Key Terms and short out the answers by one sentence make the together

Question

Interpret- to understand and explain information or an idea.
Author’s purpose- the reason an author writes a text. Must have a verb. “To explain, to inform, to persuade, to educate, to entertain” PIE
Point of view/ Perspective- opinion
Conflicting point of view- an opposing opinion about a topic
Argument- a claim, position, or idea supported by reasons and backed up with evidence.
Claim- statement of opinion
Reasons- statements in support of a claim
Evidence- something that provides proof for a claim

Refute- assert that an idea is weak or incorrect
Conclusion- judgments based on reasoning

Directions: Within Unit 3 , lessons 1-8 have prepared you to complete a piece of analytical writing. Recall what you have learned in this portfolio to write an analysis of the texts, “Genetically Modified Salmon Can Feed the World” by Yonathan Zohar and “Say No to Genetically Engineered Salmon” by Rick Moonen. These links have been updated. The articles are also in your textbook, but the link has been archived and are inaccessible.

Use the prompts to guide your response.

Audio Recording of “Genetically Modified Salmon Can Feed the World”.
Audio Recording of “Say No to Genetically Engineered Salmon”

Genetically modified salmon can feed the world (Google doc)
Genetically modified salmon can feed the world (PDF)

Say no to genetically engineered salmon (Google doc)
Say no to genetically engineered salmon (PDF)

Your portfolio must include the following:
-A minimum one paragraph response to each of the questions listed below. No introduction or conclusion are needed. You will turn in at least three paragraphs.
-This assignment is NOT a compare and contrast between the two articles. This assignment is NOT asking for your opinion, or for you to pick which article is more persuasive.
-In-text citations when referencing the two articles. Ex. (Zohar) or (Moonen) According to Moonen, “dfdsfjds”. “Dsfsdlfj” (Moonen)

Textbook Directions:Write a paragraph in which you describe the steps that experienced readers can use to analyze conflicting information in texts about the same topic. Explain why it is important for readers to recognize and evaluate conflicting information. Provide specific examples from the two texts.

Reworded Directions: As to not be fooled into believing everything you read, what should you look for in the article before you view it as reliable/credible/believable? Look at the text features, such as titles and subtitles. Look at the publication itself. Who published it? Is there an organization or group behind the publication? Who is the author? Are they reliable? What does that group represent? Is the author getting paid to write this? Are their multiple viewpoints published? Ask questions as you read. Is this a logical argument? Is there anything the author is leaving out?

Your paragraph should outline the steps you would take to decide if the author’s words are believable. You can number the steps within your paragraph. Explain why it is important to recognize and evaluate both sides to an argument. Provide at least two examples from both texts.

Sentence Starters for Citing and Explaining Text Evidence

Outline for Question 1:

Outline of steps: (1,2,3…) Look for conflicting facts, and both sides for the argument and look for opinions and for omitted facts.
Readers should look for….
Step 1- Readers should look into who the author is and if the author is reliable. Step 2- readers should look at the publication date to see if the article needs updating. Step 3- Readers should find out if the author is being paid to write the article.
Explain why it is important to recognize and evaluate both sides of an argument: ( 1-2 sentences) It is important to recognize both sides of an argument so that you and other readers can understand the entire situation. It helps people make wiser, more educated decisions about voting, products, and etc.
Evidence #1 from Moonen: “insert quote” (Moonen).
Elaborate on #1 Moonen quote: This quote proves Moonen is …….
Evidence #1 from Zohar: “insert quote” (Zohar).

Elaborate on #1 Zohar quote:

Evidence #2 from Moonen: “insert quote” (Moonen).
Elaborate on #2 Moonen quote:
Evidence #2 from Zohar: “insert quote” (Zohar).
Elaborate on #2 Zohar quote:

Textbook Directions:Write a paragraph in which you explain why it matters when the two authors interpret the same facts differently. Using specific examples from the two texts, describe the impact of the authors’ differing interpretations of the facts on you as a reader.

Reworded Directions: Is the information really conflicting, or have the authors focused on different facts? Authors look at the same fact or statistic and present it in a different way in order to help their argument. Has this happened in either of the passages? Is the information misleading or incomplete? Why should you as an educated reader educate yourself about conflicting points of view? What should the reader look for in order to understand both points of view? Find examples from the two passages where the authors use the same information but in different ways to enhance their own argument.

Outline for Question 2:
Why does it matter to the reader when two authors interpret information differently? ( 1-2 sentences) It matter to the reader when author’s use information differently because the author’s might be lying. The author’s could the data to persuade the reader to believe one thing over another, but it might not be true. By reading both sides, the reader can identify the truth.
Evidence #1 from Moonen: “insert quote” (Moonen).
Elaborate on #1 Moonen quote:
Evidence #1 from Zohar: “insert quote” (Zohar).
Elaborate on #1 Zohar quote:
Evidence #2 from Moonen: “insert quote” (Moonen).
Elaborate on #2 Moonen quote:
Evidence #2 from Zohar: “insert quote” (Zohar).
Elaborate on #2 Zohar quote:

Textbook Directions:Write a paragraph in which you explain how including a conflicting point of view and evidence in an argument can make it more persuasive. Describe the effect that including a conflicting point of view and evidence can have on readers. Give specific examples.

Reworded Directions: Why is it beneficial to address the conflicting point of view? Author “A” believes Cake is best. Author “B” believes Pie is best. Why would it be beneficial for Author A to discuss Pie in their argument? What could Author A say about Pie that would help the Cake argument. Find examples from the Salmon articles where both author’s include each other’s arguments. IE. When Moonen brings up Zohar’s perspectives and when Zohar brings up Moonen’s perspective. Provide examples from the text.

Outline for Question 3:
Why is it beneficial to address the conflicting point of view? It is beneficial to bring up the opponent’s point of view because it shows the author as trustworthy, reliable, and educated about the topic. This shows the author is presenting the truth and not trying to deceive or cover up information.(1-2 sentences)
How does including a conflicting point of view and evidence make for a more persuasive argument? (1-2 sentences) . Readers believe author’s who include a conflicting argument because it proves they are more knowledgeable about the topic.
Describe the effect including a conflicting point of view can have on us as the readers. ( 1-2 sentences) Readers will believe the author who appears more trustworthy.
Evidence #1 from Moonen: “insert quote” (Moonen).
Elaborate on #1 Moonen quote:
Evidence #1 from Zohar: “insert quote” (Zohar).
Elaborate on #1 Zohar quote:
Evidence #2 from Moonen: “insert quote” (Moonen).
Elaborate on #2 Moonen quote:
Evidence #2 from Zohar: “insert quote” (Zohar).
Elaborate on #2 Zohar quote:

Answer 1

Text Analysis Steps for Conflicting Information

To effectively analyze conflicting information in texts about the same topic, experienced readers should follow these steps: (1) Investigate the author's credibility by checking their qualifications and reliability. (2) Consider the publication date to ascertain if the information is current and relevant. (3) Assess the potential biases by determining if the author is financially compensated or affiliated with any particular organization. Recognizing and evaluating conflicting viewpoints is essential as it allows readers to understand the whole context, which aids in making informed decisions; for instance, Moonen highlights potential health risks of genetically modified salmon, stating that, “the long-term effects on consumers remain unknown” (Moonen), while Zohar focuses on the potential benefits for food security, claiming that “genetically modified salmon could significantly reduce hunger worldwide” (Zohar).

Importance of Differing Interpretations

When authors interpret the same facts differently, it matters to readers because such differences may indicate misinformation or can manipulate perception. For instance, Moonen mentions that "genetically engineered salmon could disrupt local ecosystems" (Moonen), while Zohar counters that "the modification is designed to be environmentally sustainable" (Zohar). These conflicting interpretations can lead readers to adopt a skewed perspective if they don’t critically analyze both sides. Being aware of these conflicting views helps readers discern the truth behind the arguments and mitigates the risk of being misled by one-sided narratives.

Benefit of Including Conflicting Perspectives

Addressing conflicting points of view is beneficial because it establishes the author’s credibility and shows a comprehensive understanding of the issue. This approach underscores the author's reliability, allowing readers to see that they are presenting a balanced argument rather than a biased one. For instance, Moonen acknowledges the economic advantages argued by Zohar, stating, “proponents claim economic benefits, but these fail to account for environmental risks” (Moonen), while Zohar references safety concerns by saying, “oppositions often overlook the scientific studies backing our safety claims” (Zohar). By acknowledging their opponent's arguments, both authors appear more knowledgeable, which strengthens their persuasiveness in the eyes of the reader. Ultimately, engaging with opposing viewpoints fosters trust, leading readers to be more open to the arguments presented.