defensible Thesis: a non-obvious statement with an alternative view or opposing argument that can be reasonably argued (even if it is weaker).

• Diction: the choice and use of words by a speaker or writer.

• Ethos: in rhetoric, the credibility a speaker or writer establishes in an argument based on their knowledge, experience, expertise, etc.

• Evidence: the reasons or support for an argument

• Anecdotal: stories told by other people

• Empirical: discovered through experiments, observations, or personal experiences

• Logical: data, statistics, definitions, academic studies, hard facts

• Logos: in rhetoric, the facts and reasoning (inductive and deductive) used by the speaker to strengthen an argument.

• Inductive Reasoning: developing a theory by using specific observations, resulting in a likely conclusion.

• Deductive Reasoning: testing an existing theory against various scenarios and hypotheses, resulting in a guaranteed conclusion.

• Mentor Texts: final drafts of writing by authors, teachers, and current or former students that can be studied to discover craft moves and other writing traits.

• Pathos: in rhetoric, the aspects of a speaker’s argument that rely on anecdotes, stories, and examples to tug at the reader’s or listener’s emotions.

• Op-ed: short for “opposite the editorial page,” this form of commentary is focused on a specific topic or moment in time with the author’s unique take and style.

• Tone: a writer or speaker’s attitude toward a subject, character, or audience conveyed through the choice of words and detail.

• 12.3.R.5: Evaluating arguments

• 12.6.W.2:Thesis statements

ACT College & Career Readiness Standards

SAT Content Dimensions

• Score Range 3-4: I&A 201: Understanding the task and writing with purpose (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to generate a thesis that is unclear or not entirely related to the given issue and respond weakly to other perspectives on the issue)

• Score Range 3-4: I&A 202: Analyzing critical elements of an issue and differing perspectives on it (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to provide analysis that is incomplete or largely irrelevant)

• Score Range 5-6: I&A 301: Understanding the task and writing with purpose (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to generate a somewhat clear thesis that establishes a perspective on a contemporary issue and respond to other perspectives on the issue)

• Score Range 5-6: I&A 302: Analyzing critical elements of an issue and differing perspectives on it (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to establish a limited or tangential context for analysis and provide analysis that is simplistic or somewhat unclear)

• Score Range 7-8: I&A 401: Understanding the task and writing with purpose (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to generate a clear thesis that establishes a perspective on a contemporary issue and engage with other perspectives on the issue)

• Score Range 7-8: I&A 402: Analyzing critical elements of an issue and differing perspectives on it (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to establish and employ a relevant context for analysis and recognize implications, complexities and tensions, and/or underlying values and assumptions)

• Score Range 9-10: I&A 501: Understanding the task and writing with purpose (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to generate a precise thesis that establishes a perspective on a contemporary issue and engage productively with other perspectives on the issue)

• Score Range 9-10: I&A 502: Analyzing critical elements of an issue and differing perspectives on it (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to establish and employ a thoughtful context for analysis and address implications, complexities and tensions, and/or underlying values and assumptions)

• Score Range 11-12: I&A 601: Understanding the task and writing with purpose. (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to generate a nuanced, precise thesis that establishes a perspective on a contemporary issue and engage critically with other perspectives on the issue)

• Score Range 9-10: I&A 602: Analyzing critical elements of an issue and differing perspectives on it (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to establish and employ an insightful context for analysis and examine implications, complexities and tensions, and/or underlying values and assumptions)

• Score Range 3-4: D&S 201: Building and strengthening the argument (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to arrive at a weak understanding of the issue and differing perspectives on it through inadequate reasoning and examples and offer a rationale that fails to clarify the argument and provide elaboration of ideas and analysis that is illogical, disjointed, or circular)

• Score Range 5-6: D&S 301:Building and strengthening the argument (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to make use of mostly relevant reasoning and examples to support the thesis, arrive at a general or simplistic understanding of the issue, offer a rationale that largely clarifies the argument, and provide elaboration of ideas and analysis that is somewhat repetitive or imprecise)

• Score Range 7-8: D&S 401:Building and strengthening the argument (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to make use of clear reasoning and examples to arrive at an understanding of the issue and differing perspectives on it, adequately convey reasons why the argument is worth considering, extend ideas and analysis by considering factors that complicate the writer’s own perspective, and anticipate objections by qualifying the argument

• Score Range 9-10: D&S 501:Building and strengthening the argument (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to make purposeful use of reasoning and examples to support the thesis and arrive at a deeper understanding of the issue, capably convey reasons why the argument is worth considering, enrich ideas and analysis by considering factors that complicate the writer’s own perspective, and anticipate objections by qualifying the argument)

• Score Range 11-12: D&S 601:Building and strengthening the argument (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to make skillful use of reasoning and examples to broaden the context for analysis, support the thesis, and arrive at deeper insight into the issue, effectively convey reasons why the argument is worth considering, enrich and strengthen ideas and analysis by considering factors that complicate the writer’s own perspective, and anticipate objections by qualifying the argument

• Score Range 3-4: ORG 201: Grouping and connecting ideas (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to group ideas with little consistency or clarity and use misleading and poorly formed transitions)

• Score Range 3-4: ORG 202: Employing an organizational strategy (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to provide a minimal organizational structure in which some ideas are grouped locally)

• Score Range 5-6: ORG 301: Grouping and connecting ideas (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to group most ideas logically and use transitions between and within paragraphs to clarify some relationships among ideas)

• Score Range 5-6: ORG 302: Employing an organizational strategy (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to provide a basic organizational structure)

• Score Range 7-8: ORG 401: Grouping and connecting ideas (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to group and sequence ideas logically and use transitions between and within paragraphs to clarify relationships among ideas)

• Score Range 7-8: ORG 402: Employing an organizational strategy (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to make use of an emergent controlling idea or purpose to shape the argument)

• Score Range 9-10: ORG 501: Grouping and connecting ideas (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to group and sequence ideas logically to increase the effectiveness of the argument and use transitions between and within paragraphs to consistently clarify relationships among ideas)

• Score Range 9-10: ORG 502: Employing an organizational strategy (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to make use of a controlling idea or purpose to unify the argument)

• Score Range 11-12: ORG 601: Grouping and connecting ideas (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to group and sequence ideas logically, creating a progression that increases the effectiveness of the argument and use transitions between and within paragraphs to strengthen the relationships among ideas)

• Score Range 11-12: ORG 602: Employing an organizational strategy (A score in this range indicates that the writer is able to make use of a controlling idea or purpose to unify and focus the argument)

• Proposition: The student will add, revise, or retain central ideas, main claims, counterclaims, topic sentences, and the like to structure text and convey arguments, information, and ideas clearly and effectively.

• Support: The student will add, revise, or retain information and ideas (e.g., details, facts, statistics) intended to support claims or points in text.

• Style and tone: The student will revise text as necessary to ensure consistency of style and tone within a text or to improve the match of style and tone to purpose.

• Syntax: The student will use various sentence structures to accomplish needed rhetorical purposes.

• Analysis: Analysis of the source text and understanding of the analytical task 

• Analysis: Evaluation of the author’s use of evidence, reasoning, and/or stylistic and persuasive elements, and/or features chosen by the student 

• Analysis: Support for claims or points made in the response 

• Analysis: Focus on features of the text most relevant to addressing the task

• Writing: Use of a central claim 

• Writing: Use of effective organization and progression of ideas 

• Writing: Use of varied sentence structures 

• Writing: Employment of precise word choice

• Writing: Maintenance of a consistent, appropriate style and tone