Key Terms

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 The articles are also in your textbook, but the link has been archived and are inaccessible.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

Analyzing Conflicting Information in Texts

When analyzing conflicting information in texts about the same topic, readers should adhere to several important steps to evaluate the credibility of the material. Step 1: Readers should investigate the author’s background and evaluate their reliability. This means checking the author's credentials to ascertain their expertise on the subject. Step 2: It is crucial to consider the publication date to determine if the information is current or requires updating. Step 3: Readers should investigate the affiliations or sponsorship of the article, as this may indicate potential biases. Additionally, readers must ask themselves if the argument is logical and if any important information has been omitted. Recognizing and evaluating both sides of an argument is essential, as it enables readers to form a well-rounded perspective and make better-informed decisions on issues like food sustainability or environmental ethics. For instance, Rick Moonen emphasizes the potential negative impacts of genetically modified salmon on ecosystems by stating that they could “introduce new diseases” to wild fish populations (Moonen). Conversely, Yonathan Zohar argues that genetically modified salmon are a solution to global food scarcity, highlighting their potential to produce “more food with fewer resources” (Zohar). These differing viewpoints illustrate the importance of assessing and integrating multiple perspectives before forming a conclusion.

Impact of Conflicting Interpretations on Readers

When two authors interpret the same facts differently, it significantly affects readers' understanding and perception of the discussed topic. It is crucial for readers to recognize these different interpretations because misleading data can shape beliefs and influence decisions. For example, Moonen argues that the introduction of genetically modified salmon could undermine the natural salmon population by stating that they “could outcompete wild fish” (Moonen). In contrast, Zohar counters this by asserting that genetically modified salmon are designed to be more efficient in aquaculture, stating that they require less feed compared to traditional species (Zohar). This discrepancy shows how authors can manipulate the same statistic to bolster opposing claims, leading to confusion if readers do not critically analyze the information presented. By examining both perspectives, readers can discern the truth and avoid being misled by partial truths or biased representations.

Benefits of Addressing Conflicting Points of View

Including a conflicting point of view in an argument is beneficial because it demonstrates the author’s reliability, knowledge, and ethical commitment to presenting a balanced perspective. By addressing opposing arguments, authors create trust with their readers, indicating they are not attempting to deceive or cherry-pick information. For instance, Moonen acknowledges Zohar’s argument by noting that while genetically modified salmon could help address food shortages, the potential risks to wild populations and ecosystems must be carefully considered (Moonen). Zohar also recognizes the opposition, suggesting that it is important to address safety concerns that critics have raised (Zohar). By incorporating these viewpoints, the arguments made by both authors become more persuasive, as they show a comprehensive understanding of the issue at hand. Ultimately, readers are more likely to trust authors who openly discuss and engage with conflicting arguments, as this reflects a commitment to the truth and an informed discussion on complex topics like genetically modified organisms.