Evidence and Reasoning

Thanks,  , for sharing this great strategy for helping students to get that key component of organizing an argument of explaining the reason why the cited evidence supports the claim. I can see sharing this strategy with my middle school team, introducing it in my 6th grade class and having it be reinforced as our students move through the grades. I like the idea of also giving them lots of shared experiences to learn and get the hang of the strategy before we apply it to content.

Top Replies

Parents
  • I borrowed the Tom Brady example used in the track talk - my kids ate it up! However, in their recent LEQ it was clear that there was a disconnect between what was evidence vs. reasoning in actual practice of analyzing and making historical claims. Anyone have any suggestions for helping them understand this concept in practice? 

    I did use one of the Crash Course video transcripts and have them pull claim, evidence, and reasoning out of it and even here it was clear that there was a disconnect. 

  • Hello  .  I was literally just cueing up that Crash Course claim/evidence activity for next week.  The reasoning piece is definitely tricky, I agree with you (and  ) on that one!  On the AP rubric there is a specific point awarded for the ability to connect evidence (documents) to the thesis each time, rather than just citing the evidence (documents).  With AP students, sometimes that lingering point is a motivator, but I definitely do not see that motivation with my on-level World History classes overall.  I have played around with some visual cues, such as color coding.  I've also tried some silly tactile methods (desperate times, what can I say?)  In one game, I allow groups to compete by giving them cut-out claim cards, and cut-out evidence cards, and asking them to correctly pair/match them, and then not accepting the match as a win unless the students can defend the connection by providing reasoning.  If they articulate the reasoning, they get to grab the glue and stick their matches onto our big paper.  The group that defends the most matches wins.  So then I will often refer to "reasoning" as the "glue" after that, telling them that arguments don't stick without it.

    Typing this out is embarrassing, LOL, but it did help a little and at least it was fun.  The Crash Course activity is really solid, but not as fun, so I do that one after a fun one like this.

    I don't know if this is helpful, but at least you know it's not just you :)  

Reply
  • Hello  .  I was literally just cueing up that Crash Course claim/evidence activity for next week.  The reasoning piece is definitely tricky, I agree with you (and  ) on that one!  On the AP rubric there is a specific point awarded for the ability to connect evidence (documents) to the thesis each time, rather than just citing the evidence (documents).  With AP students, sometimes that lingering point is a motivator, but I definitely do not see that motivation with my on-level World History classes overall.  I have played around with some visual cues, such as color coding.  I've also tried some silly tactile methods (desperate times, what can I say?)  In one game, I allow groups to compete by giving them cut-out claim cards, and cut-out evidence cards, and asking them to correctly pair/match them, and then not accepting the match as a win unless the students can defend the connection by providing reasoning.  If they articulate the reasoning, they get to grab the glue and stick their matches onto our big paper.  The group that defends the most matches wins.  So then I will often refer to "reasoning" as the "glue" after that, telling them that arguments don't stick without it.

    Typing this out is embarrassing, LOL, but it did help a little and at least it was fun.  The Crash Course activity is really solid, but not as fun, so I do that one after a fun one like this.

    I don't know if this is helpful, but at least you know it's not just you :)  

Children
No Data