To think "Persuasive Writing" lessons shouldn't encourage students to make up 'facts' and statistics?

[diagonallies]

My two DCs have both had several English lessons on the topic of persuasive writing in both primary and secondary school. These have focussed on persuasive techniques, but every time they have been told it's fine to make up some statistics or facts to strengthen their argument, presumably on the grounds that it's an English lesson, not a science lesson or a lesson on critical thinking.

But surely critical thinking should be at the heart of everything our children learn at school? If it's ok for future journalists, politicians, bloggers and advertising copywriters to make up persuasive stats in their English essays, then can we really be confident they will ever unlearn that?

diagonallies
Whether that was an appropriate decision depends on whether they are doing 'write speech' in class or whether the task was to research an area and prepare a speech.

It's not a difficult thing to get your head around. Is this a research project where I need appropriate evidence of is it a writing exercise to demonstrate specific skills?

Maybe my students are unusual in being able to tell the difference.

she plans to do a STEM subject at uni, where referencing will be mandated, but unfortunately that's not the case for most young people.

It is in Science lessons. And Maths. and Geography. And lots of other lessons. Including English. Just not when demonstrating a certain writing technique.

If you want to get worked up about something in secondary schools maybe focus on the wordy questions in Maths that kids with ASD find difficult to access even if they're competent mathematicians.

Maybe the lack of tiered papers in most subjects.

Maybe the removal of single science GCSE.

Hooefully my DD will learn to do it later, because she plans to do a STEM subject at uni, where referencing will be mandated, but unfortunately that's not the case for most young people.
STEM has nothing to do with it.
Referencing starts as a requirement for A Level coursework, many level 3 vocational courses (e.g. childcare) also state it and it is part of all degrees.

You do realise that having critical literacy skills is different to referencing? Most people don't need to do referencing but are still capable of critical thinking and reading critically.

It's not a difficult thing to get your head around. Is this a research project where I need appropriate evidence of is it a writing exercise to demonstrate specific skills?

Maybe my students are unusual in being able to tell the difference.

Maybe OP's English lessons weren't very good hence why she cannot tell the difference

In the English curriculum, finding supporting evidence is a reading skill. So your dd is being taught it. In the real world, tasks are not separated into reading and writing in this way, but for the purposes of school assessment, in primary and secondary education they are.

It is a continual source of bafflement to me, that post GCSE, students do actually seem to be able to combine these skills for real-world tasks and college assignments. Amazing.

Referencing is a necessary part of literally any university subject, not just STEM. I doubt her academic career is going to be compromised because of a persuasive writing class where she was allowed to invent statistics.

I teach Level 3 BTEC Performing Arts (6th Form) I teach them to reference correctly as part of that. They don’t necessarily need to be able to do so before then.

diagonallies

I think you are forgetting that it’s “horses for courses”, OP. Of course students need to be taught to reference. But for English they also need to be taught - as a priority - to use certain pieces of information in certain ways, in this case, rhetorically. The point isn’t whether the “fact” is real or not but how effectively the student manages to deploy it. Yes, you could spend hours of the available curriculum time fact-checking, but it would take away from the effectiveness of your teaching of rhetoric and persuasion.

VivienneHolt
But it will. You see some writing exercises in class are behind local campaigns for housing development, Brexit and fake news.

The world is going down the drain because someone somewhere said you could write '75% of teens said they had witnessed bullying in their school'.

I'm very uncomfortable about students getting extra marks for making up a stat - there will be many students who would struggle (with their concience) to do that, even if their teacher had said it was ok. Children on the autistic spectrum would find it especially difficult

Jesus. We aren’t teaching them to fraudulently apply for exam results. We’re teaching them that if you back up the point you’ve made sensibly with some numbers, it makes it more convincing. I have taught dozens of children with ASD and not one of them has had an issue with it, any more than they have an issue with making up an address if the writing task is a letter.

Of ALL the things to get excited about....

We’re teaching them that if you back up the point you’ve made sensibly with some numbers, it makes it more convincing

It's the "sensibly" bit that's at issue. The responses on this thread demonstrate that some teachers are more sensible than others.

Thankyou to the sensible ones! .

99% of teachers don't care if you think they're sensible or not.

t's the "sensibly" bit that's at issue. The responses on this thread demonstrate that some teachers are more sensible than others

I’ve not seen any teachers suggesting using silly statistics?

Me neither smile.
There's a bit of back tracking going on.

Yes, it's not sensible to focus on teaching the right skills for the exam, is it. Let's teach them something they cannot do in the exam instead. Perfectly sensible.

Yes, it's not sensible to focus on teaching the right skills for the exam, is it. Let's teach them something they cannot do in the exam instead. Perfectly sensible.

Some of the more sensible teachers on this thread clearly believe in teaching skills for life, and for the benefit of society, rather than just teaching to the test.

diagonallies

But you also do need to teach them the skills needed for the test. That’s not “teaching to the test”. “Teaching to the test” is when you only teach them the answers to questions you know are going to be on the test, not when you teach them so they can... you know, get a GCSE.

Some of the more sensible teachers on this thread clearly believe in teaching skills for life, and for the benefit of society, rather than just teaching to the test. smile

😂😂😂

diagonallies

Skills for life. Ok.

Do you think that GCSE English classes - where we have perhaps 5 lessons a week to teach Language and Literature- is the time to be teaching skills for life?

Or do you think it might be more useful to the children that we teach them how to do as well as they can in the GCSE that they have to sit, and that they will have to keep on sitting until they pass?

What do you think?

This thread

Can you just teach to the test in an English GCSE OP when you don't know what the topics or questions are going to be? It's not like we cover 'sailing' or 'celebrity' or 'surfing' as that is the question. We cover skills that can be adapted to exams and also 'real life'.

God, there is so much wrong in our education system. Teaching children it is okay to make up stuff to demonstrate their competence at a particular writing technique is so academically obtuse that it is bound to fly over the heads of a good number of children. We spend so long teaching children the humanities that at least they can try and do it properly.

Hopoindown31

Of course it is. The successful child adapts what they have learnt from other subjects to create a “fictional” non-fiction piece in an exam context. It’s fine.

This thread has given me a headache! People who know little to nothing about the skills needed to do well in a GCSE English language exam giving English teachers ideas on how to do it better 😂.

Are the students supposed to leave the exam hall to check their statistics on corruption in sport? And then reference them? That’s NOT what they are required to do and will not maximise their grades!

Maybe leave the professionals to it?

Kids aren't stupid. They know that what they are doing is demonstrating a technique. They also know that if it were real, the stats would be real. Why should they lose marks in an exam because they can't come up with a true fact about why people should holiday in the UK, or why plastic bottles should be banned.

You're not giving them enough credit.

I have a degree in English and didn't properly cover referencing until i was an undergraduate