aiMOOC

E10 E - Write an evidence-based argumentative text

QR-Code

E10 E - Write an evidence-based argumentative text

Mini-Beschreibung: Develop a structured argumentative text with a clear claim, relevant reasons, checked evidence, a fair counterpoint and a reasoned conclusion. You work mainly in English, use only three core sources and write about 220–280 words. German support is short and selective; there is no full translation.

Course context: English as a first foreign language, Year 10, Baden-Württemberg, E level. The learning path is: understand → respond → analyse → communicate → feedback → revise → transfer.

Media starter: Look at the photo for 30 seconds. In English, note one possible benefit and one possible problem of smartphone use at school. Do not decide yet which policy is right.

Viewing prompt: Watch the BBC Newsround report once for the main idea and a second time for evidence. Write down: What was studied? What did the report say about school bans? What question remains open?

I-can goals

By the end, you can say:

I can identify claim, reason, evidence, counterpoint and conclusion in a short argument.
I can evaluate a source by author, purpose, evidence, date, context and limitations.
I can compare two or three sources without treating an association as proof of cause.
I can discuss a school-related issue and respond to a different view respectfully.
I can write and revise a coherent 220–280-word evidence-based argumentative text.
I can mediate the relevant meaning of a short German or English text for a specific audience instead of translating everything.

Learning route

Step	What you do
Understand	Get the issue and the task.
Respond	Form a first, provisional view.
Analyse	Check source quality, evidence and limits.
Communicate	Discuss, mediate and draft.
Feedback	Use criteria, not vague praise.
Revise	Improve logic, evidence, language and precision.
Transfer	Apply the method to a new issue.

Prior knowledge: quick diagnostic

Without searching, complete these sentence stems in English:

A claim is ...
Evidence is stronger when ...
A counterpoint matters because ...
A source may be limited when ...

Then compare your answers with the structure below. Change only what you can now explain better.

Understand: how an argument works

An argument is not just an opinion. A useful E10-E structure is:

Element	Function	Short starter
Claim	Your answer to the question.	I argue that ...
Reason	Why the claim makes sense.	One important reason is ...
Evidence	Data, findings, examples or facts from a suitable source.	According to ...
Reasoning	Explain how the evidence supports the reason and claim.	This matters because ...
Counterpoint	A relevant different view or limitation.	However, ...
Reasoned conclusion	Weigh the evidence and answer the question with appropriate caution.	Overall, the evidence suggests ...

Transfer from the video: The CER model comes from science education, but the core move is useful here too: do not place evidence next to a claim without explaining the link.

Functional example: one small argument

Question: Should smartphones be restricted during the school day?

Possible claim A: Schools should restrict recreational smartphone use during lessons.

Possible claim B: Schools should avoid blanket bans and focus on responsible, purposeful use.

Both are starting positions, not model answers. Your final claim must match the evidence you choose.

Weak: Phones are bad because they distract students.

Improved: OECD data report frequent digital distraction in mathematics lessons; this can support a restriction argument, but the data are observational and do not by themselves prove that a ban causes better learning.

Analyse: Listening and Viewing

Watch selected sections of the Crash Course video on argument. Focus on premises, conclusions and whether support is strong enough. You do not need every philosophical term.

Listening notes: Write no more than six keywords. Then explain the main idea to a partner in 30–45 seconds.

Watch the source-evaluation video with one question in mind: What should I do before I trust or cite a claim? Note two checks you can use immediately.

Media analysis: The sign signals that a statement needs support. In your own writing, ask: Is this a fact, an interpretation or my conclusion? Which source supports it?

Reading: a three-source evidence pack

Use only these three core sources for the main writing task. Read selectively: title, author/institution, date, key findings and limitations.

Source	What to extract	Source-critical question
A: OECD / PISA 2022	The OECD reports that many students experience digital distraction in mathematics lessons and discusses phone restrictions, enforcement and self-regulation.	The data show associations. What can they not prove about cause and effect?
B: UNESCO	UNESCO argues that classroom technology should be used when it clearly supports learning and tracks international school-phone policies.	Is this mainly research evidence, policy synthesis or recommendation?
C: University of Birmingham, 2025	A study of 1,227 students in 30 English secondary schools found no clear advantage of restrictive phone policies for several measured outcomes, while heavier overall phone/social-media use was linked with worse outcomes.	How far can findings from English schools be transferred to your school context?

Core links:

Source rule: Three sources are enough. Quality of use matters more than quantity. Do not add random search results just to make the bibliography longer.

Source comparison: fact, interpretation, limitation

For each source, make one short note under each heading:

Fact or finding	Interpretation	Limitation
What does the source actually report?	What might the finding mean for the question?	What does the source not establish?

Important: OECD results cover many education systems and specific learning contexts; the Birmingham study concerns English secondary schools. Do not write as if either automatically describes all Year 10 students in Baden-Württemberg. Avoid cultural stereotypes; name the context instead.

Context vocabulary

Learn the words through use, not as an isolated list.

Word / phrase	Meaning in this course	Useful pattern
claim	main position	support a claim
evidence	information used to support a point	evidence suggests that ...
reasoning	explanation of why evidence matters	this matters because ...
counterpoint	relevant different view	a counterpoint is that ...
reliable	trustworthy for the purpose	a relatively reliable source
bias	a perspective or tendency that may shape presentation	possible bias
association	two things vary together	an association does not prove causation
restriction	a limit on use	restrict recreational use
self-regulation	managing your own behaviour	develop self-regulation
limitation	a boundary of what evidence can show	one limitation is ...

Pronunciation for intelligibility

Focus on clear stress and sounds, not on sounding native-like.

Word	Helpful pronunciation focus
claim	/kleɪm/ — one syllable
evidence	/ˈevɪdəns/ — stress the first syllable
source	/sɔːs/ in common British pronunciation
conclusion	/kənˈkluːʒən/ — stress the second syllable

Say one complete sentence with each word. If you record yourself, recording is voluntary and private; do not upload it without clear consent.

Respond and communicate: Speaking

Two-minute evidence discussion: Work in pairs. Student A gives one claim and one piece of evidence. Student B asks one source-critical question and offers one counterpoint. Switch roles.

Useful moves:

Clarifying: Do you mean that ...?
Evidence: What in the source supports that?
Limitation: Could there be another explanation?
Response: That is a fair point; however, ...
Weighing: On balance, this evidence is stronger for ... because ...

Do not argue about the person. Address the claim and evidence.

Writing: your evidence-based argumentative text

Task: Write 220–280 words on the question Should smartphones be restricted during the school day? Use at least two and no more than three core sources.

Your text should contain:

a clear claim in the opening;
two developed reasons;
specific evidence from the source pack;
explanation of how the evidence supports your point;
one fair counterpoint;
a reasoned conclusion that matches the strength and limits of the evidence.

Plan before you draft

Part	Your notes
Claim	My answer is ...
Reason 1	Because ...
Evidence 1	Source ... shows / reports ...
Reasoning	This supports my claim because ...
Reason 2	Another reason is ...
Evidence 2	Source ... suggests ...
Counterpoint	A different view / limitation is ...
Response	This matters, but ...
Conclusion	Overall, the evidence suggests ...

Functional grammar and style

Use grammar to make meaning precise.

Function	Language
Report evidence	The OECD reports that ... / The study found that ...
Avoid overclaiming	may, can, suggests, is associated with
Contrast	however, although, whereas, in contrast
Explain cause carefully	because / therefore only when the evidence supports a causal link
Add a condition	If restrictions are not enforced, ...
Refer back	This finding supports / limits the claim because ...

Precision check: Replace absolute words such as “always”, “proves” or “everyone” unless the evidence truly supports them.

Mediation: purpose before translation

Situation: A fictional German partner school writes: “Private Handys bleiben während des Unterrichts grundsätzlich in der Tasche. Lehrkräfte können sie für klar begrenzte Lernphasen freigeben.”

Your English-speaking exchange partner asks what the rule means for tomorrow’s project lesson.

Mediation task: Give the relevant information in 2–3 English sentences. Do not translate every word. Adapt the message to the purpose and add no information that is not in the notice.

Feedback and revision

Use this peer-feedback protocol. Comment on the text, not the writer.

Check	Feedback question
Claim	Can I state the writer’s position in one sentence?
Evidence	Is each important factual claim linked to a source?
Reasoning	Does the writer explain why the evidence matters?
Counterpoint	Is a relevant different view represented fairly?
Source criticism	Are context and limitations acknowledged?
Cohesion	Do linking words show the logic clearly?
Language	Are wording and grammar precise enough to understand easily?

Feedback formula: “Your evidence is clear when ... . I need more explanation after ... . One possible revision is ... .”

Error analysis: fix the thinking, not only the grammar

Improve each sentence:

Overclaim: “The OECD proves that phones make students fail.”
Vague evidence: “Studies say phones are bad.”
Missing link: “Thirty percent reported distraction. Therefore phones must be banned.”
Unfair counterpoint: “People against restrictions just do not care about learning.”
Context error: “English schools show what all German schools should do.”

Ask: Is the problem accuracy, evidence, reasoning, fairness, context or language?

AI and source-checking rules

If your school allows AI support, keep your own draft and your own decisions. Verify every factual claim and every source yourself. Do not invent citations. Do not upload private recordings, classmates’ work or personal data to external AI services without permission. If AI suggests a source, open the original source and check author, date, content and relevance before using it.

Revise: a focused second draft

Do not rewrite everything. Make three high-impact changes:

strengthen one evidence-to-reasoning link;
make one sentence more precise or cautious;
improve the counterpoint or conclusion.

Then proofread only for your personal error pattern, for example verb forms, articles, punctuation or linking words.

Transfer

Apply the same structure to one new school-related issue, for example:

whether homework should be reduced;
whether AI tools should be allowed for specific learning tasks;
whether school uniforms should be introduced.

Use a maximum of three suitable sources again. The aim is transfer of the method, not a longer essay.

Can-do check

Mark each statement Yes / Not yet and add one piece of evidence from your work.

Can-do	Yes / Not yet	Evidence from my work
I can separate claim, reason, evidence and reasoning.
I can identify a source limitation.
I can use a counterpoint fairly.
I can avoid confusing association with causation.
I can revise for logic and precision.
I can mediate relevant information for an audience.

Follow-up course

Continue with E10 E - Revise an evidence-based argumentative text to focus on cohesion, style, self-editing and final publication choices.

Interaktive Aufgaben

Quiz: Teste Dein Wissen

What is the main job of a claim in an argumentative text? (It states the position the writer will support) (!It lists every source in full) (!It gives only background information) (!It repeats the counterpoint)

What should follow evidence in a strong argument? (Reasoning that explains why the evidence supports the claim) (!A new topic with no connection) (!A second quotation without explanation) (!A personal attack on another view)

What is a counterpoint? (A relevant different view or limitation) (!A spelling correction) (!The title of the source) (!A repeated claim)

Which wording is most careful when a study shows an association? (The findings suggest a connection) (!The study proves the cause) (!The result is true for everyone) (!The evidence removes all doubt)

Why should you check the context of a source? (To judge how far its findings can transfer to your question) (!To make the text longer) (!To avoid naming the source) (!To replace evidence with opinion)

Which source use is strongest? (Report the finding and explain how it supports your reason) (!Name the source without using its content) (!Copy a sentence and give no explanation) (!Use an unsourced statistic)

What is the purpose of a reasoned conclusion? (To weigh the evidence and answer the question appropriately) (!To introduce a completely new main argument) (!To repeat every sentence from the introduction) (!To claim certainty when evidence is limited)

Which phrase is useful for reporting evidence? (The study found that ...) (!Everybody knows that ...) (!It is obvious that ...) (!No one can disagree that ...)

What should mediation focus on? (The information relevant to purpose and audience) (!A word-for-word translation of everything) (!Adding personal details) (!Changing the original message)

What is a productive revision step? (Strengthen one evidence-to-reasoning link) (!Add more sources without reading them) (!Delete the counterpoint automatically) (!Replace precise wording with absolute claims)

Memory

Claim	Main position
Evidence	Supporting information
Reasoning	Link between evidence and claim
Counterpoint	Relevant different view
Credibility	Trustworthiness for a purpose
Limitation	Boundary of what a source can show
Conclusion	Final weighing of the argument

Drag and Drop

Ordne die richtigen Begriffe zu.	Funktion
Claim	States the writer's position
Reason	Explains why the position makes sense
Evidence	Provides source-based support
Reasoning	Connects support to the claim
Counterpoint	Introduces a relevant different view
Conclusion	Weighs the evidence and answers the question

Kreuzworträtsel

Claim	What do you call the main position of an argumentative text?
Evidence	What word means source-based support for a reason?
Reasoning	What connects evidence logically to a claim?
Counterpoint	What word names a relevant different view?
Conclusion	What final section weighs the argument?
Credibility	What quality means trustworthiness for a purpose?

LearningApps

Lückentext

A strong argumentative text begins with a clear

. A reason should be supported by suitable

. The writer then adds

to explain why the evidence matters. A fair argument includes a relevant

. Source checking includes author, purpose, date, context and

. An observed connection does not automatically prove

. Reporting verbs such as “suggests” can prevent

. A final paragraph should give a reasoned

. During mediation, you select information for the purpose and

. Revision should improve logic, precision and

.

Offene Aufgaben

Leicht

Claim spotting: Mark the claim, one reason and one piece of evidence in a short article or school text.
Source snapshot: Create a one-card source profile with author, date, purpose and one limitation.
Vocabulary in context: Write six original sentences using six course words accurately.
One-minute response: Give a private or live one-minute response to the smartphone question using one reason and one counterpoint.

Standard

Argument map: Turn one source-based paragraph into a visual map of claim, evidence, reasoning and counterpoint.
Source comparison: Compare the OECD and Birmingham sources in a table with one similarity, one difference and one limitation each.
Peer feedback: Use the feedback checklist on a partner’s draft and suggest three concrete revisions.
Mediation message: Explain a short fictional German school rule in concise English for an exchange student.

Schwer

Evidence audit: Check every factual statement in your draft and show exactly which source supports it.
Counterpoint upgrade: Rewrite a weak counterpoint so that a reasonable person holding that view would consider it fair.
Transfer debate: Use the same method for a new school issue with no more than three suitable sources.
Revision commentary: Submit a before-and-after paragraph plus 120–150 words explaining why your changes improved logic, precision and source use.

Lernkontrolle

Transferanalyse: You receive two short sources that point in different directions. Build a claim that reflects both without pretending they agree.
Quellenkritik: Explain which conclusion a source supports and which stronger conclusion it does not support.
Argumentationsdiagnose: Identify the weakest link in a paragraph: claim, evidence, reasoning, counterpoint or conclusion. Justify your diagnosis.
Adressatenwechsel: Rewrite the same core argument once for a school council and once for a class discussion. Explain two language choices.
Mediationstransfer: Select only the information an English-speaking visitor needs from a short German school notice and explain what you deliberately left out.
Revisionstransfer: Improve a draft with one overclaim, one vague source reference and one unfair counterpoint. Explain each change.

Lernnachweis

For a successful learning record, include:

one 220–280-word argumentative text using two or three checked sources;
a visible planning stage with claim, reasons, evidence, reasoning, counterpoint and conclusion;
a short source-check table with at least one limitation per source;
evidence of peer or self-feedback;
a revised version with meaningful changes;
a short reflection explaining one strength, one remaining target and one transfer idea.

No external media or embeds are required in the learning record. Your own text and source decisions remain central.

OERs zum Thema

Verknüpfte Lernbereiche

Evidence-based argumentative writing

aiMOOC-Projekte

Inhalte werden geladen ...

Mediathek wird aus dem Wiki geladen ...

Frag mich zum aktuellen Lerninhalt oder wähle eine kurze Hilfe.

Textmodus bereit

Sprache