Argument Unit
The National Literacy Strategy
2
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Contents
Framework objectives 3
Unit plan 4
Features of a discussion text 5
Resources A–D 6
Detailed lesson plans and transcripts 14
Supplementary resources E–H 21
The National Literacy Strategy
3
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Framework objectives
Text
15. to recognise how arguments are constructed to be effective, through, e.g.
• the expression, sequence and linking of points;
• the provision of persuasive examples, illustrations and evidence;
• pre-empting or answering potential objections;
• appealing to the known views and feelings of the audience;
16. to identify the features of balanced written arguments which, e.g.
• summarise different sides of an argument;
• clarify the strengths and weaknesses of different positions;
• signal personal opinion clearly;
18. to construct effective arguments:
• developing a point logically and effectively;
• supporting and illustrating points persuasively;
• anticipating possible objections;
• harnessing the known views, interests and feelings of the audience;
• tailoring the writing to formal presentation where appropriate;
19. to write a balanced report of a controversial issue:
• summarising fairly the competing views;
• analysing strengths and weaknesses of different positions;
Sentence
5. to use reading to:
• investigate conditionals, e.g. using if . . . then, might, could, would, and their uses, e.g. in
deduction, speculation, supposition;
• use these forms to construct sentences which express, e.g. possibilities, hypotheses;
• explore use of conditionals in past and future, experimenting with transformations,
discussing effects, e.g. speculating about possible causes (past), reviewing a range of
options and their outcomes (future);
Word
8. to build a bank of useful terms and phrases for argument, e.g. similarly, whereas;
Outcomes
Written argument, a debate and reading and writing test practice papers
The National Literacy Strategy
4
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
•U
nit 5
1 fr
om G
ram
mar
for W
ritin
g.•
Sha
red
read
ing:
read
and
dis
cuss
con
tent
of d
iscu
ssio
n te
xt
(e.g
. Sam
ple
Tex
t A);
anal
yse
and
ann
otat
e fo
r org
anis
atio
n of
cont
ent a
nd c
reat
e sk
elet
on-f
ram
e.
Sha
red
writ
ing
(dem
onst
ratio
n) –
fast
pla
nnin
g. Im
por
t con
tent
from
ano
ther
cur
ricul
um a
rea
and
org
anis
e it
into
dis
cuss
ion
skel
eton
-fra
me.
Sha
red
read
ing:
ana
lyse
and
ann
otat
e te
xt (e
.g. S
amp
le T
ext A
)
for l
angu
age
feat
ures
and
cre
ate
chec
klis
t for
dis
cuss
ion
writ
ing.
Sha
red
writ
ing
(teac
her a
s sc
ribe)
– re
ferr
ing
to s
kele
ton-
fram
e.
Writ
e in
trod
uctio
n an
d s
ome
par
agra
phs
of t
he te
xt u
sing
chec
klis
t.
Sha
red
read
ing
and
writ
ing:
revi
sion
(dem
onst
ratio
n an
d te
ache
r
as s
crib
e): r
evis
e th
e op
enin
g p
arag
rap
h an
d o
ne o
r tw
o fu
rthe
r
par
agra
phs
of t
he te
xt.
Uni
t 51
from
Gra
mm
ar fo
r Writ
ing.
Sha
red
read
ing:
ana
lyse
dis
cuss
ion
text
(e.g
. Sam
ple
Tex
t C) a
t
bot
h or
gani
satio
nal a
nd s
ente
nce/
wor
d le
vel.
Imp
ort c
onte
nt fr
om a
noth
er c
urric
ulum
are
a, q
uick
pla
n fo
r
writ
ing
a d
iscu
ssio
n te
xt. T
hen
dis
cuss
how
to u
se th
e sa
me
mat
eria
l in
a d
ebat
e an
d o
rgan
ise
the
child
ren
into
gro
ups
to
pre
par
e fo
r a d
ebat
e.
Sha
red
read
ing:
do
a re
adin
g te
st p
aper
all
toge
ther
, bas
ed o
n a
dis
cuss
ion
text
.
Sha
red
writ
ing:
do
a w
ritin
g te
st p
aper
all
toge
ther
, inv
olvi
ng a
dis
cuss
ion
text
.
Rea
din
g
Writ
ing
Rea
din
g
Writ
ing
Rea
din
g
Writ
ing
Rea
din
g
Writ
ing
In p
airs
, ana
lyse
and
ann
otat
e an
othe
r dis
cuss
ion
text
(e.g
. Sam
ple
Tex
t B) f
or o
rgan
isat
ion
of c
onte
nt a
nd
crea
te d
iscu
ssio
n sk
elet
on-f
ram
e.
In p
airs
, fas
t pla
nnin
g p
ract
ice.
Usi
ng c
hild
ren’
s
exis
ting
know
led
ge o
f an
issu
e, m
ake
brie
f not
es in
dis
cuss
ion
skel
eton
-fra
me.
In p
airs
, ana
lyse
and
ann
otat
e an
othe
r tex
t (e.
g.
Sam
ple
Tex
t B) f
or la
ngua
ge fe
atur
es a
nd a
dd
to
chec
klis
t for
dis
cuss
ion
writ
ing.
In p
airs
and
refe
rrin
g to
ske
leto
n-fr
ame,
writ
e
rem
aini
ng a
nd c
losi
ng p
arag
rap
hs o
f the
text
, usi
ng
chec
klis
t.
Rev
ise
the
rem
aini
ng a
nd c
oncl
udin
g p
arag
rap
hs o
f
the
text
.
Wor
k in
sp
ellin
g lo
gs; i
den
tify
the
tric
ky b
its o
f rec
ently
used
wor
ds
from
this
and
oth
er p
iece
s of
writ
ing.
In
pai
rs, t
est e
ach
othe
r’s s
pel
ling
know
led
ge.
Ind
ivid
ually
, ana
lyse
ano
ther
dis
cuss
ion
text
(e.g
.
Sam
ple
Tex
t D) a
t bot
h or
gani
satio
nal a
nd s
ente
nce
leve
l/wor
d le
vel.
Chi
ldre
n ex
pla
in th
e or
gani
satio
n of
thei
r
text
(s) a
nd g
ener
alis
e fo
r dis
cuss
ion
as a
text
typ
e.
Chi
ldre
n ex
pla
in th
e re
ason
ing
beh
ind
thei
r pla
nnin
g.
Chi
ldre
n co
ntrib
ute
thei
r ad
diti
onal
poi
nts
for t
he c
heck
list o
r exp
lain
how
the
exis
ting
chec
klis
t wor
ks fo
r Sam
ple
Text
B.
Chi
ldre
n ex
pla
in th
e re
ason
ing
beh
ind
thei
r writ
ing
in re
latio
n to
the
chec
klis
t.
Chi
ldre
n ex
pla
in w
here
and
why
they
have
mad
e re
visi
ons.
Rec
ap o
n th
e p
rinci
ple
s b
ehin
d th
e
sent
ence
wor
k.
Chi
ldre
n ex
pla
in th
eir a
naly
ses.
Fini
sh re
adin
g te
st p
aper
.
Fini
sh w
ritin
g te
st p
aper
.
Ana
lyse
Mon
day
Ap
ply
Tues
day
Ana
lyse
Wed
nesd
ay
Ap
ply
Thur
sday
Ana
lyse
an
d a
pp
lyFr
iday
Ana
lyse
and
ap
ply
Mon
day
Ana
lyse
Tues
day
Ap
ply
Wed
nesd
ay
Thur
sday
Frid
ay
Sha
red
text
and
sen
tenc
e le
vel
Gui
ded
In
dep
end
ent w
ork
Ple
nary
Inte
nsiv
e tw
o-w
eek
pla
n fo
r Yea
r 6 T
erm
2 U
nit 3
: Arg
umen
t
Ind
ivid
ually
, do
a re
adin
g te
st p
aper
(dis
cuss
ion
text
).
Ind
ivid
ually
, do
a w
ritin
g te
st p
aper
(dis
cuss
ion
text
).
In g
roup
s, p
rep
are
to d
efen
d o
ne o
r oth
er s
ide
of th
e ar
gum
ent i
n a
deb
ate
late
r in
the
day
.
The National Literacy Strategy
5
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Features of a discussion textPurpose
To present argument and information from differing viewpoints
Generic text structure
• Statement of the issue plus a preview of the main arguments
• Arguments for, plus supporting evidence
• Arguments against, plus supporting evidence (alternatively, argument/counter-argument,
one point at a time)
• Recommendation – summary and conclusion
Sentence/word level features
• Simple present tense
• Generic human (or non-human) participants
• Logical connectives, e.g. therefore, however
• Movement is from the generic to the specific, e.g. Hunters agree ..., Mr Smith, who has
hunted for many years, ...
• Emotive language may be used to engage interest or persuade the reader.
Writer’s knowledge
• You can turn the title into a question, e.g. Should we hunt whales?
• Open by introducing the reader to the discussion – you may need to add why you are
debating the issue.
• Try to see the argument from both sides.
• Support your views with reasons and evidence.
• In your conclusion, you must give a reason for what you decide.
• If you are trying to present a balanced viewpoint, check that you have been fair to both
sides.
Conclusion
Introduction
Argument
Argument
Argument
Argument
Skeleton-frame forplanning a discussion
Sample Text A
The National Literacy Strategy
6
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Should mobile phones be banned in schools?
In the last few years there has been an explosion in the use of new
communications technologies, including mobile phones; it is estimated that
over 70% of young people aged 10–14 now own one. Considerable debate
has taken place in the press recently as to whether pupils should be allowed to
take their mobile phones into school.
No one can deny the positive benefits of children communicating freely with
each other, and pupils argue that using a mobile phone to talk to or text-
message their friends is simply one way of doing this, using new technology.
Many parents are in favour too, and like the reassurance of knowing their
child can be safer and more independent if they have a mobile phone, since
they can contact them at any time if necessary. They cite the potential risks
faced by some children travelling alone.
However, schools point out that carrying a mobile phone could in itself make
a child more vulnerable to theft or mugging, both on the street and even in the
playground. Police figures confirm that a high proportion of crimes
committed against young people involve thefts of mobile phones. Schools are
concerned, moreover, that allowing pupils to bring their mobiles to school
could create a competitive atmosphere amongst children and result in some
children feeling left out and unvalued. In addition they claim that pupils’
education would be affected by the distraction of phones ringing in class.
Some doctors fear that children using mobiles could suffer long-term brain
damage. Until this is disproved, it would seem that schools might best protect
their pupils from this and other problems by making them leave their mobile
phones at home.
The National Literacy Strategy
7
Annotated Text A
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Pas
sive
con
stru
ctio
n
Pas
sive
con
stru
ctio
nP
ast
tens
e to
giv
e re
leva
nt inf
orm
atio
n
For
mal
lang
uage
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate:
str
ong
asse
rtio
n
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate
Pre
sent
ten
se g
ener
ally
use
d
Com
plex
sen
tenc
e us
ing
conn
ecti
ve
Sta
tist
ics
to r
einf
orce
Con
nect
ive
impl
ying
con
trad
icti
on
For
mal
lang
uage
Con
diti
onal
for
m s
ugge
sts
hypo
thes
is
Con
diti
onal
for
m s
ugge
sts
hypo
thes
is
Con
nect
ive C
onne
ctiv
e im
plyi
ngan
acc
umul
atio
n of
ar
gum
ents
Con
nect
ive
phra
se s
howin
g a
logi
cal r
elat
ions
hip
betw
een
the
two
sent
ence
s
Pas
sive
Con
diti
onal
for
m a
lso
dist
ance
s au
thor
fro
m t
he
argu
men
t an
d so
sug
gest
s a
bala
nced
pre
sent
atio
n
Em
otiv
e la
ngua
ge t
oem
phas
ise
poin
t
Te
xt le
vel
Sen
tenc
e /
wo
rd le
vel
Titl
e A
que
stio
n su
mm
aris
ing
the
issu
e b
eing
d
iscu
ssed
. Key
wor
ds:
mob
ile p
hone
s,
b
anne
d, s
choo
ls.
Arg
umen
t P
arag
rap
h 2
A
gain
st a
ban
. 1st
sen
tenc
e p
rese
nts
an
ar
gum
ent
bas
ed o
n ch
ildre
n’s
need
s.
2n
d s
ente
nce
add
s a
new
arg
umen
t (s
afet
y).
3r
d s
ente
nce
elab
orat
es o
n th
is w
ith
ev
iden
ce.
P
arag
rap
h 3
Fo
r a
ban
. 1st
sen
tenc
e co
ntes
ts t
he s
afet
y
ar
gum
ent
in P
arag
rap
h 2.
2nd
sen
tenc
e ad
ds
conf
irmin
g ev
iden
ce. 3
rd a
nd 4
th s
ente
nces
intr
oduc
e tw
o ne
w r
easo
ns fo
r a
ban
.
Co
nclu
sio
n F
inal
par
agra
ph
1s
t se
nten
ce o
ffers
com
pel
ling
reas
on fo
r a
ban
, bas
ed o
n th
e is
sue
of s
afet
y. 2
nd
se
nten
ce a
dd
s to
thi
s cl
inch
ing
argu
men
t a
sum
mar
y of
Par
agra
ph
3.
Intr
od
uctio
n F
irst
par
agra
ph
P
rese
nts
the
fact
s th
at h
ave
give
n ris
e to
the
que
stio
n in
the
titl
e.
Sh
ou
ld m
ob
ile
ph
on
es b
e b
anned
in
sch
oo
ls?
In t
he
last
few
yea
rs t
her
e has
bee
n a
n e
xplo
sion i
n t
he
use
of
new
com
munic
atio
ns
tech
nolo
gie
s, i
ncl
udin
g m
obil
e phones
; it
is
esti
mat
ed t
hat
over
70%
of
young p
eople
aged
10-1
4 n
ow
ow
n o
ne.
Consi
der
able
deb
ate
has
taken
pla
ce i
n t
he
pre
ss r
ecen
tly a
s to
whet
her
pupil
s sh
ould
be
allo
wed
to
take
thei
r m
obil
e phones
into
sch
ool.
No o
ne
can d
eny t
he
posi
tive
ben
efit
s of
chil
dre
n c
om
munic
atin
g f
reel
y w
ith
each
oth
er, an
d p
upil
s ar
gue
that
usi
ng a
mobil
e phone
to t
alk t
o o
r te
xt-
mes
sage
thei
r fr
iends
is s
imply
one
way
of
doin
g t
his
, usi
ng n
ew t
echnolo
gy.
Man
y p
aren
ts a
re i
n f
avour
too, an
d l
ike
the
reas
sura
nce
of
know
ing t
hei
r
chil
d c
an b
e sa
fer
and m
ore
indep
enden
t if
they
hav
e a
mobil
e phone,
sin
ce
they
can
conta
ct t
hem
at
any t
ime
if n
eces
sary
. T
hey
cit
e th
e pote
nti
al r
isks
face
d b
y s
om
e ch
ildre
n t
ravel
ling a
lone.
How
ever
, sc
hools
poin
t out
that
car
ryin
g a
mobil
e phone
could
in i
tsel
f m
ake
a ch
ild m
ore
vuln
erab
le t
o t
hef
t or
muggin
g, both
on t
he
stre
et a
nd e
ven
in t
he
pla
ygro
und. P
oli
ce f
igure
s co
nfi
rm t
hat
a h
igh p
roport
ion o
f cr
imes
com
mit
ted a
gai
nst
young p
eople
involv
e th
efts
of
mobil
e phones
. S
chools
are
conce
rned
, m
ore
over
, th
at a
llow
ing p
upil
s to
bri
ng t
hei
r m
obil
es t
o s
chool
could
cre
ate
a co
mpet
itiv
e at
mosp
her
e am
ongst
chil
dre
n a
nd r
esult
in s
om
e
chil
dre
n f
eeli
ng l
eft
out
and u
nval
ued
. In
addit
ion t
hey
cla
im t
hat
pupil
s’
educa
tion w
ould
be
affe
cted
by t
he
dis
trac
tion o
f phones
rin
gin
g i
n c
lass
.
Som
e doct
ors
fea
r th
at c
hil
dre
n u
sing m
obil
es c
ould
suff
er l
ong-t
erm
bra
in
dam
age.
Unti
l th
is i
s dis
pro
ved
, it
would
see
m t
hat
sch
ools
mig
ht
bes
t pro
tect
thei
r pupil
s fr
om
this
and o
ther
pro
ble
ms
by m
akin
g t
hem
lea
ve
thei
r m
obil
e
phones
at
hom
e.
Sample Text B
The National Literacy Strategy
8
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Has the time come to ban cars fromthe centre of towns and cities?
Global warming caused by pollution has begun to affect us directly, with climate
change starting to affect British weather. Some people believe the time has come
for drastic action to reduce pollution caused by heavy traffic.
There is no doubt that traffic fumes are a major cause of pollution throughout the
developed world, and are a particular problem in large towns and cities. In a small
country like the UK, cities are close enough together to cause high levels of traffic
fume pollution in the air over large areas of the land. Consequently, health
problems are created such as asthma, which has rapidly increased as the number of
cars on the road has risen. An additional problem in urban areas is congestion,
which wastes time and adds to costs. The average speed of traffic in central London
is now only 12 miles per hour, the same as it was in Victorian times. A ban on cars
in the centre of large towns and cities would therefore seem sensible as it would cut
pollution thereby improving health. It would also reduce congestion, allowing
buses, emergency vehicles and delivery trucks to be more efficient.
On the other hand, it could be argued that such a ban would create other problems.
Public transport in this country is expensive and sometimes unreliable. Would there
be enough trains and buses to cope with the numbers needing them? Furthermore,
there is also the issue of personal freedom. Is it right to prevent people from
choosing the mode of transport they prefer? Many people feel safer in their cars
when travelling at night than they do on a bus or a train.
While there is clearly an urgent need to cut pollution, this could be achieved by
developing cleaner fuels and electrically powered cars, and encouraging people to
use public transport where possible, rather than forcing them to do so.
The National Literacy Strategy
9
Annotated Text B
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Te
xt le
vel
Sen
tenc
e /
wo
rd le
vel
Titl
e A
que
stio
n su
mm
aris
ing
the
issu
e b
eing
dis
cuss
ed. K
ey w
ord
s: b
an, c
ars,
tow
ns,
ci
ties.
Arg
umen
t P
arag
rap
h 2
Fo
r a
ban
. 1st
sen
tenc
e gi
ves
fact
s w
hich
und
erp
in a
ll ar
gum
ents
in fa
vour
of a
ban
.
2nd
sen
tenc
e m
akes
the
gen
eral
arg
umen
t
m
ore
spec
ific
(wor
se in
UK
). 3r
d s
ente
nce
intr
oduc
es a
new
arg
umen
t (h
ealth
). 4t
h an
d
5t
h se
nten
ces
add
ano
ther
arg
umen
t w
ith
su
pp
ortin
g ev
iden
ce. 6
th a
nd 7
th s
ente
nces
sum
mar
ise
why
a b
an w
ould
be
effe
ctiv
e.
P
arag
rap
h 3
A
gain
st a
ban
. 1st
sen
tenc
e co
ntes
ts a
ll
ar
gum
ents
in P
arag
rap
h 2
with
a
co
ntra
dic
tory
ass
ertio
n. 2
nd s
ente
nce
mak
es
a
clai
m t
hat
is s
pec
ific
to t
he U
K. 3
rd
se
nten
ce e
lab
orat
es o
n th
is. 4
th s
ente
nce
intr
oduc
es a
new
arg
umen
t. 5
th s
ente
nce
elab
orat
es o
n th
is b
y ci
ting
an e
xam
ple
.
Co
nclu
sio
n F
inal
par
agra
ph
S
ente
nce
ackn
owle
dge
s th
e fa
cts
stat
ed in
the
open
ing
sent
ence
of t
he in
trod
uctio
n, a
nd
su
gges
ts a
ltern
ativ
e so
lutio
ns t
o th
e p
rob
lem
.
Intr
od
uctio
n F
irst
par
agra
ph
S
tate
s sc
ient
ific
fact
s th
at h
ave
give
n ris
e to
the
que
stio
n in
the
titl
e.
Pas
sive
voi
ce
Thi
rd p
erso
n L
angu
age
of d
ebat
e
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate:
str
ong
asse
rtio
nP
rese
nt t
ense
gen
eral
ly u
sed
Com
plex
sen
tenc
e
Sta
tist
ics
to r
einf
orce
Con
nect
ive
sugg
ests
cau
sal l
ink
Tec
hnical
lang
uage
Con
diti
onal
for
m s
ugge
sts
hypo
thes
is
Con
diti
onal
for
m s
ugge
sts
hypo
thes
is
Con
nect
ive
Con
nect
ive
Con
nect
ive
Con
nect
ive
phra
seF
orm
al la
ngua
ge o
f de
bate
Use
of
ques
tion
s to
prov
oke
deba
te
Has
th
e ti
me
com
e to
ban
car
s fr
om
the
cen
tre
of
tow
ns
and
cit
ies?
Glo
bal
war
min
g c
ause
d b
y p
oll
uti
on
has
beg
un
to
aff
ect
us
dir
ectl
y, w
ith
cli
mat
e
chan
ge
star
tin
g t
o a
ffec
t B
riti
sh w
eath
er.
So
me
peo
ple
bel
iev
e th
e ti
me
has
co
me
for
dra
stic
act
ion
to
red
uce
po
llu
tio
n c
ause
d b
y h
eav
y t
raff
ic.
Ther
e is
no d
oubt
that
tra
ffic
fum
es a
re a
maj
or
cause
of
poll
uti
on t
hro
ughout
the
dev
elo
ped
wo
rld
, an
d a
re a
par
ticu
lar
pro
ble
m i
n l
arg
e to
wn
s an
d c
itie
s. I
n a
sm
all
cou
ntr
y l
ike
the
UK
, ci
ties
are
clo
se e
no
ug
h t
og
ether
to
cau
se h
igh
lev
els
of
traf
fic
fum
e p
oll
uti
on
in
th
e ai
r o
ver
lar
ge
area
s o
f th
e la
nd
. C
on
seq
uen
tly,
hea
lth
pro
ble
ms
are
crea
ted
su
ch a
s as
thm
a, w
hic
h h
as r
apid
ly i
ncr
ease
d a
s th
e n
um
ber
of
cars
on
th
e ro
ad h
as r
isen
. An
ad
dit
ion
al p
rob
lem
in
urb
an a
reas
is
con
ges
tio
n,
wh
ich
was
tes
tim
e an
d a
dd
s to
co
sts.
Th
e av
erag
e sp
eed
of
traf
fic
in c
entr
al L
on
do
n
is n
ow
on
ly 1
2 m
iles
per
ho
ur,
th
e sa
me
as i
t w
as i
n V
icto
rian
tim
es. A
ban
on
car
s
in t
he
cen
tre
of
larg
e to
wn
s an
d c
itie
s w
ou
ld t
her
efo
re s
eem
sen
sib
le a
s it
wo
uld
cu
t
po
llu
tio
n t
her
eby
im
pro
vin
g h
ealt
h.
It w
ou
ld a
lso
red
uce
co
ng
esti
on
, al
low
ing
buse
s, e
mer
gen
cy v
ehic
les
and d
eliv
ery t
ruck
s to
be
more
eff
icie
nt.
On
th
e o
ther
han
d,
it c
ou
ld b
e ar
gu
ed t
hat
su
ch a
ban
wo
uld
cre
ate
oth
er p
rob
lem
s.
Pu
bli
c tr
ansp
ort
in
th
is c
ou
ntr
y i
s ex
pen
siv
e an
d s
om
etim
es u
nre
liab
le. W
ou
ld t
her
e
be
eno
ug
h t
rain
s an
d b
use
s to
co
pe
wit
h t
he
nu
mb
ers
nee
din
g t
hem
? F
urt
her
mo
re,
ther
e is
als
o t
he
issu
e o
f p
erso
nal
fre
edo
m.
Is i
t ri
gh
t to
pre
ven
t p
eop
le f
rom
cho
osi
ng
th
e m
od
e o
f tr
ansp
ort
th
ey p
refe
r? M
any
peo
ple
fee
l sa
fer
in t
hei
r ca
rs
when
tra
vel
ling a
t nig
ht
than
they
do o
n a
bus
or
a tr
ain.
Wh
ile
ther
e is
cle
arly
an
urg
ent
nee
d t
o c
ut
po
llu
tio
n, th
is c
ou
ld b
e ac
hie
ved
by
dev
elo
pin
g c
lean
er f
uel
s an
d e
lect
rica
lly
po
wer
ed c
ars,
an
d e
nco
ura
gin
g p
eop
le t
o
use
pu
bli
c tr
ansp
ort
wh
ere
po
ssib
le,
rath
er t
han
forc
ing
th
em t
o d
o s
o.
Sample Text C
The National Literacy Strategy
10
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Should dogs be banned from parks?
There are thousands of pet dogs in Britain today, and clearing up after
them costs local councils money. This fact, and some well-publicised
attacks by dogs on children, have led to calls for dogs to be banned from
parks.
Everyone at some time or other has experienced the unpleasantness of
finding dog mess on their shoes. Yet it could be argued dog mess is not
simply annoying: direct contact with it can also lead to an eye disease
(toxocariasis) resulting in blindness.
However, dog lovers point out that this mess is biodegradable, whereas
the mess and rubbish left behind by humans in parks and on the streets
is not. Cans, plastic bottles and polystyrene packaging cost enormous
sums of money to dispose of, and will pollute the planet for thousands
of years. Toxocariasis is an extremely rare disease which can be avoided
by following basic hygiene rules. Most dog owners clear up after their
pets if bins are provided.
Critics of dogs often claim that they are unpredictable and dangerous,
and therefore should not be allowed in parks because of the risks to
children.
On the contrary, most dogs are friendly and sociable, particularly those
whose owners take them out regularly. Attacks by dogs usually only
arise when a dog is defending its territory. For example, in one serious
incident it emerged that the injured boy had climbed into the pub yard
which the dog was guarding.
Although dogs can sometimes be a nuisance and, very rarely, dangerous,
they do less damage to our environment than lazy people who drop
litter. Walking a dog is a cheap and easy way for many people to stay fit.
Moreover, Parks Police admit that dog walkers, by being out at all hours
and by often not sticking to the main paths, perform a valuable service
in deterring would-be criminals from using our parks.
The National Literacy Strategy
11
Annotated Text C
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
For
mal
lang
uage
Pre
sent
ten
se g
ener
ally
use
d
Con
nect
ive
impl
ying
con
trad
icti
onIm
pers
onal
lang
uage
Com
plex
sen
tenc
e
Com
plex
sen
tenc
e
Con
diti
onal
dis
tanc
eswri
ter
from
arg
umen
t
Pas
sive
voi
ce u
sed:
iden
tity
of
agen
tir
releva
ntF
orm
al la
ngua
ge o
f de
bate
For
mal
lang
uage
Con
nect
ive
phra
se
For
mal
/im
pers
onal
lang
uage
Con
nect
ives
Tec
hnical
ter
m
Te
xt le
vel
Sen
tenc
e /
wo
rd le
vel
Titl
e A
que
stio
n su
mm
aris
ing
the
issu
e b
eing
d
iscu
ssed
. Key
wor
ds:
dog
s, b
anne
d, p
arks
.
Arg
umen
t P
arag
rap
h 2
Fo
r a
ban
. 1st
sen
tenc
e ap
pea
ls t
o co
mm
on
ex
per
ienc
e to
arg
ue d
ogs
are
mes
sy. 2
nd
se
nten
ce e
lab
orat
es, w
ith s
cien
tific
evi
den
ce
th
at d
ogs
are
a th
reat
to
heal
th.
P
arag
rap
h 4
Fo
r a
ban
. Sen
tenc
e in
trod
uces
a n
ew
ar
gum
ent
(dog
s ar
e d
ange
rous
).
Par
agra
ph
5
Aga
inst
a b
an. 1
st s
ente
nce
cont
rad
icts
the
assu
mp
tion
in P
arag
rap
h 4.
2nd
sen
tenc
e
of
fers
evi
den
ce b
ased
on
scie
ntifi
c th
eory
. 3rd
sent
ence
ela
bor
ates
with
a s
pec
ific
exam
ple
.
Par
agra
ph
3
Aga
inst
a b
an. 1
st s
ente
nce
cont
rad
icts
the
1st
argu
men
t (d
ogs
are
mes
sy),
with
a
co
unte
r-cl
aim
(peo
ple
are
mes
sier
). 2n
d
se
nten
ce e
lab
orat
es w
ith s
upp
ortin
g
ev
iden
ce. 3
rd s
ente
nce
cont
rad
icts
the
2nd
argu
men
t (th
reat
to
heal
th).
4th
sent
ence
offe
rs a
sol
utio
n to
bot
h ar
gum
ents
1 a
nd 2
.
Co
nclu
sio
n F
inal
par
agra
ph
1s
t se
nten
ce s
umm
aris
es t
he a
rgum
ents
in
P
arag
rap
h 3.
2nd
sen
tenc
e ad
ds
an a
dd
ition
al
re
ason
aga
inst
a b
an, a
lso
rela
ted
to
heal
th.
3r
d s
ente
nce
give
s as
a c
linch
ing
argu
men
t
th
e cl
aim
tha
t, fa
r fr
om m
akin
g p
arks
dan
gero
us fo
r ch
ildre
n, d
ogs
can
actu
ally
mak
e th
em s
afer
.
Intr
od
uctio
n F
irst
par
agra
ph
E
ach
sent
ence
giv
es a
rat
iona
le in
favo
ur o
f a
b
an.
Sh
ou
ld d
og
s b
e b
ann
ed f
rom
par
ks?
Ther
e ar
e th
ousa
nds
of
pet
dogs
in B
rita
in t
oday
, an
d c
lear
ing u
p a
fter
them
cost
s lo
cal
counci
ls m
oney
. T
his
fac
t, a
nd s
om
e w
ell-
publi
cise
d
atta
cks
by d
ogs
on c
hil
dre
n, hav
e le
d t
o c
alls
for
dogs
to b
e ban
ned
fro
m
par
ks.
Ever
yone
at s
om
e ti
me
or
oth
er h
as e
xper
ien
ced t
he
unple
asan
tnes
s of
findin
g d
og m
ess
on t
hei
r sh
oes
. Y
et i
t co
uld
be
argued
dog m
ess
is n
ot
sim
ply
annoyin
g:
dir
ect
conta
ct w
ith i
t ca
n a
lso l
ead t
o a
n e
ye
dis
ease
(toxoca
rias
is)
resu
ltin
g i
n b
lindnes
s.
How
ever
, dog l
over
s poin
t out
that
this
mes
s is
bio
deg
radab
le,
wher
eas
the
mes
s an
d r
ubbis
h l
eft
beh
ind b
y h
um
ans
in p
arks
and o
n t
he
stre
ets
is n
ot.
Can
s, p
last
ic b
ott
les
and p
oly
styre
ne
pac
kag
ing c
ost
enorm
ous
sum
s of
money
to d
ispose
of,
and w
ill
poll
ute
the
pla
net
for
thousa
nds
of
yea
rs. T
oxoca
rias
is i
s an
extr
emel
y r
are
dis
ease
whic
h c
an b
e av
oid
ed
by f
oll
ow
ing b
asic
hygie
ne
rule
s. M
ost
dog o
wner
s cl
ear
up a
fter
thei
r
pet
s if
bin
s ar
e pro
vid
ed.
Cri
tics
of
dogs
oft
en c
laim
that
they
are
unpre
dic
table
and d
anger
ous,
and t
her
efore
should
not
be
allo
wed
in p
arks
bec
ause
of
the
risk
s to
chil
dre
n.
On t
he
contr
ary,
most
dogs
are
frie
ndly
and s
oci
able
, par
ticu
larl
y t
hose
whose
ow
ner
s ta
ke
them
out
regula
rly.
Att
acks
by d
ogs
usu
ally
only
aris
e w
hen
a d
og i
s def
endin
g i
ts t
erri
tory
. F
or
exam
ple
, in
one
seri
ous
inci
den
t it
em
erged
that
the
inju
red b
oy h
ad c
lim
bed
into
the
pub y
ard
whic
h t
he
dog w
as g
uar
din
g.
Alt
hough d
ogs
can s
om
etim
es b
e a
nuis
ance
and,
ver
y r
arel
y, d
anger
ous,
they
do l
ess
dam
age
to o
ur
envir
onm
ent
than
laz
y p
eople
who d
rop
litt
er. W
alkin
g a
dog i
s a
chea
p a
nd e
asy w
ay f
or
man
y p
eople
to s
tay f
it.
More
over
, P
arks
Poli
ce a
dm
it t
hat
dog w
alker
s, b
y b
eing o
ut
at a
ll h
ours
and b
y o
ften
not
stic
kin
g t
o t
he
mai
n p
aths,
per
form
a v
aluab
le s
ervic
e
in d
eter
ring w
ould
-be
crim
inal
s fr
om
usi
ng o
ur
par
ks.
Sample Text D
The National Literacy Strategy
12
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Do circuses still need animal acts?
For over a century, touring circuses have provided family entertainment with a
mixture of human and animal acts. As more information about animal behaviour
becomes available, the question arises of whether it is any longer acceptable for
animals to be kept for performing.
Supporters argue that circuses are part of our tradition, and that many families
visit a circus who might not go to other sorts of live entertainment. But traditions
can and do change with time, and a circus without animal acts still provides plenty
of variety, with clowns, trapeze and high wire acts, jugglers and acrobats.
It is claimed that circuses are educational, as they give many people the chance to
see wild animals such as lions and elephants at close quarters. However, it could
be argued that zoos and safari parks offer this opportunity more successfully, since
they contain a far wider range of creatures living in a more natural habitat. They
also usually provide additional information in the form of leaflets, signs and
captions, and have staff available to answer questions.
Those in favour of animals in circuses say that the animals enjoy performing and
are trained using rewards and tit-bits, so no cruelty is involved. Nevertheless,
opponents point out that animals do not perform in their natural environments, and
therefore it is not right to coerce them into doing this merely for the entertainment
of humans. They also criticise the cramped living conditions in which circus
animals are forced to spend most of their time.
Through watching informative programmes on television, more people have a
growing understanding of the needs of wild animals, such as plenty of space to
roam and the freedom to live with their own kind. In the 21st century, it seems
unnecessary and even cruel to confine wild animals and train them to do tricks
for the public’s amusement.
The National Literacy Strategy
13
Annotated Text D
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Titl
e A
que
stio
n su
mm
aris
ing
the
issu
e b
eing
d
iscu
ssed
. Key
wor
ds:
stil
l, ne
ed, a
nim
al.
Te
xt le
vel
Arg
umen
t P
arag
rap
h 2
Fo
r: 1
st s
ente
nce
give
s tw
o re
ason
s w
hy t
he
si
tuat
ion
shou
ld r
emai
n th
e sa
me.
Aga
inst
:
2n
d s
ente
nce
coun
ters
the
se t
wo
poi
nts
and
elab
orat
es o
n th
e id
ea o
f liv
e en
tert
ainm
ent.
P
arag
rap
h 3
Fo
r: 1
st s
ente
nce
pro
pos
es a
new
arg
umen
t
(e
duc
atio
nal).
Aga
inst
: 2nd
sen
tenc
e co
unte
rs
th
is w
ith s
upp
ortin
g ev
iden
ce. 3
rd s
ente
nce
elab
orat
es o
n th
is w
ith fu
rthe
r d
etai
l.
Par
agra
ph
4
For:
1st
sen
tenc
e p
rop
oses
a n
ew a
rgum
ent
(ani
mal
s d
on’t
suffe
r). A
gain
st: 2
nd s
ente
nce
cont
rad
icts
thi
s p
rop
ositi
on w
ith e
vid
ence
.
3r
d s
ente
nce
add
s ad
diti
onal
evi
den
ce o
f
su
fferin
g.
Co
nclu
sio
n F
inal
par
agra
ph
1s
t se
nten
ce r
efer
s to
the
cha
nge
in
und
erst
and
ing
imp
lied
in t
he in
trod
uctio
n.
2nd
sen
tenc
e su
ms
up t
he a
rgum
ents
ag
ains
t.
Intr
od
uctio
n F
irst
par
agra
ph
E
xpla
ins
exis
ting
situ
atio
n an
d r
esta
tes
the
que
stio
n.
Sen
tenc
e /
wo
rd le
vel
Thi
rd p
erso
n
Pre
sent
ten
se g
ener
ally
use
d
Pre
sent
ten
se g
ener
ally
use
d
Con
diti
onal
for
m s
ugge
sts
hypo
thes
is
Con
diti
onal
for
m s
ugge
sts
hypo
thes
is
Con
nect
ives
sho
win
glo
gica
l relat
ions
hips
betw
een
idea
sP
assi
ve
Con
nect
ives
sho
win
glo
gica
l relat
ions
hip
Pas
t te
nse
used
her
e to
give
relev
ant
info
rmat
ion
For
mal
lang
uage
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate
For
mal
lang
uage
For
mal
lang
uage
Do
cir
cuse
s st
ill
nee
d a
nim
al a
cts?
Fo
r o
ver
a c
entu
ry,
tou
rin
g c
ircu
ses
hav
e p
rov
ided
fam
ily
en
tert
ain
men
t w
ith
a
mix
ture
of
hu
man
an
d a
nim
al a
cts.
As
mo
re i
nfo
rmat
ion
ab
ou
t an
imal
beh
avio
ur
bec
om
es a
vai
lab
le,
the
qu
esti
on
ari
ses
of
wh
eth
er i
t is
an
y l
on
ger
acc
epta
ble
fo
r
anim
als
to b
e k
ept
for
per
form
ing
.
Su
pp
ort
ers
arg
ue
that
cir
cuse
s ar
e p
art
of
ou
r tr
adit
ion
, an
d t
hat
man
y f
amil
ies
vis
it
a ci
rcu
s w
ho
mig
ht
no
t g
o t
o o
ther
so
rts
of
liv
e en
tert
ain
men
t. B
ut
trad
itio
ns
can
and
do
ch
ang
e w
ith
tim
e, a
nd
a c
ircu
s w
ith
ou
t an
imal
act
s st
ill
pro
vid
es p
len
ty o
f
var
iety
, w
ith
clo
wn
s, t
rap
eze
and
hig
h w
ire
acts
, ju
gg
lers
an
d a
cro
bat
s.
It i
s cl
aim
ed t
hat
cir
cuse
s ar
e ed
uca
tio
nal
, as
th
ey g
ive
man
y p
eop
le t
he
chan
ce t
o
see
wil
d a
nim
als
such
as
lio
ns
and
ele
ph
ants
at
clo
se q
uar
ters
. H
ow
ever
, it
co
uld
be
arg
ued
th
at z
oo
s an
d s
afar
i p
ark
s o
ffer
th
is o
pp
ort
un
ity
mo
re s
ucc
essf
ull
y, s
ince
they
conta
in a
far
wid
er r
ange
of
crea
ture
s li
vin
g i
n a
more
nat
ura
l hab
itat
. T
hey
also
usu
ally
pro
vid
e ad
dit
ional
info
rmat
ion i
n t
he
form
of
leaf
lets
, si
gns
and
cap
tio
ns,
an
d h
ave
staf
f av
aila
ble
to
an
swer
qu
esti
on
s.
Th
ose
in
fav
ou
r o
f an
imal
s in
cir
cuse
s sa
y t
hat
th
e an
imal
s en
joy
per
form
ing
an
d
are
trai
ned
usi
ng
rew
ard
s an
d t
it-b
its,
so
no
cru
elty
is
inv
olv
ed. N
ever
thel
ess,
op
po
nen
ts p
oin
t o
ut
that
an
imal
s d
o n
ot
per
form
in
th
eir
nat
ura
l en
vir
on
men
ts, an
d
ther
efo
re i
t is
no
t ri
gh
t to
co
erce
th
em i
nto
do
ing t
his
mer
ely
fo
r th
e en
tert
ain
men
t
of
hu
man
s. T
hey
als
o c
riti
cise
th
e cr
amp
ed l
ivin
g c
on
dit
ion
s in
wh
ich
cir
cus
anim
als
are
forc
ed t
o s
pen
d m
ost
of
thei
r ti
me.
Th
rou
gh
wat
chin
g i
nfo
rmat
ive
pro
gra
mm
es o
n t
elev
isio
n, m
ore
peo
ple
hav
e a
gro
win
g u
nd
erst
and
ing
of
the
nee
ds
of
wil
d a
nim
als,
su
ch a
s p
len
ty o
f sp
ace
to
roam
an
d t
he
free
do
m t
o l
ive
wit
h t
hei
r o
wn
kin
d. In
th
e 2
1st
cen
tury
, it
see
ms
un
nec
essa
ry a
nd
ev
en c
ruel
to
co
nfi
ne
wil
d a
nim
als
and
tra
in t
hem
to
do
tri
cks
for
the
pu
bli
c’s
amu
sem
ent.
The National Literacy Strategy
14
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Detailed lesson plans for Days 3 and 4:Day 3: shared reading and analysis
Day 4: shared writing (applying the learning from Day 3)
ContextOn Day 1 the teacher and children did some activities from Unit 51 in Grammar for Writing on
conditionals. Then they read Sample Text A, and briefly discussed the issues presented
before going on to analyse and annotate for organisational features in order to create the
skeleton-frame of the discussion text type. They repeated the process independently using
Sample Text B and other classroom texts. On Day 2, they used the skeleton-frame and facts
and arguments they had been discussing in history to plan a discussion text on the Second
World War.
Day 3 – Shared reading and analysis 1. Tell the children that in order to write a really effective discussion, they need to be clear
about both the organisation of this text type, which they worked on earlier in the week, and
its language features. This might include the tense and person the text is written in, the
kinds of sentences used, the punctuation and particular sorts of vocabulary chosen to
match the text type and to engage and stimulate the reader.
2. Explain that the purpose of today’s session will be to analyse Text A, investigating its
language features and creating a checklist of the features they can use for their own
writing.
3. Re-read Text A (enlarged/OHT) briskly to orientate the children.
4. Referring to the title, model for the children how to annotate a text by underlining ‘be
banned’ and annotating it as the passive voice. Remind them of the reasons for using the
passive.
5. Analyse and annotate the first paragraph with the children. Begin to create the checklist of
features as you go, on a flipchart.
6. For paragraph 2, ask the children to work in pairs for a few minutes, noting features which
seem distinctive to this text type on their whiteboards. Then ask them to join with another
pair, compare their lists, discuss them and agree on a final list of three or four features
between them. Take feedback from the groups, annotate Text A and continue to add to the
class checklist.
7. Repeat with paragraphs 3 and 4, noting the features of a conclusion.
8. Tell the children to use the checklist they have just created for Text A as a reference point
and prompt to annotate Text B in pairs and write two checklists: one of any language
features in B which were also in A, and one of any new features in B only. Make it clear that
in the plenary, you will be adding what they’ve discovered to the class checklist.
PlenaryTake feedback from each group, asking first for one or two examples of language features in
Text B which were also found in Text A. Annotate Text B as you go. Were there any features
which occurred in the same paragraph in each text? Why might that be? Were there any
additional features in B, that were not in A (e.g. questions to provoke debate)? If so, could they
think of a way that feature could have been used in Text A? Take suggestions and encourage
children to comment on the effectiveness of this. Conclude by telling children that tomorrow
they will be thinking of how they can use the checklist of language features in their own writing
of a discussion.
The National Literacy Strategy
15
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Day 4 – Application in shared writing1. Tell the children that the objective of today’s session is to write a discussion text, based on
the plan they made on Tuesday, on the Second World War. Re-read Texts A and B briskly to
remind them of the text type they will be producing. Refer to the checklist made yesterday
and tell them you will be using this as a prompt.
2. Display the notes made in the discussion skeleton-frame on Tuesday. Give the children
some time in small groups to discuss the issue and ask if anyone has thought of any
additional arguments or has located any useful facts or figures to support the argument
which are not on the plan. Add these on.
3. Begin with the title. Remind the children of what they noticed about the titles when
analysing Texts A and B (e.g. use of key words and question format). Ask them in pairs to
think of a suitable title for this piece. Take ideas, rephrase if necessary and scribe.
4. Move on to the introductory paragraph. Recap on the features identified in Texts A and B,
pointing out that these introductions are usually only one or two sentences long. Write part
of the sentence yourself, then ask the children to complete in pairs on their whiteboards.
Take some of their ideas and scribe. Demonstrate using the checklists (for content and for
language features) as reference points.
5. Explain that paragraph 2, as in Texts A and B, will contain all the arguments and evidence
supporting one point of view on the issue. Ask the children to discuss, in pairs, which point
of view should come first and why. Take suggestions and encourage children to respond to
each other’s opinions. Agree the broad content of the paragraph, and then tell the children
in which order the points in the skeleton should go, i.e. which is the best point to start with.
Give reasons for your choices.
6. Follow the same pattern for the points in paragraphs 2 and 3, remembering to re-read and
emphasising the need for the ideas to flow logically.
7. Re-read what you have composed so far. Ask the children to consider whether it could be
improved by using any of the features on the checklist. Re-draft as necessary.
8. Explain to the children that in pairs, during independent time, they are going to write
paragraph 3 which will include all the opposing arguments, and the concluding paragraph.
Remind them to refer to both checklists, and to discuss each sentence aloud with their
partner.
9. Tell them that in the plenary you will be taking a couple of points from the skeleton and
asking them how they expressed one of these points effectively in their writing.
PlenarySelect one of the points from the skeleton, which the children have been including in
paragraph 3, and ask for volunteers to read aloud the sentence or sentences which relate to
that point. Ask the other children to listen carefully and identify which features have been used
and to suggest why they think the writers chose to use it. Encourage them to comment on their
own and each other’s sentences, particularly in relation to the effectiveness of using particular
features (e.g. the use of certain connectives implying contradiction or reinforcement) and
vocabulary choices.
The National Literacy Strategy
16
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Transcripts of lessons for Days 3 and 4(taught by Year 6 teacher, Bobbie. Children’s responses and contributions omitted)
Day 3 – Shared reading and analysisNote: the texts for the shared and independent reading are on pages 6– 13.
You remember that I told you on Monday when we started this work on discussion texts that the aim is foryou to be able to write your own argument or discussion really effectively? Well, in order to do that, you haveto be clear not just about how that type of text is organised, but also you have to know about the languagefeatures of discussion texts. What I mean by that is, the kinds of words you use, the way you construct yoursentences. Can anyone suggest what else we mean by language features? . . . . . . . . Yes, right, punctuation. Wemight use particular forms of punctuation, like you often use bullet points when you write instructions . . . . . . .Yes, definitely, the tense it’s written in, good. So, our objective today is to look carefully at the discussiontext we read and discussed on Monday, ‘Should mobile phones be banned in schools?’, investigate its languagefeatures together, and make a list of them on the flip chart. Then, when you come to write your owndiscussion later, you’ll all be able to use the checklist to remind yourselves . . . . . . . . That’s right, we did thesame thing when we were writing playscripts, well remembered. And it did help, didn’t it? [Switched on OHP –enlarged version of ‘Should mobile phones be banned?’ and read through it]
I know we all have lots to say about this issue and different points of view came up in our discussion. Now weare going to look more closely at how the argument has been constructed. If we look first at the title, I’mgoing to show you a language feature in that title, and it’s not a very common one, [underlined ‘be banned’] cananyone tell me what it is? . . . . . . . . Nearly right, it’s called the passive voice [annotated ‘passive voice’ on OHT]and who can remember why it might be used? . . . . . . . . Yes, when you want your writing to sound more formal.Can you remember any other formal writing we did? . . . . . . . . Yes, when we wrote those letters of complaint tothe council . . . . . . . . and the certificates too, that’s right. Now if you look at this title you’ll see it doesn’t tellus who would be doing the banning, and that’s what happens if you use the passive voice, it lets you ‘hide’ who’sdoing it, maybe because it doesn’t matter or because you don’t want to draw attention to them. So I’m goingto start off our checklist of key language features with ’passive voice’ [wrote this on flip chart headed ‘KeyLanguage Features of Discussion Texts’].
Now let’s look at the first paragraph, the introduction, all together . . . . . . . . Good, you’ve spotted another useof the passive voice [underlined and annotated ‘it is estimated’ ] . . . . . . . . the words the writer chooses. Yes,‘explosion’ has greater impact on the reader than a phrase such as ‘sharp increase’ – Why? . . . . . . . . And tell uswhy you picked ‘Considerable debate’ . . . . . . . . Yes it does sound very formal again, doesn’t it? It definitelylets us know there’s a debate happening, there are two different viewpoints on this issue [underlined andannotated ‘considerable debate’ and added ‘formal language of debate’ to checklist]. Is there any evidence,any hard facts here? . . . . . . . . Well done, those statistics there [underlined and annotated ‘70% of youngpeople’] make it sound more convincing, you’re right [wrote ‘evidence, e.g. statistics, to support a point ofview’ on checklist]. Now I want us to move on to paragraph 2. What do we know from our work on Monday isthe content of paragraph 2? . . . . . . . . Thank you, all the arguments against a ban, so there should be plenty ofthese features here we can spot. I’d like you to work with your partner, find and note down at least threelanguage features in this paragraph . . . . . . . . Yes, they might be ones we’ve found already or they might benew ones. You’ll have three minutes for that, then I’m going to ask you as a pair to turn to another pair andcompare your lists. I want you to discuss what you found and agree on one list between the four of you, OK?Five minutes for all of that, please . . . . . . . . Well done, you’ve found that it’s written in the present tense,[underlined ‘is’] can anyone else see some other present tense verbs, please? . . . . . . . . Yes, ‘argue’ . . . . . . . . ‘can’
The National Literacy Strategy
17
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
. . . . . . . . ‘are’ . . . . . . . . In fact all the verbs are in the present tense so I can underline and annotate them all,and also add ‘present tense’ to our checklist. What about other features? . . . . . . . . Yes, excellent, you fourhave noticed some of the particular language that people tend to use in discussion writing [underlined andannotated ‘pupils argue’ and ‘They cite’] – these sorts of phrases are typical of a discussion text where bothsides of the argument are being put quite strongly. Again, it’s quite formal language. Can you see any moreexamples of this sort of formal, debating style of language? . . . . . . . . Very good, yes, ‘No one can deny’. Canyou explain to us, one of you four, why you picked out that phrase? . . . . . . . . I do see what you mean, yes, whatabout the rest of you? . . . . . . . . OK so I’m going to write that on our checklist as ‘strong claim’ or ‘strongassertion’. Is there anything we’ve missed in either paragraph? Just check through them again . . . . . . . . Good,there’s a connective there, ‘since’, in that complex sentence which links together the two parts of thesentence.
If we start to look at paragraph 3, where we know all the opposing arguments are, we can see that it startswith another connective [underlined and annotated ‘however’]. Even if we didn’t already know that the otherside of the argument was going to be in this paragraph, that particular connective would tell us, wouldn’t it?Can anyone explain that? . . . . . . . . Good, yes, it’s like a signal to the reader that someone is about to argue theopposite, to contest the viewpoint in paragraph 2. I’d like you now to read through paragraph 3 with yourpartner and list some of the language features on your white boards . . . . . . . . You’ve said ‘moreover’[underlined and annotated ‘moreover’] so can another pair explain what kind of connective that is? Is it like‘however’? . . . . . . . . What does anyone else think about what she just said? . . . . . . . . So what do I need to writeon our checklist? . . . . . . . . You’re both right, so I’m going to write this [wrote ‘connective suggesting furtherevidence (moreover)’ on flip chart] . . . . . . . . These verbs, ‘could’ and ‘would’ – what form is that and when is itused? . . . . . . . . Good, they’re conditional verbs [underlined and annotated] and they suggest a possibility,don’t they, rather than a certainty. What’s the effect of using them here? Let’s replace them with ‘does’ and‘will’ [wrote on OHT] – what’s the difference when we read it? Talk about that for a minute in your pairs,please . . . . . . . . That’s it, if you use the conditional form, ‘could’ and ‘would’ and ‘might’ and so on, it makes yousound more reasonable, as if you’re making your arguments in a very measured way, not just flinging out a lotof wild claims that you can’t prove. I’m going to write ‘conditional form to suggest possibility/hypothesis’[wrote on checklist] because we’ve come across that word in our science work.
Let’s do the concluding paragraph together quickly . . . . . . . . Yes, we’ve got those on our checklist [underlinedand annotated ‘could’, ‘might’ and ‘until this is disproved’]. That last one is a connective phrase isn’t it, ratherthan a single connective word, that links the ideas in the two sentences together. [Wrote ‘connective phraselinking ideas’ on checklist.]
Listen carefully while I explain what I want you to do while I’m reading with a group. On your tables is a copyof the text you analysed on Monday, ‘Has the time come to ban cars from the centre of towns and cities?’ Inpairs, read through the whole text again first. Then start to annotate it, like I did, beginning with the title,underlining the language features you notice and writing what they are in the margin. Use our checklist we’vemade today to help you find as many features as you can. If you find a feature in this text that is on ourchecklist, write it in one list. If you find a language feature that isn’t already on our checklist, write it in aseparate list, so you could end up with two lists. In our plenary, I want to add all the features you’ve found toour class checklist, and also I’ll be asking some of you about the effects of some of these features.
The National Literacy Strategy
18
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
PlenaryRight, can your group start us off by telling us one or two features you discovered, that were also in thistext? . . . . . . . . [ticked off items on class checklist, underlined and annotated copy of Text B on OHT] . . . . . . . .Thank you, next group, please . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [repeated for each group]. Has anyone noticed if there wereany features which occurred in roughly the same place in each text? . . . . . . . . Yes, like both titles beingquestions, but looking at the language features . . . . . . . . So both paragraph 2s begin with a strong assertion,and there are several connectives in there, too. Why is that, do you think? . . . . . . . . You think it’s an effectiveway to start off a paragraph of arguments, then? I agree, it takes the reader straight to the point of viewvery forcefully, doesn’t it?
My last question to you is, were there any features in your text that weren’t in this one we did together? . . . . . . . . Could that feature, asking the reader questions to make them think about the point being made, beused in this text? [pointed to Text A]. Have a quick go at changing this final sentence [pointed to Text A] inparagraph 3 into a question . . . . . . . . Well done, ‘Would children’s education be affected by the distraction ofphones ringing in class?’ You might like to think about the effect of making this change. This checklist isgoing to be really helpful to us tomorrow when we start to write our own discussion text and you need toinclude the key language features.
Day 4 – Shared writing – applyOur objective today is to write our own argument or discussion text, using all the things we’ve found outabout how this kind of text is written. We’re going to use the plan we made on Tuesday as a basis, and we’vealso got these two checklists we can refer to [pointed to lists and plan displayed] that will act as reminders.
Now for our discussion text, we’re using information from our history topic last term, when we learnt a lotabout what life was like during the Second World War. As I said to you on Tuesday, we’re using that becauseit’s something you know a lot about, especially the effect of the war on children, and many of you said thatthe drama we did about evacuation really made you understand what that experience might have been likefor the children and their families. So here’s our skeleton-frame, with all the points in favour of evacuationdown one side, and the points against down the other, and some additional detail for some of those points,such as evidence to back up a claim being made. Has anyone thought of any more points since Tuesday that wecould include, either for or against? . . . . . . . . You’ve come up with an important fact that we forgot, thatsadly, some children became orphans while they were evacuated because their dad was killed in the fightingand their mum died in the bombing – that is a really important piece of information. Well done. Now can youthink of an argument to make, based on that fact? Talk to your partners for a moment and see what you canthink of . . . . . . . . OK, you’ve put that very well. From your discussion you would like to argue that becausesome children were orphaned, evacuation was a bad thing and it would have been better if they could havestayed with their mums even if that meant running the risk of dying in an air raid. Can someone put theopposing argument? . . . . . . . . Good, yes, you’ve come up with a good reason, that they might have survived thebombing so it was better that they were living safely with someone they knew, if they were going to beorphaned anyway. I think if you want to include this point in your writing, you could argue it as a ‘for’ or an‘against’, so I’m going to leave that to you to decide, and maybe later in the week we’ll see who came up withthe most convincing argument.
The National Literacy Strategy
19
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Now we said our writing would be a discussion that might have appeared in a newspaper or magazine duringthe war, once evacuation had started and some people had started to question whether it was such a goodidea. Let’s start with thinking of a title – remember what we found out about the title: that it’s often in theform of a question, and includes the key words. Turn to your partner and decide on a suitable title . . . . . . . .I’m going to change what you said just a little bit to make it a bit shorter ‘Will evacuation be good for ourchildren?’ ‘Evacuation’ is one of the ‘shun’ words we’ve looked at isn’t it? Stephen can you think about theword ending please and spell ‘evacuation’ for me as I write . . . . . . . . [Wrote ‘Will evacuation be good for ourchildren?’] How did you know it ended with ‘-tion’ and not ‘-sion’ or ‘-cian’ Stephen? . . . . . . . .Well remembered,it comes from the verb ‘evacuate’ and it keeps the ‘t’ when you change it to ‘evacuation’ . . . . . . . . Yes, quiteright, Hasna, we found out that ‘-tion’ is the most common ‘shun’ ending, didn’t we?
Next, we need to write our introductory paragraph, so let’s recap on what we know about that. It’s quitebrief, usually only one or two sentences long, and it needs to clarify the situation, saying a bit more aboutthose key words in the title. I’m going to begin by writing the first sentence. [Wrote ‘Since the start of thewar, more than 250,000 children have been evacuated’.] I’d like you, in your pairs, to write the next sentenceon your white boards which will finish off the introduction . . . . . . . . I like the way you’ve managed to suggestthe long-term effects of evacuation in your sentence, and it also uses one of the language features from thechecklist. See if you can spot it as I’m writing. [Wrote ‘Yet as the war continues into another year many ofthose have been removed from their new homes’.] . . . . . . . . Good, there’s the passive voice there [pointed to‘have been removed’] setting a formal tone to the whole piece right at the start.
Let’s move on to paragraph 2. As we know from the discussion texts we’ve read, this is often where we’ll needto write all the arguments in support of one point of view. Here on our plan are the two different viewpoints:which shall we start with? Discuss it with your partner, and I want you to give me reasons why we shouldstart with the point of view you choose . . . . . . . . Good, you’ve given me two reasons why we should start withthe arguments against evacuation. Has anyone got two or more reasons why we should start with the points infavour? . . . . . . . . Anybody like to comment on either of those proposals? . . . . . . . . Right, I think that’s a goodpoint, to start with the points ‘for’ because that’s what everyone thought to begin with, that it was a goodidea to send the children to a safe place, and it was only as time went on that some of the points againstevacuation began to be realised. So we could reflect that in the way we write this, beginning with this pointon our plan, then moving to a sentence about this one because it follows logically, and finishing with asentence about food shortages. Now what we need is an effective opening phrase for this sentence which isgoing to explain the idea of moving children away from the bombing. Talk to your partner and try to think of astrong phrase that we can use . . . . . . . . Yes, we could start off with that, but I think this pair’s was betterbecause it appeals to a common belief at the start of the war, that the bombing would kill everyone in thecities. [Wrote ‘In 1939 everyone believed that’.] And I’m going to finish the sentence using the passive voiceto get that feeling of formality [pointed to checklist, then wrote ‘our cities would be destroyed and the’] andI want to write ‘people killed’. Can anyone think of a more emphatic way of writing ‘people killed’ to make agreater impact on the reader? . . . . . . . . ‘population wiped out’. OK, that’s probably not an exaggeration.[Wrote ‘population wiped out’.] I’m going to make a link now with one of the less serious effects of thebombing which we’ve got on our plan. I’m starting with a connective phrase [wrote ‘Even when it was realisedthat this wasn’t happening, the effect of the nightly bombing raids on children’] and I’d like you to completethis sentence on your white boards, please. Don’t forget to use the checklists to help you . . . . . . . . Good,
The National Literacy Strategy
20
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
you’ve brought in the formal language of debate with that phrase so I’m going to use it and add in what theothers said about sleep being important for children’s health. [Wrote ‘convinced many people that childrenwould be safer and healthier if they could leave the city and have a proper night’s sleep’.] We want to bring inthis point in favour of evacuation, [pointed to plan] that the food shortages were less severe in the country,so let’s re-read what we’ve written so far, see how it sounds and then try to think of a way of linking in thatnext sentence . . . . . . . . I agree, we need a connective that suggests further evidence. Can you see one on thechecklist? Good, ‘moreover’ will fit well, so start your next sentence with ‘moreover’ . . . . . . . . Well done,you’ve also used a more technical term: ‘malnourished’ which gives a greater sense of suffering than ‘didn’thave enough to eat’ in this kind of writing, so we’ll include that. [Wrote ‘Moreover, many city children weremalnourished and food shortages were less of a problem in the country’.] Just re-read what we’ve done sofar today, and tell me if you think we could improve it by using any more features from the checklist . . . . . . . .
Listen carefully to what I want you to do next. In pairs, you’re going to write paragraph 3, which will includeall the opposing arguments, and then the concluding paragraph. Use the checklists to help you, keep re-reading what you’ve written and discuss each sentence before you write it. In the plenary, I’ll be pickingout some of the points against evacuation that we put in our skeleton-frame and asking you how youexpressed that argument.
PlenaryRight, let’s take this point from the plan, that evacuation was a bad idea because some children lived withmuch wealthier people while they were evacuated and that made it hard for them and their families whenthey went back home. I’m going to ask for volunteers to read out how they wrote that into their argument,and I’d like the rest of you to listen carefully and see if you can identify the features they’ve used and howthey affect the argument . . . . . . . . Thank you. So who spotted one of the features on our checklist that theboys used there? . . . . . . . . You’ve said the conditional verbs. Can you tell us why you think they thought thatwould be effective? . . . . . . . . Boys, do you want to come back on that one? Yes, tell her your reasons . . . . . . . .Would any pair like to read their version of that argument? Tomorrow we’ll have a chance to look at thisagain to see if we can improve on what we’ve done together. Any different features used there? . . . . . . . .Good. I agree. The sentence ‘Parents haunted by the image of children scarred physically and mentally bythe nightly bombings, have no alternative but to send them away to safety’ is much more effective. Why?Tomorrow we’ll have a chance to look at this again to see if we can improve on what we’ve done together.
The National Literacy Strategy
21
Supplementary Resources
Sample Text E
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Is homework necessary?
Secondary schools have been setting their pupilshomework for many years, and more recently this hasbeen extended into primary classes, including thosefor the youngest children. Recent articles in the pressabout standards in schools, and about the stressesplaced on some pupils to achieve, have highlightedthe role of homework.
It is argued that providing children with tasks tocomplete outside school hours helps them to developthe ability to work independently, without thesupervision of an adult. This is important as pupils areincreasingly expected to take responsibility for theirown learning as they progress through secondaryschool. Most adults are expected to use their initiativeat work, and to be able to do the job for which they arepaid without constant supervision: in this sense,homework is a preparation for real life. Those whosupport homework point out that it would beimpossible to cover in school time everythingnecessary, and that regular homework allows childrenthe opportunity to practise and revise certain skills.
(continued)
Supplementary Resources
Annotated Text E
The National Literacy Strategy
22
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Is h
omew
ork
nece
ssar
y?
Sec
onda
ry s
choo
ls h
ave
been
set
ting
thei
r pu
pils
hom
ewor
k fo
r m
any
year
s,an
d m
ore
rece
ntly
this
has
been
ext
ende
d in
to p
rimar
y cl
asse
s,in
clud
ing
thos
efo
r th
e yo
unge
st c
hild
ren.
Rec
ent a
rtic
les
in th
e pr
ess
abou
t sta
ndar
ds in
sch
ools
,and
abo
ut th
e st
ress
espl
aced
on
som
e pu
pils
to a
chie
ve,h
ave
high
light
edth
e ro
le o
fho
mew
ork.
It is
arg
ued
tha
t pro
vidi
ng c
hild
ren
with
task
s to
com
plet
e ou
tsid
e sc
hool
hou
rs h
elps
them
to d
evel
opth
e ab
ility
to w
ork
inde
pend
ently
,with
out t
hesu
perv
isio
n of
an a
dult.
Thi
s is
impo
rtan
t as
pupi
ls a
rein
crea
sing
ly e
xpec
ted
to ta
ke r
espo
nsib
ility
for
thei
row
n le
arni
ng a
s th
ey p
rog
ress
thro
ugh
seco
ndar
ysc
hool
.Mos
t adu
lts a
re e
xpec
ted
to u
se th
eir
initi
ativ
ea
t wor
k,an
d to
be
able
to d
o th
e jo
b fo
r w
hich
they
are
paid
with
out c
onst
ant s
uper
visi
on:i
n th
is s
ense
,ho
mew
ork
is a
pre
para
tion
for
real
life
.Tho
se w
hosu
ppor
t hom
ewor
k po
int o
ut th
at i
t wou
ld b
eim
poss
ible
to c
over
in s
choo
l tim
e ev
eryt
hing
nece
ssar
y,an
d th
at r
egul
ar h
omew
ork
allo
ws
child
ren
the
oppo
rtun
ity to
pra
ctis
e an
d re
vise
cer
tain
ski
lls.
(con
tinue
d)
Text
str
uct
ure
an
d o
rgan
isat
ion
Sen
ten
ce s
tru
ctu
re a
nd
pu
nct
uat
ion
Sp
ellin
g
A q
uest
ion
sum
mar
isin
gth
e is
sue be
ing
disc
usse
d
Pas
t te
nse to
giv
e re
leva
nt in
form
atio
n
Lon
g se
nten
ce w
ith
clau
ses
mar
ked
wit
h co
mm
as
For
mal
lang
uage
(no
un)
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate
Con
tinu
es in
the
pre
sent
ten
se
For
mal
lang
uage
(no
un)
Pas
sive
voi
ce r
einf
orce
s fo
rmal
sty
le
Col
on s
ugge
sts
caus
al li
nk
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate
Intr
oduc
tion
:ex
plai
ns t
hecu
rren
t si
tuat
ion
and
why
the qu
esti
on h
as a
rise
n
Arg
umen
t in
fav
our
of h
omew
ork
Cla
im for
inde
pend
ent
lear
ning
Reinf
orce
s ‘ind
epen
dent
’ar
gum
ent
wit
h ex
ampl
es
Sec
ond
clai
m
Sp
ellin
gar
gum
ent –
no
‘e’
pra
ctis
e–
‘s’–
as
a ve
rb
pra
ctic
e–
‘c’–
as
a no
un
The National Literacy Strategy
23
Supplementary Resources
Sample Text E (continued)
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
However, critics of homework argue that if thecurriculum cannot be covered within the school day,there is clearly too much content and it should bereduced. They further claim that since some childrenhave access at home to computers and books andothers do not, certain children are at a disadvantage.They believe that this amounts to a lack of equalopportunities. In terms of encouraging children tobecome independent learners, they point out that insome cases, parents provide so much help andsupport for their children’s homework that, far fromlearning to tackle problems on their own, thesechildren are simply relying on adults even more.Furthermore, some critics argue that children areunder a great deal of pressure to work hard at school,and that they need plenty of time to relax and develophobbies and personal interests.
Schools have to balance the desire to prepare theirpupils properly for the future against the risk ofsubjecting them to too much stress. Clearly, schoolsmust think carefully about the homework tasks theyset, in order to ensure that some groups of pupils donot struggle because they happen to lack certainresources at home.
Supplementary Resources
Annotated Text E (continued)
The National Literacy Strategy
24
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Text
str
uct
ure
an
d o
rgan
isat
ion
Sen
ten
ce s
tru
ctu
re a
nd
pu
nct
uat
ion
Co
mp
osi
tio
n a
nd
eff
ect
Eco
nom
ical
use
of
lang
uage
red
uces
a lo
t of
deta
il
into
a r
ela
tivel
y sh
ort d
iscu
ssio
n pa
per.
Con
sist
ently
impe
rson
al s
tyle
not
laps
ing
into
hec
torin
g bu
t
mak
ing
forc
eful
ass
ertio
ns.C
oncl
usio
n ac
cept
s th
at
hom
ewor
k in
evita
ble
but a
ppea
ls to
sch
ools
to
exer
cise
car
e.
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate
Con
nect
ive to
sug
gest
pos
sibl
e co
ntra
dict
ion
Arg
umen
t ag
ains
t ho
mew
ork
Cou
nter
‘ind
epen
denc
e’ar
gum
ent
Res
pons
ibili
ty o
f sc
hool
s in
set
ting
hom
ewor
k to
tak
e th
e co
unte
rar
gum
ents
into
con
side
rati
on
Sp
ellin
gsi
nce,
acc
ess,
cer
tain
, red
uced
– ‘c
’– s
oft
dis
adva
ntag
e–
brea
k in
to s
ylla
bles
ind
epen
den
t– ‘e
nt’
Pas
sive
voi
ce cre
ates
for
mal
styl
e (al
tern
ativ
e ‘te
ache
rssh
ould
red
uce’
=he
ctor
ing
tone
)
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate
Com
plex
sen
tenc
e to
poi
nt u
par
gum
ent
and
then
pre
sent
coun
ter
argu
men
ts
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate
Con
nect
ive de
mar
cate
d wit
h a
com
ma
For
cefu
l lan
guag
e
Con
nect
ive de
mar
cate
d wit
h a
com
ma
For
mal
lang
uage
Cou
nter
s se
cond
cla
im in
last
par
agra
ph
Poi
nts
out
ineq
ualit
ies
in p
upil
acce
ss t
o m
ater
ials
Intr
oduc
es n
ew a
rgum
ent
agai
nst
hom
ewor
k
How
ever
,crit
ics
ofho
mew
ork
argu
e th
at i
fth
ecu
rric
ulum
can
not b
e co
vere
d w
ithin
the
scho
ol d
ay,
ther
e is
cle
arly
too
muc
h co
nten
t and
it s
houl
d be
redu
ced.
The
y fu
rthe
r cl
aim
tha
t sin
ce s
ome
child
ren
have
acc
ess
at h
ome
to c
ompu
ters
and
boo
ks a
ndot
hers
do
not,
cert
ain
child
ren
are
at a
dis
adva
ntag
e.T
hey
belie
ve th
at t
his
amou
nts
to a
lack
of
equa
lop
port
uniti
es.I
n te
rms
ofen
cour
agin
g ch
ildre
n to
beco
me
inde
pend
ent l
earn
ers,
they
poi
nt o
ut th
at i
nso
me
case
s,pa
rent
s pr
ovid
e so
muc
h he
lp a
ndsu
ppor
t for
thei
r ch
ildre
n’s
hom
ewor
k th
at,
far
from
lear
ning
to ta
ckle
pro
blem
s on
thei
r ow
n,th
ese
child
ren
are
sim
ply
rely
ing
on a
dults
eve
n m
ore.
Fur
ther
mor
e,so
me
criti
cs a
rgue
tha
t chi
ldre
n ar
eun
der
a g
rea
t dea
l of
pres
sure
to w
ork
hard
at s
choo
l,an
d th
at t
hey
need
ple
nty
oftim
e to
rel
ax a
nd d
evel
opho
bbie
s an
d pe
rson
al in
tere
sts.
Sch
ools
hav
e to
bal
ance
the
desi
re to
pre
pare
thei
rpu
pils
pro
perl
y fo
r th
e fu
ture
aga
inst
the
risk
ofsu
bjec
ting
them
to to
o m
uch
stre
ss.C
lear
ly,s
choo
lsm
ust t
hink
car
eful
ly a
bout
the
hom
ewor
k ta
sks
they
set,
in o
rder
to e
nsur
e th
at s
ome
gro
ups
ofpu
pils
do
not s
trug
gle
beca
use
they
hap
pen
to la
ck c
erta
inre
sour
ces
at h
ome.
The National Literacy Strategy
25
Supplementary Resources
Sample Text F
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Should smoking in public be banned?
Smoking continues to be one of the main causes ofillness and death in the UK, and huge sums of moneyare spent both on treating victims of heart diseaseand cancer caused by smoking, and on trying toprevent young people from becoming addicted andrisking their health and lives in the future. In recentyears experts have become increasingly aware ofthe dangers of passive smoking – that is, the risk to non-smokers of breathing in smokers’ tobacco fumes– and some people are now calling for a ban onsmoking in public.
Anti-smokers point out that since the dangers ofsmoking are so serious and so well-known, it iscompletely unfair that they should be forced to beexposed to the risks of inhaling other people’sdangerous fumes. Some places where smoking isallowed, for example on the top deck of buses, arevery confined spaces that can quickly become filledwith smoke. However, passengers may have no choicebut to travel upstairs if the bus is crowded. In thesecircumstances, it is impossible to avoid breathing in
(continued)
Supplementary Resources
Annotated Text F
The National Literacy Strategy
26
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Sho
uld
smok
ing
in p
ublic
be
bann
ed?
Sm
okin
g co
ntin
ues
to b
e on
e of
the
mai
n ca
uses
of
illne
ss a
nd d
eath
in th
e U
K,a
nd h
uge
sum
s of
mon
eyar
e sp
ent b
oth
on tr
eatin
g vi
ctim
s of
hear
t dis
ease
and
canc
er c
ause
d by
sm
okin
g,an
d on
tryi
ng to
prev
ent y
oung
peo
ple
from
bec
omin
g ad
dict
ed a
ndris
king
thei
r he
alth
and
live
s in
the
futu
re.I
n re
cent
year
s ex
pert
s ha
ve b
ecom
e in
crea
sing
ly a
war
e of
the
dang
ers
ofpa
ssiv
e sm
okin
g –
tha
t is,
the
risk
to
non-
smok
ers
ofbr
eath
ing
in s
mok
ers’
toba
cco
fum
es–
and
som
e pe
ople
are
now
cal
ling
for
a ba
n on
smok
ing
in p
ublic
.
Ant
i-sm
oker
s po
int o
ut th
at s
ince
the
dang
ers
ofsm
okin
gar
e so
ser
ious
and
so
wel
l-kno
wn,
it is
com
plet
ely
unfa
ir th
at t
hey
shou
ld b
e fo
rced
to b
eex
pose
d to
the
risks
of
inha
ling
othe
r pe
ople
’sda
nger
ous
fum
es.S
ome
plac
es w
here
sm
okin
g is
allo
wed
,for
exa
mpl
e on
the
top
deck
of
buse
s,ar
eve
ry c
onfin
ed s
pace
s th
at c
an q
uick
ly b
ecom
e fil
led
with
sm
oke.
How
ever
,pas
seng
ers
may
hav
e no
cho
ice
but t
o tr
avel
ups
tairs
ifth
e bu
s is
cro
wde
d.In
thes
eci
rcum
stan
ces,
it is
impo
ssib
le to
avo
id b
rea
thin
g in
(con
tinue
d)
Text
str
uct
ure
an
d o
rgan
isat
ion
Sen
ten
ce s
tru
ctu
re a
nd
pu
nct
uat
ion
A q
uest
ion
sum
mar
isin
g th
e is
sue
Pas
sive
voi
ce,n
o re
fere
nce
to w
ho s
houl
d ba
n it
Tec
hnical
voc
abul
ary
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate
Str
ong
asse
rtio
n
Com
plex
sen
tenc
e ec
onom
ical
ly
cont
aini
ng a
ll th
e po
ints
Con
nect
ives
kee
ping
the
argu
men
t go
ing
Pre
sent
ing
fact
s ab
out
smok
ing
and
heal
th,a
nd exp
lain
ing
risk
s of
pas
sive
sm
okin
g
Arg
umen
ts in
fav
our
of a
ban
Fai
rnes
s ar
gum
ent
Ela
bora
tion
of ar
gum
ent
wit
h ex
ampl
es
Sp
ellin
gsm
oker
s’ +
peo
ple
’s–
both
plu
ral
but i
n sm
oker
s th
e ‘s
’is
both
pos
sess
ive
and
plur
al s
o th
e ap
ostr
ophe
is a
t the
end
–
in p
eopl
e’s,
the
‘s’i
s on
ly p
osse
ssiv
e
Pre
sent
ten
se
The National Literacy Strategy
27
Supplementary Resources
Sample Text F (continued)
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
potentially toxic fumes. In restaurants and cafes wheresmoking is permitted, customers can have their mealruined by smokers at an adjacent table. Those whoare pressing for a ban on smoking in public complainthat smokers can choose whether to put their ownhealth at risk, but should be prevented from doing thesame to everyone else.
However, many smokers argue that the risks ofpassive smoking are still relatively unproven, and maybe quite minimal. They contest that smoking is nowforbidden in numerous public places, such as shops,trains, many offices and some shopping malls, andthat a further ban would limit their personal freedom.Moreover, they argue that since they pay enormousamounts of tax on each pack of cigarettes, they arecontributing large sums of money to the governmentto help fund hospitals.
As people become more and more health-conscious,it seems unlikely that the bans which currently exist onsmoking in public will be reversed. If the UK followsthe example of the USA as it often does, we may wellsee such bans extended.
Supplementary Resources
Annotated Text F (continued)
The National Literacy Strategy
28
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Text
str
uct
ure
an
d o
rgan
isat
ion
Sen
ten
ce s
tru
ctu
re a
nd
pu
nct
uat
ion
Co
mp
osi
tio
n a
nd
eff
ect
Eco
nom
ical
use
of
lang
uage
red
uces
a lo
t of
deta
il
into
a r
ela
tivel
y sh
ort d
iscu
ssio
n pa
per.
Con
sist
ently
impe
rson
al s
tyle
not
laps
ing
into
hec
torin
g bu
t
mak
ing
forc
eful
ass
ertio
ns.W
ithou
t sta
ting
a
view
poin
t,th
e pi
ece
pred
icts
an
answ
er to
the
ques
tion
‘Will
sm
okin
g be
ban
ned?
’ra
ther
than
‘Sho
uld
smok
ing
be b
anne
d?’
For
mal
lang
uage
Sp
ellin
ggo
vern
men
t– ‘e
rn’
hosp
itals
– ‘a
l’
heal
th–
‘ea’
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate
Sum
mar
ises
arg
umen
ts in
favo
ur o
f a
ban
Pas
sive
,not
sta
ting
who
isre
spon
sibl
e fo
r do
ing
the pr
even
ting
Con
diti
onal
sug
gest
shy
poth
esis
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate
Con
nect
ive
Com
plex
sen
tenc
es
wit
h co
mm
as d
emar
cati
ng end
sof
sub
ordi
nate
cla
uses
Arg
umen
ts a
gain
st a
ban
Q
uest
ions
ass
erti
on a
bout
dan
ger
of p
assi
ve s
mok
ing
(re
f op
enin
gpa
ragr
aph)
Ass
ert
that
sm
oker
s pa
y fo
rth
eir
hosp
ital
car
e th
roug
h ta
xes
(re
f op
enin
g pa
ragr
aph)
Com
men
ts o
n in
evit
abili
ty o
fco
ntin
uing
and
ext
endi
ng b
an w
itho
utre
cour
se t
o fu
rthe
r ar
gum
ent
Con
nect
ive im
plyi
ng con
trad
icti
on
Pas
sive
voi
ce
Rai
ses
issu
es o
f pe
rson
al fre
edom
pote
ntia
lly to
xic
fum
es.I
n re
stau
rant
s an
d ca
fes
whe
resm
okin
g is
per
mitt
ed,c
usto
mer
s ca
n ha
ve th
eir
mea
lru
ined
by
smok
ers
at a
n ad
jace
nt ta
ble.
Tho
se w
hoar
e pr
essi
ng fo
r a
ban
on s
mok
ing
in p
ublic
com
plai
nth
at s
mok
ers
can
choo
se w
heth
er to
put
thei
r ow
nhe
alth
at r
isk,
but s
houl
d be
pre
vent
ed fr
om d
oing
the
sam
e to
eve
ryon
e el
se.
How
ever
,man
y sm
oker
s ar
gue
tha
t the
ris
ks o
fpa
ssiv
e sm
okin
g ar
e st
ill r
ela
tivel
y un
prov
en,a
nd m
aybe
qui
te m
inim
al.T
hey
cont
est t
hat s
mok
ing
is n
owfo
rbid
den
in n
umer
ous
publ
ic p
lace
s,su
ch a
s sh
ops,
trai
ns,m
any
offic
es a
nd s
ome
shop
ping
mal
ls,a
ndth
at a
furt
her
ban
wou
ld li
mit
thei
r pe
rson
al fr
eedo
m.
Mor
eove
r,th
ey a
rgue
tha
t sin
ce th
ey p
ay e
norm
ous
amou
nts
ofta
x on
eac
h pa
ck o
fci
gare
ttes,
they
are
cont
ribut
ing
larg
e su
ms
ofm
oney
to th
e go
vern
men
tto
hel
p fu
nd h
ospi
tals
.
As
peop
le b
ecom
e m
ore
and
mor
e he
alth
-con
scio
us,
it se
ems
unlik
ely
tha
t the
ban
s w
hich
cur
rent
ly e
xist
on
smok
ing
in p
ublic
will
be
reve
rsed
.If
the
UK
follo
ws
the
exam
ple
ofth
e U
SA
as
it of
ten
does
,we
may
wel
lse
e su
ch b
ans
exte
nded
.
The National Literacy Strategy
29
Supplementary Resources
Sample Text G
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Should girls be able to play football inmixed teams after the age of 12?
The mushrooming popularity of women’s football,coupled with the publicity given to the success ofwomen’s teams at home and abroad, has led togreater numbers of girls playing the sport at everylevel. The Football Association (FA) allows girls to play as part of mixed teams up to the age of 12, butwill not permit mixed teams to enter its leaguecompetitions above that age. A number of individualcases have hit the national headlines, promptingquestions about the FA’s stance.
Talented girls turned away from mixed leagues after their 12th birthday complain that this is an old-fashioned ruling, dating from the time when it wasthought wrong for girls to play football at all. The FAresponds that it is inappropriate for adolescents toplay a contact sport in mixed teams. They feel theremight be problems at club level in providing separatechanging rooms.
(continued)
Supplementary Resources
Annotated Text G
The National Literacy Strategy
30
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Sen
ten
ce s
tru
ctu
re a
nd
pu
nct
uat
ion
Text
str
uct
ure
an
d o
rgan
isat
ion
Pre
sent
ten
se
A q
uest
ion
sum
mar
isin
g th
e is
sue
Com
plex
sen
tenc
e su
ccin
ctly
stat
es exp
lana
tion
for
mor
egi
rls
play
ing
foot
ball
For
mal
lang
uage
For
mal
lang
uage
Giv
es fac
tual
det
ail a
nd
expl
ains
why
thi
s is
sue ha
s ar
isen
as
a pr
oblem
Sp
ellin
gw
omen
’s–
alre
ady
plur
al:a
post
roph
e th
en ‘s
’
FA’s
– po
sses
sive
(ne
ver
use
apos
trop
he fo
r pl
ural
)
Pas
sive
voi
ce
mai
ntai
ns t
he for
mal
ity
of a
deb
ate
Par
agra
ph p
rese
nts
argu
men
ts
for
and
agai
nst
Arg
umen
t fo
r m
ixed
tea
ms
Arg
umen
t ag
ains
t an
d ex
plan
atio
n
Sho
uld
girl
s be
abl
e to
pla
y fo
otba
ll in
mix
ed te
ams
afte
r th
e ag
e of
12?
The
mus
hroo
min
g po
pula
rity
ofw
omen
’s fo
otba
ll,co
uple
d w
ith th
e pu
blic
ity g
iven
to th
e su
cces
s of
wom
en’s
team
s a
t hom
e an
d ab
road
,has
led
tog
rea
ter
num
bers
of
girl
s pl
ayin
g th
e sp
ort a
t eve
ryle
vel.
The
Foo
tbal
l Ass
ocia
tion
(FA
) al
low
s gi
rls
to
play
as
part
of
mix
ed te
ams
up to
the
age
of12
,but
will
not
per
mit
mix
ed te
ams
to e
nter
its
leag
ueco
mpe
titio
ns a
bove
tha
t age
.A n
umbe
r of
indi
vidu
alca
ses
have
hit
the
natio
nal h
eadl
ines
,pro
mpt
ing
ques
tions
abo
ut th
e FA
’s s
tanc
e.
Tale
nted
gir
ls tu
rned
aw
ay fr
om m
ixed
leag
ues
afte
r th
eir
12th
bir
thda
y co
mpl
ain
tha
t thi
s is
an
old-
fash
ione
d ru
ling,
datin
g fr
om th
e tim
e w
hen
it w
asth
ough
t wro
ng fo
r gi
rls
to p
lay
foot
ball
at a
ll.T
he F
Are
spon
ds th
at i
t is
inap
prop
riate
for
adol
esce
nts
topl
ay a
con
tact
spo
rt in
mix
ed te
ams.
The
y fe
el th
ere
mig
ht b
e pr
oble
ms
at c
lub
leve
l in
prov
idin
g se
para
tech
angi
ng r
oom
s.
(con
tinue
d)
The National Literacy Strategy
31
Supplementary Resources
Sample Text G (continued)
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Supporters counter that, for the good of the game,players should be picked on merit, regardless ofgender, and that not to do so amounts todiscrimination. However, it could be argued that manyother sports, such as athletics, tennis and swimming,segregate girls and boys at an even earlier age.
The football frenzy inspired by the 2002 World Cuphas resulted in many more children and adultsdeveloping an interest in the game, and this may welllead to greater numbers of girls wanting to playcompetitively. As more girls develop their confidenceand skills in football, it seems likely that the FA willcome under increasing pressure to reconsider its ban.
Supplementary Resources
Annotated Text G (continued)
The National Literacy Strategy
32
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Text
str
uct
ure
an
d o
rgan
isat
ion
Sen
ten
ce s
tru
ctu
re a
nd
pu
nct
uat
ion
Sup
port
ers
coun
ter
tha
t,fo
r th
e go
od o
fth
e ga
me,
play
ers
shou
ld b
e pi
cked
on
mer
it,re
gard
less
of
gend
er,a
nd th
at n
ot to
do
so a
mou
nts
todi
scrim
ina
tion.
How
ever
,it c
ould
be
argu
ed th
at m
any
othe
r sp
orts
,suc
h as
ath
letic
s,te
nnis
and
sw
imm
ing,
seg
rega
te g
irls
and
boy
s a
t an
even
ear
lier
age.
The
foot
ball
fren
zy in
spire
d by
the
2002
Wor
ld C
upha
s re
sulte
d in
man
y m
ore
child
ren
and
adul
tsde
velo
ping
an
inte
rest
in th
e ga
me,
and
this
may
wel
lle
ad to
gre
ate
r nu
mbe
rs o
fgi
rls
wan
ting
to p
lay
com
petit
ivel
y.A
s m
ore
girl
s de
velo
p th
eir
confi
denc
ean
d sk
ills
in fo
otba
ll,it
seem
s lik
ely
tha
t the
FA
will
com
e un
der
incr
easi
ng p
ress
ure
to r
econ
side
r its
ban
.
Co
mp
osi
tio
n a
nd
eff
ect
Leve
l of
form
ality
tem
pere
d by
jour
nalis
tic to
ne
such
as
‘hit
the
head
lines
’and
wor
ds s
uch
as
‘old
-fas
hion
ed’(
arch
aic
wou
ld h
ave
been
mor
e
form
al),
‘foot
ball
fren
zy’.
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate
Arg
umen
t fo
r a
basi
s of
dis
crim
inat
ion
Com
mas
dem
arca
ting
addi
tion
al in
form
atio
n
Con
nect
ive su
gges
ting
cont
radi
ctio
n
Con
diti
onal
for
m s
ugge
sts
a hy
poth
esis
Con
nect
ive su
gges
ting
ca
usal
link
For
mal
lang
uage
Arg
umen
t ag
ains
t,clai
min
got
her
spor
ts a
re in
sam
e po
siti
onan
d al
so d
iscr
imin
ate
Sug
gest
s de
bate
is li
ve
and
that
FA
may
be fo
rced
to
reco
nsid
er t
he s
tatu
s qu
o
Sp
ellin
gco
mp
etiti
vely
– co
mpe
titio
n
pre
ssur
e–
‘ssu
re’–
‘ure
’(un
stre
ssed
vow
el)
dev
elop
– no
‘e’
The National Literacy Strategy
33
Supplementary Resources
Sample Text H
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
How wrong was Goldilocks?
When young children are told the story of ‘Goldilocksand the three bears’, it is unlikely that they spendmuch time considering the behaviour of thecharacters. However, like many children’s stories, thistale does raise important questions about right andwrong that deserve consideration.
It could be argued that Goldilocks must have known itwas wrong to go into someone else’s house when shewas not invited and they were out. In helping herself totheir food, breaking one of their chairs and climbingon all of their beds, she was doing one wrong thingafter another, yet she seems not to care what damageshe is causing or how the owners of the propertymight feel. This is very irresponsible behaviour.Furthermore, when the bears discover her in theirhouse and very reasonably demand to know why sheis there, she makes no attempt to explain or apologise,but simply runs away.
(continued)
Supplementary Resources
Annotated Text H
The National Literacy Strategy
34
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
How
wro
ng w
as G
oldi
lock
s?
Whe
n yo
ung
child
ren
are
told
the
stor
y of
‘Gol
dilo
cks
and
the
thre
e be
ars’
,it i
s un
likel
y th
at t
hey
spen
dm
uch
time
cons
ider
ing
the
beha
viou
r of
the
char
acte
rs.H
owev
er,l
ike
man
y ch
ildre
n’s
stor
ies,
this
tale
doe
s ra
ise
impo
rtan
t que
stio
ns a
bout
rig
ht a
ndw
rong
tha
t des
erve
con
side
ratio
n.
It co
uld
be a
rgue
d th
at G
oldi
lock
s m
ust h
ave
know
n it
was
wro
ng to
go
into
som
eone
els
e’s
hous
e w
hen
she
was
not
invi
ted
and
they
wer
e ou
t.In
hel
ping
her
self
toth
eir
food
,bre
akin
g on
e of
thei
r ch
airs
and
clim
bing
on a
ll of
thei
r be
ds,s
he w
as d
oing
one
wro
ng th
ing
afte
r an
othe
r,ye
t she
see
ms
not t
o ca
re w
hat d
amag
esh
e is
cau
sing
or
how
the
owne
rs o
fth
e pr
oper
tym
ight
feel
.Thi
s is
ver
y ir
resp
onsi
ble
beha
viou
r.F
urth
erm
ore,
whe
n th
e be
ars
disc
over
her
in th
eir
hous
e an
d ve
ry r
easo
nabl
y de
man
d to
kno
w w
hy s
heis
ther
e,sh
e m
akes
no
atte
mpt
to e
xpla
in o
r ap
olog
ise,
but s
impl
y ru
ns a
way
.
(con
tinue
d)
Text
str
uct
ure
an
d o
rgan
isat
ion
Sen
ten
ce s
tru
ctu
re a
nd
pu
nct
uat
ion
Tit
le s
umm
ing
up t
he is
sue
unde
r di
scus
sion
Intr
oduc
tory
par
agra
ph est
ablis
hes
that
the st
ory
rais
es a
mor
al q
uest
ion
Sp
ellin
gim
por
tant
–‘m
’– ‘a
nt’
unst
ress
ed v
owel
exp
lain
– lik
e co
mpl
ain
wro
ng–
‘w’
Pas
sive
voi
ce p
utti
ng chi
ldre
n as
the
impo
rtan
t su
bjec
t of
the
sen
tenc
e
Com
plex
sen
tenc
e:su
bord
inat
e clau
sese
para
ted
from
mai
n clau
se b
y a
com
ma
Con
nect
ive op
enin
g po
ssib
ility
tha
t th
ere m
ay b
e an
issu
e
For
mal
lang
uage
of de
bate
Lon
g,co
mpl
ex s
ente
nce wit
h co
mm
asde
mon
stra
ting
gra
mm
atical
boun
dari
es a
nd con
nect
ive ‘
yet’
toex
tend
the
sen
tenc
e fu
rthe
r
Str
ong
asse
rtio
n
Con
nect
ive su
gges
ting
ac
cum
ulat
ing
reas
ons
Com
plex
sen
tenc
e st
arti
ng w
ith
subo
rdin
ate clau
se s
epar
ated
by a
com
ma
Arg
umen
ts t
hat
Gol
dilo
cks
dese
rves
bla
me
Lis
ts G
oldi
lock
s’wro
ngdo
ings
Cri
ticism
of be
havi
our
Cri
ticism
of he
r re
acti
on
The National Literacy Strategy
35
Supplementary Resources
Sample Text H (continued)
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
However, it must be remembered that Goldilocks wasonly a young child, and may not have realised that itwas wrong to enter a house where the door had beenleft open. She broke the chair quite accidentally afterall, and since small children usually have their mealsprovided for them, she may have thought that shewas allowed to eat food left out on the table. As torunning away, this was the understandable reaction ofa frightened young child.
In conclusion, although Goldilocks did do thingswhich were plainly wrong, it is important to considerher parents’ role in all of this. Why did they allow asmall girl to go wandering off on her own? Why hadthey not taught her basic rules of safety, such asnever to go into strangers’ houses? It is the parentswho are ultimately responsible, and it is to be hopedthat both they and Goldilocks learnt a valuable lessonfrom this experience.
Supplementary Resources
Annotated Text H (continued)
The National Literacy Strategy
36
Year 6 Planning Exemplification 2002–2003:
Argument Unit
Text
str
uct
ure
an
d o
rgan
isat
ion
Sen
ten
ce s
tru
ctu
re a
nd
pu
nct
uat
ion
Co
mp
osi
tio
n a
nd
eff
ect
A c
onve
rsa
tion
is m
aint
aine
d in
this
text
,by
the
auth
or w
ith th
e au
thor
– m
akin
g po
ints
and
then
prov
idin
g co
unte
r ar
gum
ents
.An
elem
ent o
firo
ny
runs
thro
ugh
the
text
,hei
ghte
ning
in th
e co
nclu
sion
whe
n th
e pa
rent
s ar
e bl
amed
.The
rea
der
is
appe
aled
to in
the
ques
tions
in th
e co
nclu
sion
.
Con
nect
ive su
gges
ting
ch
ange
in d
irec
tion
Arg
umen
ts a
gain
st b
lam
ing
Gol
dilo
cks
Sp
ellin
g
acci
den
tally
–ac
cide
nt
acci
dent
al
frig
hten
ed–
frig
ht/f
right
en/fr
ight
ened
stra
nger
s’–
apos
trop
he a
fter
‘s’p
lura
l
Pas
sive
voi
ce(ch
ildre
n ar
e im
port
ant
– n
ot t
hepr
ovid
er o
f th
e fo
od)
Impe
rson
al la
ngua
ge
Lan
guag
e of
deb
ate
Use
of qu
esti
ons
to p
rovo
ke d
ebat
e
Impe
rson
al la
ngua
ge
Ela
bora
tes
wit
h ex
ampl
e
Res
pond
s to
arg
umen
t in
pre
viou
spa
ragr
aph
Ack
nowledg
es a
rgum
ents
of pr
evio
uspa
ragr
aph
and
intr
oduc
es n
ew a
rgum
ent
wit
h whi
ch it
con
clud
es
How
ever
,it m
ust b
e re
mem
bere
d th
at G
oldi
lock
s w
ason
ly a
you
ng c
hild
,and
may
not
hav
e re
alis
ed th
at i
tw
as w
rong
to e
nter
a h
ouse
whe
re th
e do
or h
ad b
een
left
open
.She
bro
ke th
e ch
air
quite
acc
iden
tally
afte
ral
l,an
d si
nce
smal
l chi
ldre
n us
ually
hav
e th
eir
mea
lspr
ovid
ed fo
r th
em,s
he m
ay h
ave
thou
ght t
hat s
hew
as a
llow
ed to
ea
t foo
d le
ft ou
t on
the
tabl
e.A
s to
runn
ing
away
,thi
s w
as th
e un
ders
tand
able
rea
ctio
n of
a fr
ight
ened
you
ng c
hild
.
In c
oncl
usio
n,al
thou
gh G
oldi
lock
s di
d do
thin
gsw
hich
wer
e pl
ainl
y w
rong
,it i
s im
port
ant t
o co
nsid
erhe
r pa
rent
s’ro
le in
all
ofth
is.W
hy d
id th
ey a
llow
asm
all g
irl t
o go
wan
derin
g of
fon
her
ow
n? W
hy h
adth
ey n
ot ta
ught
her
bas
ic r
ules
of
safe
ty,s
uch
asne
ver
to g
o in
to s
tran
gers
’hou
ses?
It is
the
pare
nts
who
are
ulti
ma
tely
res
pons
ible
,and
it is
to b
e ho
ped
tha
t bot
h th
ey a
nd G
oldi
lock
s le
arnt
a v
alua
ble
less
onfr
om th
is e
xper
ienc
e.
Con
nect
ive,
hold
ing
the te
xt t
oget
her