Thinking/Writing Unit Argumentative Thinking/Writing Unit

Learning Target 1/6/16: Students will listen to episode 1 “Alibi” of Serial and take notes to begin constructing an argument as to whether or not Adnan killed Hae Min.

Listening Notes: Building Your Case *While listening to episode 1 “Alibi” of Serial, it is critical that you take notes on all the details of the case that will allow you to build an argumentative case for your essay.

Adnan Syed Hae Min Lee Cristina Gutierrez (Adnan’s lawyer) Jay Wilds (Adnan’s friend) Asia McClain (witness seen in library) Rabia Chaudry (Adnan’s family friend) Saad Chaudry (Adnan’s friend – Rabia’s son) Sarah Koenig (narrator)

Sarah Koenig: Narrator

Rabia Chaudry: Adnan’s Family Friend

Jay Wild

Hae Min Lee

Google Earth Map of Baltimore https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3142317,-76.7678228,17097m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

mosque, foundation, adamant, staunch, tangible, alibi, confide, affidavit, undermine, discredit, bloodhound, trawling, diligence, heinous, elation, manipulate

- Answer the following questions in your packet: Homework For Friday: - Finish listening, completing vocab, and taking notes on episode 1 “Alibi” - Answer the following questions in your packet: 1. What portrait has Sarah Koenig (narrator) painted of Adnan – based on the interviews she has featured in episode 1? 2. What is your reaction to Jay’s story of what happened to Hae Min Lee? Compare and contrast Jay’s timeline of events and to Adnan’s. Who do you think is lying and why? 3. What more information do you need to know from the subsequent episodes?

Argumentative Thinking/Writing Skills: 1. Propel conversations by posing and responding to questions that relate the current discussion to broader themes or larger ideas; actively incorporate others into the discussion; and clarify, verify, or challenge ideas and conclusions. 2. Respond thoughtfully to diverse perspectives, summarize points of agreement and disagreement, and, when warranted, qualify or justify their own views and understanding and make new connections in light of the evidence and reasoning presented. 3. Integrate multiple sources of information presented in diverse media or formats (e.g., visually, quantitatively, orally) evaluating the credibility and accuracy of each source. 4. Evaluate a speaker’s point of view, reasoning, and use of evidence and rhetoric, identifying any fallacious reasoning or exaggerated or distorted evidence.

1. Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence. a. Introduce precise claim(s), distinguish the claim(s) from alternate or opposing claims, and create an organization that establishes clear relationships among claim(s), counterclaims, reasons, and evidence. b. Develop claim(s) and counterclaims fairly, supplying evidence for each while pointing out the strengths and limitations of both in a manner that anticipates the audience’s knowledge level and concerns. c. Use words, phrases, and clauses to link the major sections of the text, create cohesion, and clarify the relationships between claim(s) and reasons, between reasons and evidence, and between claim(s) and counterclaims. d. Establish and maintain a formal style and objective tone while attending to the norms and conventions of the discipline in which they are writing.