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