Assessment

I began the persuasion unit by having the students complete the Frayer
model to get a feel for their current level of understanding. Many of them had a
general idea that persuasion was to convince, but nothing much more substantive.
They also connected the idea of sales and advertising with persuasion. Here are a
few representative generalizations they created at the beginning of the unit:
Formative Data from Freyer Model
Sample Generalizations about Persuasion (BEFORE)
Persuasion is convincing people.
People persuade to get power.
Advertising is persuasion.
People try to change your mind with persuasion.
Persuasion is getting your way.
Persuasion is used to make people buy things.
Parents persuade you to do what they want you to.
Persuasion is used to trick people.

While I thought their current knowledge was a starting point, I wanted

them to take their understanding of persuasion both deeper and wider. With
that in mind, I taught them the components of a valid argument. I also
taught them propaganda techniques and argumentative fallacies to help
them spot misleading arguments. I also gave them an opportunity to practice
these skills. They performed skits emphasizing ethos, pathos, or logos. They
wrote persuasive letters to the president, and when they peer edited, they
were attending to persuasive techniques. Here is the checklist they used:

Peer Editing

Read your partners letter all the way through, then complete these steps.
1. Does the letter start with an exciting hook to get our attention? If not, highlight
the first sentence, so the writer knows to work on it.
2. Please circle any words you think are misspelled.
3. Highlight any areas you think need a change in punctuation.
4. Please look through the letter.
*In one color, highlight or underline examples of arguments using ethos.
*With another color, highlight or underline arguments appealing to pathos.
*With a third color, highlight or underline arguments appealing to logos.
*If they are missing any of these three parts, please write out to the side what is
missing. Ex. MISSING PATHOS
5. Read through the data that is given. Is there any data that is missing a warrant?
If so, draw an arrow to it and write NEEDS A WARRANT.
6. Read the letter to yourself. Are there any missing words or sections that are
confusing? Please mark those things if you find them.
7. Does the person make a convincing case that the issue he/she wrote about is
important enough for the president to take her/ his time to get involved? If not,
what could make it more convincing?
8. Does the proposed solution seem likely to solve the problem? Is it specific? If
not, make a note for the writer.
The students did a good job working on their reasoning using the checklist. I also taught
a couple of mini-lessons on writing an interesting lead and how to incorporate ethos to help with
some common errors I saw. They then revised and turned in their final drafts of the persuasive
letters. Heres the rubric used to grade those:

Persuasive Letter Rubric

Name:___________________________________
___/5
The letter includes a salutation, a friendly closing, and a
signature.

___/20
The scope and importance of the problem is clearly
explained.
___/20
A solution is offered for the problem, and there is a
thorough explanation of why this would solve the
problem.
___/5
The writer accurately and fairly explains why someone
might disagree.
___/10
The writer responds to that disagreement respectfully
and persuasively.
___/10
Ethos, pathos, and logos are all used as persuasive
tools.
___/10
Data and warrants are used to prove the claims made
in the letter.
___/10
Spelling is correct.
___/10
Capitalization and punctuation are correct.
___/100 TOTAL SCORE
Their next assignment was to take their persuasion skills and put them
into practice in a presidential debate. Heres the rubric I used for that.
Presidential Debate Rubric

Trait
Student
completed all
tasks assigned
to his or her
role.
When the
student
completed his
or her own role,
he or she
pitched in to
help teammates
who needed
help.
The students
work
demonstrated
the components
of a good

Always- 5

Usually-4

Sometimes-3

Never- 0

argument
(claim, data,
warrant)
The teams
arguments
reflected
appeals to
ethos, pathos,
and logos.

Total Score: ______ x 5= ________/100

Finally, I asked the students to redo two parts of the Frayer Model, the list of 25 and the
generalizations. Here are some samples of their generalizations after the unit:
Sample Generalizations about Persuasion (AFTER)
Persuasion is trying to influence somebody to believe a certain thing.
Persuasion has three different forms.
Persuasion uses personal, emotional, and moral appeals.
To persuade, you should use a claim, warrant, and data.
Persuasion is challenging and good for every day life.
Persuasion could be used for good or bad.
Persuasion doesnt always work if the people you were trying to persuade didnt like
your persuasion.
Persuasion doesnt always work.
Persuasion can help you get the things you want.
Ethos, pathos, and logos are three types of persuasion.
Facts are key to persuasion.
Untrue information can kill you.
We all fall into some argumentative fallacies.
A good understanding is key to avoiding being fooled.
It takes a lot of preparation to persuade a person.
Persuasion is not as easy as it seems!
Theres more than one way to persuade a person.
If you want a good argument, you should probably appeal to ethos, pathos, and
logos.

Some people are easy to persuade.

Presidential candidates use fallacies sometimes to get the votes.
You need facts to help support your topic, and you also have to find different ways
to convince someone.
Half the time, people arent even telling the truth; you can almost always believe it.

We put some of one classs generalizations on the board.

Here are a couple of samples of the post-data: