AP Language
Re-introduction to Argumentation
To re-familiarize ourselves with the art of argument this week, we will read about argument, learn more about logical
fallacy (so we can avoid it), and finally conduct a debate.
Standards Addressed:
CBAPELC LO3—create and sustain arguments based on readings, research, and/or personal experience
ELACC12SL1: Initiate and participate effectively in a range of collaborative discussions(one-on-one, in groups, and
teacher-led) with diverse partners on grades 11-12 topics, texts, and issues, building on others’ ideas and expressing their
own clearly and persuasively.
a. Come to discussions prepared, having read and researched material under study; explicitly draw on that preparation by
referring to evidence from texts and other research on the topic or issue to stimulate a thoughtful, well-reasoned exchange
of ideas.
b. Work with peers to set rules for collegial discussions and decision-making, set clear goals and deadlines, and establish
individual roles as needed.
c. Propel conversations by posing and responding to questions that probe reasoning and evidence; ensure a hearing for a
full range of positions on a topic or issue; clarify, verify, or challenge ideas and conclusions; and promote divergent and
creative perspectives.
d. Respond thoughtfully to diverse perspectives; synthesize comments, claims, and evidence made on all sides of an issue;
resolve contradictions when possible; and determine what additional information or research is required to deepen the
investigation or complete the task.
ELACC12SL2: Integrate multiple sources of information presented in diverse formats and media (e.g., visually,
quantitatively, orally) in order to make informed decisions and solve problems, evaluating the credibility and accuracy of
each source and noting any discrepancies among the data.
ELACC12SL3: Evaluate a speaker’s point of view, reasoning, and use of evidence and rhetoric, assessing the stance,
premises, links among ideas, word choice, points of emphasis, and tone used.
Schedule
Tuesday, November 11
Argumentation readings: Patterns pp. 547-572.
Immigration Reform readings: Patterns pp. 648-676
Wednesday, November 12
Lab: Create Logical Fallacies presentations
Thursday, November 13
Present Logical Fallacy topics
Friday, November 14
Immigration reform readings due (Patterns pp. 648-676 and at least two other internet articles about the topic)
Immigration Reform debate team work—prepare the arguments
Tuesday, November 18
Immigration Reform Debates
Partners (heterogeneous pairs based on TW scores for argument and synthesis)
3rd Period
5th Period
Logical Fallacy Topic
Immigration Reform
Debate Side
(One per block—Affirmative,
Negative, or Judge)
Emily D., Sydnie, Austin
Jillian, Ricky
Brittany, Maisha
Austin, Mia
Brittany, Rachel T.
Danielle, Grace
Begging the Question (Tautology)
Argument from Analogy
Ad Hominem (Personal Attack)
Alex, Todd
Cara, Brenna
Reilly, Jordan
Olivia, Noah Q.
Kameryn, Emma
Katie, Noah M.
Hasty Generalization (Bad Example)
False Dilemma (False Choice)
Equivocation
Grant, Ashley
Ryan, Bradley
Heather, Olivia
Maddy, Keeley Beth
Haley, Charlie
Bailey, Brandon D.
Red Herring
You Also (Tu Quoque)
Appeal to Doubtful Authority
Parker, Emily
Sam, Jake
Brooke, Aubrey
Rachel N., Brandon B.
Matthew, Mary Kate
James, Allison
Misleading Statistics
Post Hoc, Ego Propter Hoc
Non Sequitur
Logical Fallacy Topic Presentations
Each pair will research the assigned logical fallacy and prepare a 5-minute digital and interactive presentation about the
fallacy.
 Digital presentation might include video clips, political cartoons, or song clips to enhance the definition and
demonstration of the fallacy. Example: https://prezi.com/h_yw58asggal/slippery-slope/
 Interactive content must engage the audience in creation or identification of the fallacy. Example:
http://www.davidagler.com/teaching/criticalthinking/handouts/Handout12_SlipperySlopeArguments.pdf (see the
bottom of the handout)
Immigration Reform Debates
Read “Grab and Go Debate Unit” from SEDA (Saskatchewan Elocution and Debate Association).
http://www.saskdebate.com/media/3101/grab%20and%20go%20debate%20unit.pdf
Read “It’s Debatable” pp. 5, 6, 7, 13, 18, 20 http://www.saskdebate.com/media/13755/itsdebatableunit.pdf
Within the partners block, each set of partners will choose whether they will be the Affirmative side, the Negative side, or
the Judges for the contest. All pairs must be familiar will all pieces of evidence—both from Patterns and from all articles
contributed by classmates.
Affirmative and Negative sides will craft their evidence cards and constructive speech worksheets. Both sides must be
familiar with the structure of the debate in order to work within the time parameters. Both sides will take notes on a Flow
Sheet both before and during the debate.
Judges will comb through all evidence in an effort to guard themselves against logical fallacy and prepare to hear the
arguments. Judges must be familiar with the structure of the debate in order to be able to time the debate properly.
Deliverables to Turn in After Debate: Evidence Cards, Constructive Speech Worksheets, Flow Sheets, Scoring Ballots,
Internet Articles