Learners are expected to evaluate the arguments and reasoning in the two statements and compare their effectiveness. They should make a supported judgement with some explanation about which person has the most effective argument.
Learners may consider the following types of issue:
- quality of the argument
- clarity
- tone – emotive; exaggerated; precise; respectful
- language
- balance
- quality of the evidence
- relevance
- sufficiency – sample size; amount and weight
- source – media; radio; research
- date – how recent
- factual, opinion, value, anecdote
- testimony – from experience and expert
- knowledge claims
- sources of bias
- gender
- political
- personal values
- experience
- likelihood of consequences and implications of their ideas
- acceptability of their values to others
- how likely other people are to agree with their perspective/view.
Learners may interpret the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments in different ways. Assessors are marking the quality of their evaluation of the arguments and how well they support their conclusion. Some of the possible responses might be:
| Person
| Strengths
| Weaknesses
|
| Professor Anika Roy
| - Clearly expressed
- Shows commitment and passion
- Uses several pieces of evidence
- Uses scientific evidence based on research
- Up-to-date research
- Is likely to be an expert on the subject
- Uses personal experience
- Some consequences have been shown to be accurate by research
- Many people agree that the environment needs to be protected
- Other
| - Not balanced as only addresses one side of the issue
- Could be biased as her career and reputation based on this type of work
- Wants to get more money for research so exaggerates problem
- Some implications suggested may be unlikely
- Claims are based on projections that may not happen
- Other
|
| Zhang Li
| - Some balance in the argument
- Some arguments have some credibility
- Argues strongly
- Refers to past experience and historical evidence
- Other
| - Not very respectful
- Exaggerated tone
- Generalised judgements
- Little evidence from research or factual material
- Mainly assertions
- Anecdotal
- Doesn’t focus on the main issue
- Other
|
