Years 9–10 · English · Advanced craft laboratory

Lesson 6: Ethical Persuasion — Claim, Evidence, Reasoning, and Appeal

Build a proportionate proposal from a supplied fictional evidence set without laundering certainty or emotion.

Ngā Whāinga Akoranga | Learning intentions

We are learning to: combine credible evidence, reasoning, audience awareness, and proportionate appeal in a persuasive text.

Success evidence: I can state a supportable claim, explain how evidence bears on it, acknowledge a counterargument, and calibrate a call to action.

Te Whakatakotoranga | Run of show

  1. Notice — what the evidence permits 6 min
  2. Model — reason between evidence and action 10 min
  3. Guided test — audit rhetoric for integrity 13 min
  4. Independent writing — draft a proportionate proposal 20 min
  5. Reader evidence and revision — challenge the strongest sentence 8 min
  6. Exit — say what remains unknown 3 min

Total: 60 minutes.

Tirohanga whānui | Teaching focus

Ethos, pathos, and logos are relationships in an argument, not decorations to insert. The workshop makes learners distinguish evidence from inference and prohibits claims stronger than the supplied data.

You’ll need

  • Workshop 6 learner page, printed or open digitally.
  • Display the fictional late-library evidence set and label it clearly as invented.
  • Prepare five headings: claim, evidence, reasoning, counterargument, action.

Original mentor material

Fictional evidence set: “In a school-made survey, 84 of 120 respondents said a later Thursday library closing would help them study; 18 disagreed and 18 were unsure. The proposal requires one staff member for 45 extra minutes.” These figures exist only for this lesson.

Notice — what the evidence permits 6 min

Run it

  1. Calculate no new percentages; instead, paraphrase what each count does and does not show.
  2. Cross out three overclaims: “everyone agrees”, “this will fix achievement”, and “there is no downside”.
  3. Name the reader—a principal deciding whether to trial the proposal—and anticipate one reasonable concern.

Model — reason between evidence and action 10 min

Run it

  1. Write a precise claim for a four-week trial, not permanent adoption.
  2. Add the missing warrant: why reported usefulness is relevant to testing later access.
  3. Acknowledge staffing cost before making a modest action request.

Guided test — audit rhetoric for integrity 13 min

Run it

  1. Groups label claim, evidence, reasoning, credibility, emotion, counterargument, and action in a model paragraph.
  2. Remove a rhetorical question that adds heat but no reasoning.
  3. Replace one vague “studies show” phrase with the actual supplied evidence and its limit.

Independent writing — draft a proportionate proposal 20 min

Run it

  1. Write 220–280 words to the fictional principal.
  2. Use the evidence set, one reasoned counterargument response, and a feasible call to action.
  3. Annotate where ethos, pathos, and logos arise from the argument rather than merely naming them.

Reader evidence and revision — challenge the strongest sentence 8 min

Run it

  1. A reader underlines the claim that sounds strongest and asks whether the evidence supports it.
  2. The writer narrows, qualifies, or better explains that claim.
  3. Record why the revised version is more credible, even if less dramatic.

Exit — say what remains unknown 3 min

Run it

  1. Add one honest limitation the proposal should carry into a trial.

Ngā huarahi ako | Differentiation

Tautoko / Support

  • Provide the five-part argument frame and sentence starters for concession.
  • Allow oral rehearsal of claim and warrant before drafting.

Toitoi / Extension

  • Write for a second audience and explain which structural or tonal changes are ethically necessary.
  • Distinguish a compelling appeal from an emotionally manipulative one.

Mana, safety, and writer choice

The scenario and data are explicitly fictional. Learners do not survey peers, disclose study barriers, or claim real school policy without evidence.

Hononga marautanga | Curriculum

"Persuasive texts aim to convince the reader to agree with a particular point of view, take an action, or adopt a certain belief; they use a combination of emotional appeal (pathos), logical reasoning (logos), and credible evidence (ethos)."

"Language features (emotive language, rhetorical questions, inclusive language, statistics), structural features (thesis statement, counter-arguments, conclusion with a call to action), and stylistic features (assertive tone, direct address) shape how ideas are conveyed and how readers engage with persuasive texts."

The lesson teaches the persuasive purpose and features through an evidence-constrained proposal, counterargument, and call to action.

Sources and authority