Paper instructions:
Consider this scenario:For two weeks, Jeff and Dana have gone back and forth over what movie to see Friday after work. Jeff wants to go see a foreign picture, claiming it will broaden both of their cultural horizons. I was a film major, he says, what more authority do you need? Of course, Dana cant argue with the fact that Jeff excelled in his film courses, but that hardly makes you an expert. In fact, youre so stubborn it feels like Im talking to a wall. I want to see something romantic, something to remind you of how I should be treated once in a while! Danas suggestion falls on deaf ears. I swear, when it comes to romance movies, if you see one youve seen them all, Jeff says. Its like running circles around the same old track. I could write the script for you and save us each the ten dollars.Why does each kind of argument create an inferential claim? For example, why would Jeffs expert testimony weigh more heavily than Danas when it comes to film choices?
Are we ever 100% certain about causal inferences?
Why do analogies work in some arguments but not in others?
Of the several analogies presented in the scenario, which do you believe was the most successful? Why?
Present an example of a commonly used argument form.

Analysis
Calculate RR errors annotate match strength and need to outcome (EN1.4A) /content descriptors
Finally once all the above data is collected, you need to annotate it and analyse it. Use The Running Record Conventions and include analysis of the student’s use of Meaning, Grammar and Visual (Sound) MSV (will be discussed in lectures and tutorials). Appropriate outcomes and content descriptors that describe learning come from: Board of Studies NSW (2012). NSW Syllabuses for the Australian Curriculum: English K-10. Vol 1 English K-6 retrieved from http://syllabus.bos.nsw.edu.au/english/english-k10/ Focus is on reading outcome EN1.4.A identify, one strength and one are of need for this child (phonological, graphological processing) link their identified strength and need to a content descriptor of reading from the outcome EN1.4.A K-6 English syllabus (models for annotation of RR are on VWS)

Annotate and analyse comprehension questions
Identify the 3 levels of questions and detail the student’s responses to questions. Identify at least one strength and/or need linked to a relevant K-6 content descriptor