Dr. Louis' Blog

Dear Dr. D',

Could you please explain the difference between persuasive and argumentative writing…could it be as simple as semantics?

- Gerene

Dear Gerene:

The difference is semantics, but in its most formal sense: the study of the relationship between the structure of a theory and its subject matter. Unfortunately, the semantics of your question is not simple, but I'm going to attempt to simplify the difference between persuasion and argumentation so that we can explain it to our students and parents. First, let me assuage the classical theorists and rhetoricians in the room.

When we talk about persuasion and argumentation, we must first turn to Plato, then Aristotle, then Isocrates, Cicero, Quintilian, the Second Sophistic, and Saint Augustine -- and that only gets us to 400 A.D.! The classical rhetorical theory which these philosophers present is the foundation that precipitates your and everyone else's questions on persuasion and argumentation. As we move forward in history, Hugh Blair and the Belles Lettres, the neoclassicists and epistemologists, George Campbell, Richard Whately, and the elocutionists are the theorists who bring us to the 19th century, and all of them have much more to say on the subject. Discussions of persuasion, rhetoric, argumentation, elocution, propaganda, and many other associated terms abound, and tomes are written on these ideas and their implementation in various areas of our lives.

In what is considered the contemporary rhetorical theory, some of my favorite resources on the subject are I.A. Richards' Philosophy of Rhetoric, Marshal McLuhan's Understanding Media: The Extension of Man; Kenneth Burke's A Rhetoric of Motives, and most recently James Kinneavy's A Theory of Discourse. These later gurus have helped me to understand the earlier ones and have brought the discussion to current day (Note: I have left out many other great philosophers, but if you really want to learn about this incredibly interesting concept, you might begin with some of my go-to people mentioned above, and they will send you even deeper into the material.).

My first master's degree was in Language and Composition, so I studied the material, and I like to start with Quintilian when I introduce the topic of Argumentation. Quintilian defined the orator as "the good man speaking good." No, the second “good” is not a grammatical error. In this case, Quintillian means that “a good man only pleads good causes, and truth itself is defense enough for them without the help of learning” (Russell, Bk. XII, 214-15). I like to talk about citizenry ala Cicero, too. I talk to the kids about "Aristotle's four main reasons for the necessity of rhetoric: (1) it assists in the general triumph of good over evil; (2) it is necessary to influence those incapabile of real instructions; (3) examining both sides of a topic helps to find ou the truth; (4) it is necessary as a means of self-defense against the rhetoric of others" (Kinneavy 224).

All of which leads me to answering your question, Gerene, and here's the down and dirty difference in my humble opinion:

If you know me, you know what a stickler I am about reducing students' stress levels by using common terminology.

I try to simplify this incredibly dense topic by telling them that "persuasion" is about convincing people to "act" differently, even if for a short time. So, much of the time persuasive writing and speaking is rife with emotional appeals (pathos) to derive immediate action. Richards discusses the emotional appeals that underlie the discourse of persuasion, and I like to refer to Aristotle's number 2 reason above as the basis for sophistry and people with inflated egos. I tell the kids, "the masses will “ReAct” when someone gets them "all stirred up," but that action might not last (hence, mob mentality).

Over the past couple of decades, persuasive writing on tests weighed heavily on the side of pathos. When we were asked to teach our students the persuasive essay, we focused on putting forth one side, what the classicists called confirmation. Only one side, our side, was necessary to convince people, and the writing at times was plagued with inflammatory and forceful diction as well as logical fallacies (AP Language curriculum excepted).

But Quintilian's good man theory and Cicero's citizen orator both understood that “pathos” was to be used sparingly, and I believe therein lies the transition of language. Enter Argumentation. And with it a change in expectations. I like to tell students and teachers that "Argumentation" (as opposed to Persuasion), is designed to convince people to "think" differently and, therefore, has a more lasting effect on people's thoughts and actions. This lasting effect is derived from a focus toward ethics (ethos) and logic (logos) and away from emotion (pathos). In other words, ethos is first; logos is second; pathos should be used in very small doses.

We accomplish this feat by acknowledging the other side of the argument (Aristotle's #3 above), even providing validity to the other side in some cases (the concession). We provide the anticipated counter argument from the opposing side, then confute/refute that counter argument. So, now we're seeing the state and national test makers and standards people including concession, counterargument, et.al in the changing state and national standards and student expectations. I think these are the reasons they are calling it "argumentation" rather than persuasion.

The difference is semantics. But, perhaps, it's also a difference of connotation: When we say “argumentation,” we're expecting a more thoughtful, ethical, logical, Rogerian, reflective, objective, Toulmanian, issue-based approach to an issue rather than a forceful, inflammatory, feelings-based approach that we used to call persuasion.

Keep writing,

Dr. D'

Getting to know your students is paramount in your year being a successful one. Pretty soon, you'll discover who your kids "really" are, and some or many of them might be longing for "the call for adventure" like Odysseus in Homer's Odyssey. For those of you teaching Homer's great piece and discussing Odysseus' son, Telemachus, or any literature where loss is involved, you might consider discussing "The Orphan" with your students and convey to them that at different stages of our lives, we all experience this archetype.

excerpt from "Crossing Thresholds: The Hero Archetype

and an Introduction to the Individuation Process in Homer's Odyssey."

By Deborah E. Louis

The disappearance of a parent, whether through death, divorce, war, or self-seeking adventure, leaves a child with what Joseph Campbell describes as an "unsuspected world, and the [child] is drawn into a relationship with forces that are not rightly understood" (51). Activated by abandonment, betrayal, victimization, neglect, or disillusionment, this state of woundedness, according to Carol Pearson, launches the child into a form of the Orphan archetype (83). But one or both parents do not need to be missing in order for someone to experience the Orphan archetype. According to Pearson,

[w]henever we feel wounded by an injustice in our lives or an injustice in our society, whenever we realize that this life is not always fair, friends talk behind our backs, people of authority cannot satisfactorily answer our questions, and truths are contingent at best, the Orphan archetype comes to  the forefront. Whenever we lose our idealism, our Innocence, even for a moment, and feel a sense of hopelessness, we are facing our Orphan. (89)

Concerning its place in hero archetypes, the Orphan is a critical stage of a person’s growth and development. Woundedness, too, is an integral part of our human condition and, more importantly, how we deal with that woundedness. According to Pearson,

[t]he gift of the Orphan is to help us acknowledge our wounding and to open enough to share (in places that are safe) our fears, our vulnerabilities, and our wounds. Doing so helps us bond with others out of a grounded, honest, vulnerable place. This provides the bonding that allows intimacy to happen and also to open the heart so we may learn to be compassionate with ourselves and one another. (92)

While the feelings associated with the Orphan archetype are full of pain and alienation, conversely, according to Pearson, “[t]he gift of the Orphan archetype is [ultimately] a freedom from dependence, a form of interdependent self-reliance. We no longer rely on external authority figures, but rather learn to help ourselves and one another” (85). Therefore, at some point in our crisis of abandonment is the beginning of the hero’s journey, the “call to adventure.”

Works Cited

Campbell, Joseph. The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Princeton: Bollingen, 1968.Louis, Deborah E. "Crossing Thresholds: The Hero Archetype and an Introduction to the Individuation Process in Homer's Odyssey. "Approaches to Teaching Archetypal and Mythocultural Literature in a Technological World. Dissertation. April 2013.Pearson, Carol S. Awakening the Heroes Within: Twelve Archetypes to Help Us Find Ourselves and Transform Our World. San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1991.

DECODING A WRITING PROMPT‍

We have all heard students exclaim, “I don’t know how to start!” The Jane Schaffer Writing Program® (JSWP) was designed by Jane to demystify that thought from their minds. From the prompt to the final draft, JSWP teaches students the cognitive thinking process behind the execution of writing.

Let’s start with the prompt.

We have found that students encounter difficulty in writing because they do not understand how to “decode” or “deconstruct” writing prompts. Once students understand our color-coding system, we teach them how to use it to comprehend what a prompt is asking.

‍Sample Sixth Grade Guidebooks 2.o Textbook Prompt: Hatchet

‍Select an event from Hatchet. What did Brian do to aid or hinder his survival? Does Hatchet have instructional value as a survival guide?

Write a multi-paragraph report explaining how Brian was successful and/or could have improved his situation if he had followed the steps provided in the article case studies. Conclude the report by making a claim and providing clear reasons and evidence about the instructional value of Hatchet. Be sure to use proper grammar, conventions, spelling, and grade-appropriate words and phrases. Cite several pieces of textual evidence, including direct quotations and page numbers.

‍

"What Are They Asking Me to Do? Decoding the Prompt"

‍Introduction and Thesis Statement: In JSWP™, we teach students to start with a broad, thematic, universal idea about the human condition. We don't call it a "hook" because the opening sentence of an essay is not a gimmick or an advertising ploy. Instead of asking, what is meant by success, start your introduction by answering that question. Then, narrow the introduction, observing the fictional idea and nonfictional texts that deal with the concept of survival as success. The thesis has the potential of being two-fold: Was Brian successful and/or could he have improved his situation? This is the key question, and from this question the student will derive the first part of the thesis statement. The second part of the thesis statement will defend or challenge the idea that Hatchet is of instructional value. Because of the complexity of the questions, the thesis should probably be a compound sentence (a compound-complex sentence, if the teacher wants a counterargument regarding the argumentative portion of the assignment). The thesis may be a framed thesis in which the writer names his/her reasons, which will lead to the topic sentences or an open thesis that “hints” at the topics. We break down all of these skills for our students in the Jane Schaffer Writing Program.

‍Topic Sentences (TS): Topic sentences provide reasons that support a writer’s thesis. From where in the prompt could topic sentences come? Options abound: (1) each body paragraph could begin with a TS that names different successes that Brian experiences that aid his survival (beginning writer); or (2) perhaps the student would like to focus on what Brian did that hindered his survival and how he could have improved on that situation (intermediate writer); or, (3) perhaps a student wants to approach main ideas that emerge from the article case studies and use that concept to lead the discussion (advanced); or (4) a combination (highly advanced).Since this prompt requests two different modes of discourse, literary analysis and argumentation, the student will end his report with one or two body paragraphs. In that case, each TS will be the writer’s assertion which supports the claim with a “clear reason” about the instructional value of Hatchet.

‍Concrete Details (CDs): In this assignment, concrete details (evidence) are derived directly from the multiple texts (not other forms of evidence which we discuss in our trainings). That evidence will come from Hatchet and the articles. Using the “Evidence Chart,” students will write the concrete details in red. We recommend teaching students how to embed quotations while they read rather than paraphrasing at the 6th grade level. You’ll also notice that we place the prompt as well as key ideas on the “Evidence Chart” to keep the students focused. Once the reading has been completed, discerning which pieces of evidence are the most important is an essential skill that we teach.

‍Commentary (CMs): Commentary is always the most difficult to teach because it asks for students to give insight into their reading and provide interpretations about life and the human condition as well as the significance of the evidence as it pertains to the thesis and the topic sentences. Thus, it must be both insightful and logical. We teach students how to take the ideas of a prompt (abstract nouns, powerful verbs, etc.) and Web-off-of-the-Word™ in order to make inferences about the selection of evidence and how those inferences relate to the prompt, the thesis, and the topic sentences.

‍Concluding Sentence (CS): In an academic body paragraph, each body paragraph must have a concluding sentence. Concluding sentences come from commentary ideas that provide a finished feeling to the body paragraph. For 6th graders, we tell the students that the concluding sentence is a reflection of the topic sentence but does not use any of the same words.‍

Argumentation: This particular assignment has an argumentative piece in the final section, so we must teach students how to take the different parts of an academic body paragraph and build the claim, concession, counterargument, and refutation. The latter three are not usually necessary at the sixth grade level but is required, starting with seventh grade.

‍The Conclusion: This particular assignment does not end with a traditional, classical conclusion since it combines two modes of discourse. If we were to teach the conclusion, we would start with a restatement of the purpose of this essay and broaden the idea to the significance of the assignment. That task is actually being accomplished in the second half of the assignment through argumentation.

Dear Dr. Louis,‍

Would you please take a look at the following prompt and give me some suggestions for revision?

In the Greek Tragedy by Sophocles, “Oedipus Rex,” the protagonist, Oedipus lives a life both cursed and blessed by the gods. Read Oedipus Rex by Edith Hamilton looking closely at the author’s use of ethical appeal. Develop a well thought out two-chunk paragraph (2+:1) where you defend whether Oedipus is a victim of his circumstances or in control of his destiny. Use examples of ethos to support your claim. Consider the gods as you develop your paragraph.

Thank you,

John

‍

‍Dear John,

Of course, I am delighted to look at your prompt!

I firmly believe that teaching writing to students begins with the teacher's knowing how to write effective prompts, prompts that allow student insight and creativity while also providing guidance and expectations. Students are often blind-sided by the vagueness of their teachers' prompts. And, unless we are trained in writing effective prompts, we write prompts that might make a lot of sense to us (like my Teiresias allusion in the title) but confuses and even shuts down our students. Consequently, we receive from some of our students either nothing or a product completely different from what we anticipated. For that reason, I always appreciate when a master teacher, such as yourself, calls upon a colleague to provide feedback on a prompt before the former gives that prompt to 150-200 students. That's a smart teacher!

Let's look at your prompt!

• Your ratio: I understand why you are suggesting 2+:1; you are working with ethos, a rhetorical device used in argumentation, and you are asking them to defend a position. But you are asking the students to interpret literature. Any time we ask students to provide a literary or rhetorical analysis, even when argumentation is part of that assignment, the best papers will have more commentary. So, I think you'll be happier with a 1:2+ ratio.
• Your request: This topic could easily become a beautiful essay. That you're asking your students to write a paragraph concerns me, but if a paragraph is what you want, let's help your students by being more succinct in your instructions, especially in the first quarter of the school year when students are still learning about method and meaning.
  
  • Revised Prompt: Oedipus, the king of Thebes, lives a life both cursed and blessed by the gods. Read carefully Edith Hamilton’s translation of Sophocles’ famous tragedy, Oedipus Rex, paying special attention to Sophocles’ use of ethical appeal to characterize Oedipus and those who surround him, including the gods. Then, develop a well thought out two-chunk paragraph (1:2+) where you defend whether Oedipus is a victim of his circumstances or in control of his destiny (TS). Support your decision by embedding evidence (CDs) from the text related to ethical appeal to support your claim. Your commentary (CMs) and concluding sentence (CS) might include how the evidence you choose contributes to the tone(s) of the piece, the meaning/theme/universal truth you derive, and/or the author's purpose.

I look forward to hearing about how they perform on this assignment. Send me samples to share!

Keep reading and writing!

Best regards,

Dr. Louis

P.S. I sure would like to see you teach those kids Oedipus at Colonus! It goes brilliantly with your teaching free will and destiny and how they relate to blame and guilt. And teaching this piece also allows us to discuss the idea of acceptance and being able to work with letting go of those issues in our lives that do not provide any answers or answer any riddles. I have written an essay on why teachers should teach this text. Let me know if you'd like to read it. DL

Dear Dr. D',

I wanted to get your comments on a  prompt that I will use on Friday with my Honors students.  They read a creation myth about good vs. evil and the need for both in order to create balance in the world.  Below is the prompt I plan to use.

Prompt: Based on the Iroquois creation myth “The World on the Turtle’s Back,” write a one chunk (2+:1) paragraph that discusses the need for good and evil in the world. For the CD (2+), list events from the story that support the need of both good and evil in the world and for the CM (1), explain the importance.

We completed guided practice and they are currently working on writing a paragraph as a group.  Later this week, I will be having them write individually.  Any feedback on the prompt or process is greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Monica 

‍

‍Dear Monica,

Thank you for reaching out to me. I love to collaborate with teachers on prompts, and yours is a good one. It's fun to work as colleagues. Sometimes, being a teacher can be a lonely profession.

Prompts are important to our students; if we don't make ourselves clear about our expectations, students cannot succeed. Also, we're so busy and deadline-oriented that sometimes we hurry through a prompt, and the results are disastrous. I've done it -- written a prompt during passing period or in a matter of minutes, and the results were quite ugly! So, I especially appreciate your asking your question many days before you give the students the prompt. That's a master teacher move!

So, here is my mini-lesson on prompts: Decoding prompts is a skill that all students should learn. I am always concerned when students say, "I don't know how to start."

The definition of "prompt" is

1) to move or induce to action;

2) to occasion or incite; inspire; or

3) to assist (a person speaking) by suggesting something to be said.

To that end, I instruct teachers to write prompts with three distinctive parts: BACKGROUND SENTENCES(1-3), a TRIGGER SENTENCE, and the TASK. What you have written is the task. So, I'd like to see you give one or two background sentences about why the heck they have to read this story in the first place. How will their lives benefit or be more enriched by knowing this creation myth? Or, give them some insight into how creation myths tend to have some recurring patterns. In other words, start your prompt with a sentence or two that either 1) sparks their interest; 2) shocks their daily routine; 3) provides them with a mini-lesson on an element of literature; 4) begins with a thematic statement; or 5) sets the literary period that helps them to decipher characteristics of that literary period as they read the passage.

Example of a BACKGROUND SENTENCE for your prompt: Creation myths are found in cultures around the world. They are stories that we agree to tell about ourselves or another culture but frame them in different ways.  That’s what myth does; it tells us about ourselves or who we choose to say we are. What is fascinating about myths is that even cultures that live across the world from each other seem to have stories that bind us all together as human beings, concepts such as good and evil.

‍Then, write the TRIGGER SENTENCE. I always wondered why the AP prompts had sentences such as "Read the passage carefully." I thought to myself, "What else would they say -- "Read the passage haphazardly?" Then, I realized that this type of sentence was a trigger sentence. When students learn how to decode prompts, they understand that the purpose of a trigger sentence is to point out that everything above this trigger sentence is designed to engage their thinking; everything below the trigger sentence is designed to guide their task for writing. Example of a trigger sentence for your prompt: Read carefully the Iroquois creation myth titled “The World on the Turtle’s Back."

‍Finally, the TASK. I like yours. Let me play with it a little. Because you are dealing with both good and evil, both of which are important concepts, I recommend that your task divides the two concepts into one body paragraph with two chunks or, because the concepts are deep ones, two one- to two-chunk paragraphs. Since you are asking them to discuss the need for both good and evil in the world, you want to give both ideas their just deserts. Your call. You know your students.

Example of a task for your prompt: Then, in a well-developed paragraph (two chunks; 1:2+), discuss the need for both good and evil in the world. For the CDs (1), list events from the story that support the need for both good and evil in the world. For the CM (2+) in each chunk, provide your insight into the importance of good as well as the importance of evil. For your concluding sentence, reflect on the paradox of the need for both.

‍If you go with a two-chunk paragraph, it might look something like this:

• TOPIC SENTENCE
  
  • ‍TS - Who or what am I writing about? Include "good" and "evil" in this sentence.‍
• FIRST CHUNK
  
  • ‍CD 1 - One or more examples of "good" combined into one sentence.
  • CM 1 - How is that "good?"
  • CM 2+ - Importance of "good" to humanity.
• TRANSITION TO SECOND CHUNK‍
  
  • CD 1 - One or more examples of "evil" combined into one sentence.
  • CM 1 - How is that "evil?"
  • CM 2+ - Importance of "evil" in our understanding of humanity.
• CONCLUDING SENTENCE
  
  • CS - The paradox of needing both good and evil in our society.

Question: Are you having them embed quotations from the text? If so, make sure you teach them the TLCD (Transition/Lead-in/Concrete Detail).

Keep reading and writing!

Best regards,

Dr. D'

Dear Dr. Louis,

Would you review this prompt and give me feedback? 

"This week in class we talked about happiness and what things make you happy.  Reflect on those things we talked about. Then, in 5 sentences, please summarize your thoughts for this week.  Please use 12-point font, Times New Roman, double space, and your MLA heading.”

‍

Tina H.

Sure, Tina. I can see that you learned the parts of the prompt well at our workshop together. I love your "Background Sentence" and "Trigger Sentence." For your "Task," I'd like to see you start your year out using your prompt to support and reinforce the JSWP terminology and elements of good writing, guiding your students to an understanding of your expectations for this and future writing prompts. I would avoid telling students "how many" sentences to write. When you start the year out doing that, be prepared for the students to ask you all year, "How many sentences?" JSWP doesn't count sentences. That's why we always have a plus (+) in our ratios. I'd rather you give them some options: 100-250 words; no more than one page; one or two paragraphs. That way, you can diagnose the writing capabilities and confidence levels of your students.

Now, let's talk about the prompt's specs:

First, is the writing assignment supposed to be in paragraph form; a short answer or free response;, or bulleted sentences? Each mode of discourse or format specified has rules to follow, so identifying the required structure up front helps the students’ thinking. Your original prompt looks like a paragraph to me.

Second, the verb "summarize," by definition, demands concrete detail only, and since your topic is about happiness, it begs for commentary; so, let’s go with 2+:1, and let's select a different verb, such as "discuss," "explore," or "communicate."

Let’s give them more guidance since the students are new to your class and new to your expectations. In another email, you indicated that your colleague in the previous year taught them JSWP. Use this opportunity to refresh their knowledge, assess their skills, and address their curiosity that what they learned last year will be built upon this year. Consider the following foundational prompt.

"This week in class we talked about happiness and what things make you happy.  Reflect on those things we talked about. Then, in a well-developed body paragraph,(2+:1), explore what truly makes you happy. For your topic sentence, assert what truly makes you happy with no concrete detail. For your 2+ sentences of concrete detail, provide examples and situations that you have experienced or that people have discussed that created this happiness within you. For your commentary sentence, answer this question: What is it about the situations in your concrete details that inspired happiness within you? And for your concluding sentence, write a sentence about how your happiness might affect others or your outlook on life. Please use 12-point font, Times New Roman, double space, and MLA for your heading."

Once students see this layout -- this foundational prompt -- they'll realize that they must decode a prompt into a logical, organized thought process. Sure, eventually, you wean them off of direct instruction about sentences. How do you do that? After several prompts with precise instructions, you ask them, "Who or what are you writing about? Circle in blue the subject of the assignment." They should be able to identify the subject/topic of the assignment that would belong in their topic sentence or thesis statement (if you are assigning an essay). 

Next, ask them, "What concrete details will you be searching for that will support your topic sentence?" Let them tell you and underline those in red in the prompt.

Continue with, "What's the ratio of this assignment?" If the assignment is literary, style, or rhetorical analysis, it's 1:2+. If the students are writing an expository (nonfiction), argument, or narrative, it's 2+:1. If the assignment is a summary, the ratio is 3+:0.

Next question, "What type of commentary is the prompt asking you to write? Circle that in green. Words might be "discuss," "explain," "investigate." If the word were "summarize," and you didn't have the ratio, students would assume that it fell into a 3+:0 ratio. Ask the students, "What are you going to discuss that comes from your analytical mind, your heart and soul, your gut instincts, and your intuition?" The answer should be something like "the importance, the significance, the impact, or the effect of what they have discovered about themselves" in this particular assignment.

There's a difference between teaching and assigning writing. You'll be teaching them!

Keep Reading and Writing!

Warm regards,

Dr. Louis

‍