Lesson Report:
Title
Building Argumentative Essays: From Convincing Claims to Structured Drafts
In this workshop-style session, students moved from identifying what makes an argument convincing to building a clear essay structure (thesis → sub-claims → evidence). Using Bruegel’s “Hunters in the Snow� as a shared text, the class practiced breaking a central claim into body-paragraph arguments and supporting details, then mapped this to a four-paragraph academic essay. The instructor also clarified expectations, timelines, and in-class-only drafting policies to reduce anxiety and ensure original work.
Attendance
Number of students mentioned absent: 0
Topics covered (chronological progression)
1) Opening and day plan
– Framing: Today is dedicated to academic essay writing.
– Schedule for the day:
– Session 1: Revise prewritten paragraphs and learn paragraph/essay structure.
– Session 2: Write the first draft in class (ungraded; diagnostic only).
– Session 3: Peer review of the draft for strengths and areas to improve.
– Submission timeline and constraints:
– Final essay due Tuesday.
– No work on drafts over the weekend (all drafting/revision must occur in class).
– Monday: at least two in-class revision activities; finalize and submit end of Monday or start of Tuesday (to be confirmed).
2) Private free write(s) to warm up thinking
– Free write 1 (choose-your-own-topic). Optional fallback prompt: “Most overrated character in a movie or TV show.â€�
– Free write 2 (bridge to argumentation): Describe a specific argument you found convincing (source could be a friend, parent, social media, etc.) and explain why it persuaded you.
3) What makes an argument convincing? Class brainstorm with examples
– Credibility/credentials and citation:
– Example: A YouTube presenter discussing free will, supported by “many science researchers,â€� felt persuasive because expertise and sources conferred authority.
– Confidence and passion (persuasive tone):
– Example: Friends asking to borrow money often persuade because of confident delivery and perceived trustworthiness.
– Clarity and logic:
– Example: Parent’s leadership analogy (leader as “head,â€� group as “body;â€� workers as “arms/legsâ€�) made the point easy to grasp; logical structure increased trust.
– Intuitiveness (“why didn’t I think of that?â€�):
– Example: Audience-interactive performance idea (letting viewers choose plot actions) seemed immediately sensible and outcome-oriented (builds engagement to “winâ€�).
– Relatability and lived experience:
– Example: Sister’s advice “don’t lose hopeâ€� resonated because the student experienced its effectiveness firsthand.
– Evidence vs. credibility (distinguished as related but not identical):
– Evidence: Concrete support (“look at these data/examplesâ€�).
– Credibility: The arguer’s qualifications or reliable sourcing.
– Takeaway: Effective arguments often combine these elements—clear ideas, credible sources, confident delivery, intuitive appeal, relatability, and evidence.
4) Reducing anxiety about the essay; instructor’s criteria and policies
– Purpose: Diagnostic to see current writing skills, not to test for perfect English.
– Primary evaluation criteria:
– Can you follow instructions in English?
– Is your writing comprehensible (ideas are understandable)?
– Did you produce the work yourself (originality)?
– Placement reassurance:
– Minor grammar or word choice issues will not trigger Intensive English placement.
– New policy (as stated): Students placed in Intensive English can still take FYS concurrently.
– AI/originality reminder:
– Past problem: High rates of AI-generated submissions made meaningful feedback impossible.
– Expectation now: Original student writing only; the class is structured to complete work in class to support this.
– Logistics reiteration:
– First draft written in class today (ungraded).
– Monday: guided in-class revisions (no weekend drafting).
– Final due Tuesday.
5) Modeling claim → sub-claims → evidence using Bruegel’s “Hunters in the Snow�
– Central thesis used for modeling: “The joy of the many depends on the hardship of the few.â€�
– Conceptual setup:
– Two broad groups in the painting:
– Workers (hunters, wood gatherers, fire tenders, people hauling supplies).
– Enjoyers (skaters, sledders, people socializing on the ice).
– Question: Why does the joy of the many depend on the hardship of the few?
– Sub-claim 1: The world is naturally harsh; without some people’s struggle, none would be comfortable.
– Workers provide others with time to enjoy life.
– Evidence/examples:
– Hunting is time-intensive (start early, return late; or trap-making and checking—also time-consuming).
– If everyone had to hunt/forage, nobody would have time to skate or socialize; they’d be searching for food or protecting themselves.
– Sub-claim 2: Workers supply the materials that make comfort possible.
– Evidence/examples:
– Hunters provide meat (a filling, sustaining food source not easily replaced by garden scraps).
– Wood gatherers supply fuel for fire (heat for health and comfort; cooking; prevention of illness from cold).
– Delivery/transport (e.g., a man with a horse) saves community time and ensures resources reach households.
– Consequence reasoning:
– Without workers: hunger, cold, illness, safety risks, and loss of leisure.
– With workers: others gain both the time and the materials needed for comfort and joy.
– Structural takeaway: A strong essay starts with a clear thesis, breaks into focused sub-claims, and supports each sub-claim with concrete, relevant evidence.
6) Essay architecture and process guidance
– Minimum structure for this assignment:
– Four paragraphs: Introduction, Body 1, Body 2, Conclusion.
– Quality over quantity: Two strong body paragraphs are better than three weak ones (unless prompt requires three).
– “Burgerâ€� analogy for paragraph balance:
– Intro and conclusion = “breadâ€� (short, similar size).
– Body paragraphs = “meatâ€� (substantial, detailed).
– Visual check: If the intro/conclusion dwarf the bodies, the essay is likely underdeveloped in argumentation.
– Time management and outlining:
– Do not start by composing the full essay immediately.
– Begin with a brief outline: thesis, body paragraph sub-claims, and key evidence for each.
– Budget time evenly so the second body paragraph and conclusion are not rushed.
– Body paragraph anatomy:
– Topic sentence: Announces the paragraph’s main point (e.g., “Workers provide others the time to be comfortable.â€�).
– Supporting details/evidence: Specific, observable examples (e.g., hunters’ time-consuming labor; wood collection/delivery).
– Concluding sentence: Restates/synthesizes the paragraph’s main point to avoid abrupt endings and improve cohesion.
– Transitions:
– To be addressed during revision activities; today’s focus is on main ideas and evidence mapping.
– Length guidance (suggested):
– Intro/conclusion: ~4–5 sentences each.
– Body paragraphs: ~5–6 sentences each.
7) Guided practice: break one argument into two sub-arguments
– Task: Students took yesterday’s paragraph and split their argument into two clear sub-claims (as modeled with “timeâ€� and “materialsâ€�) and identified specific evidence for each.
– Work time: ~10 minutes before a short break.
– Clarifications:
– The new draft will be on a fresh prompt (related to recent discussions but not yet used).
– All drafting and revision occur in class only.
Actionable items
Urgent: Before Session 2 (today’s in-class drafting)
– Finalize and distribute the specific essay prompt (new but thematically connected to recent discussions).
– Provide an outline template (thesis; Body 1 sub-claim + 2–3 evidence points; Body 2 sub-claim + 2–3 evidence points; concluding insight).
– Prepare and communicate “in-class-onlyâ€� workflow:
– Decide whether to collect physical drafts or lock LMS edits outside class to prevent weekend work.
– Set up peer-review logistics for Session 3:
– Assign pairs/triads and share a checklist (followed instructions; clear thesis; strong topic sentences; relevant evidence; concluding sentences present; originality).
Next class (Monday) – planned mini-lessons and supports
– Mini-lesson on transitions between paragraphs and within paragraphs (cohesion and flow).
– Quick review of citation basics vs. credibility (how to reference evidence appropriately at this level).
– Provide a concise rubric aligned to stated criteria (follow instructions, comprehensibility, originality, evidence use).
General follow-ups
– Confirm with program/volunteers the policy that Intensive English can be taken concurrently with FYS; communicate any updates to the class.
– Reinforce time budgeting and outlining at the start of drafting to prevent overlong introductions and rushed conclusions.
– No homework assigned (per in-class-only policy), but remind students of Tuesday final deadline and that Monday features dedicated revision time.
Homework Instructions:
NO HOMEWORK
The instructor states that all drafting, revision, and peer review will occur in class and explicitly says “we are not allowed to let you work on your drafts over the weekend we have to keep everything in class,� with final essays to be submitted “either at the end of Monday or the beginning of Tuesday.�