Lesson 5

Lesson Goals

Texts

Core

• • Excerpts from The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals, Michael Pollan, Penguin Press, an imprint of Penguin Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House LLC., 2006
  • “History and Overview of the Green Revolution: How Agricultural Practices Changed in the 20th Century,” Amanda Briney, ThoughtCo., 2020

• • “Organic Farming is Rarely Enough: Conventional Agriculture Gives Higher Yields Under Most Conditions,” Natasha Gilbert, Nature, April 25, 2012

Materials

Tools

• Delineating Arguments Tool

• Evaluating Arguments Tool

Reference Guides

• Academic Discussion Reference Guide

Question Sets

• Global Food Production: Section 2 Question Set

Editable Google Docs

• Delineating Arguments Tool

• Evaluating Arguments Tool

• Global Food Production: Section 2 Question Set

Activity 1: Read – Write

We will independently read and annotate a short selection from the book the omnivore’s dilemma: a natural history of four meals by Michael Pollan.

In pairs or small groups, read the selection by Pollan, annotating instances in which a claim or argument is made. As you read, consider the discussion question assigned to your pair or group. Note and annotate places in the text where this question is addressed.

1. Pollan describes farmer Naylor as someone who participates in an "infinitely more complex industrial system" than farmer Salatin. What are the differing elements of each system that is described?

2. What are some of the main differences between Naylor Farm and Polyface Farm, as described by Pollan? Are there any similarities, and if so, what are they?

3. Why doesn’t Salatin ship Pollan the chicken? Why do you believe Pollan included this detail?

4. How would you describe Salatin’s perspective on the concept of industrial organic agriculture? What phrases or sentences lead you to believe this?

5. Using evidence from the text, how would Pollan, Naylor, or Salatin define or describe sustainable agriculture?

Activity 2: Present – Discuss

As a class, we will briefly discuss the selection from the omnivore’s dilemma: a natural history of four meals, including the text’s issue, perspective, position, and evidence.

Share with the class what your small group or pair learned as a result of reading the passage. Identify what your discussion question was and explain what you learned after reading the passage with this question in mind.

As a class, identify and discuss the argumentation elements that can be identified in the selection by Pollan. Use the following questions as a guide for the class discussion:

1. The Issue: How clear, accurate, and complete is the explanation of the issue?

2. Perspective: How clear and reasonable is the author’s viewpoint or attitude about the issue?

3. Position: How clearly is the argument’s position (thesis) presented, explained, and connected to its claims?

4. Evidence: How credible, convincing, and complete is the supporting evidence?

Activity 3: Read – Write

We will read and evaluate the text “Organic Farming Is Rarely Enough: Conventional Agriculture Gives Higher Yields Under Most Conditions” by Natasha Gilbert while evaluating the text’s argument.

Step 1

Access and read another argument that presents a different perspective on the topic and questions whether organic farming can solve the food needs of a growing population: “Organic Farming Is Rarely Enough.”

This article summarizes a study about organic farming conducted in 2012 by McGill University scientist Verena Seufert: “Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture.”

Before reading the article, follow along as your teacher explains the concept of meta-analysis as a research technique. Record this term and its definition in your Vocabulary Journal.

Search through the article looking for this term and identify what Seufert’s meta-analysis involved. Discuss whether or not you think this kind of research is credible, and how it may avoid or reflect bias.

Step 2

Use the Delineating Arguments Tool to delineate the research-based argument presented by Seufert and summarized in Gilbert’s article.

• Determine the question or issue that was at the center of the study (What were the scientists trying to find out?).

• Discuss what you think the purpose of the study might have been.

• Based on what the article tells you about Verena Seufert, infer what you think her perspective as a scientist might be.

• Find a place in the article where the central conclusion of the study, its position, is best stated.

• With a partner, find a place in the article where you think a claim is being stated. Identify the evidence behind the claim (if it is mentioned in the article).

Step 3

In a class discussion, share the claims and evidence you found in the article and the study it summarizes. Record the claims, evidence, and reasoning pattern on your Delineating Arguments Tool.

As a class, think about the implications of the article in response to the following guiding question:

1. What does the research by Seufert suggest about whether organic farming is a viable way to feed the world’s growing population, considering how effective and sustainable its practices may be?

Activity 4: Discuss – Listen

We will learn how to use the Evaluating Arguments Tool and its guiding questions to judge whether an argument is convincing.

Step 1

As a class, discuss the purpose and organization of the Evaluating Arguments Tool. Note the following:

• Purpose: The tool and its questions are used to evaluate or judge the elements of an argument and how convincing it is overall.

• Questions: The guiding questions for each element are written in a way to make you think about how well the element is presented or evidenced in the argument.

• Evaluation Scale: The tool has a scale (on the right side) to help you judge each element as a questionable aspect or weakness of the argument (✓-), a reasonable or acceptable aspect of the argument (✓), or a strength of the argument (✓+).

• Supporting Notes: As you make judgments, you can write down notes about text-based observations that lead to, or support, your judgments.

• Overall Judgment: Taken together, your evaluations of the argument’s elements can add up to a final judgment about whether you think it is a convincing argument, using the questions below:

  • Does the argument make sense to me?

  • To what extent do I agree with its positions and claims?

  • Am I convinced?

Ask clarifying questions about the tool, its purpose, and its organization so that you are prepared to use it.

Step 2

Follow along as your teacher models how to use the Evaluating Arguments Tool with an argument you have read. Use the tool to write down information and ideas that come up during class discussion.

• Begin by identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the argument’s issue, perspective, and position. For each element analyzed, use the guiding questions to determine as a class if that element is a questionable aspect or weakness of the argument (✓-), a reasonable or acceptable aspect of the argument (✓), or a strength of the argument (✓+). Make notes about what led you to, or supported, your judgment.

• Identify, analyze, and evaluate the claims and evidence presented in the argument. Make notes about these key elements.

• Discuss what you know about the author and source of the argument and any evidence related to their credibility or bias. You might need to learn more about these two concepts. If you know enough, evaluate the argument’s credibility and bias.

• To move to a final judgment about the argument, analyze and evaluate its reasoning and the conclusions it reaches. Make any relevant notes.

• Look at the pattern of evaluations you have made as a class or group. Individually, make a final judgment about whether the text presents a convincing argument. Make notes about how and why you reached your final judgment.

• Compare your overall judgment of the argument with those of other students.

Step 3

In a small group, pair, or individually, follow the same process for a second argument you have read. Make text-based observation notes for each judgment you make in response to the guiding questions.

• Identify, analyze, and evaluate the argument’s issue, perspective, and position.

• Identify, analyze, and evaluate the claims and evidence presented in the argument.

• Discuss what you know about the author, source of the argument, and any evidence related to their credibility or bias. If you know enough, evaluate these two elements.

• To move to a final judgment about the argument, analyze and evaluate its reasoning and the conclusions it reaches.

• Individually, make a final judgment about whether the text presents a convincing argument.

• Compare your overall judgment of the argument with those of other students.

Step 4

If necessary, repeat the process individually so that you have done evaluations for both the Pollan selection and the Natasha Gilbert article before the next activity.

Activity 5: Discuss

As a class, we will discuss and compare the two articles and their arguments regarding the role of organic agriculture in Food production and farming.

Referencing your notes from both articles and your Evaluating Arguments Tool, share your answers to the following guiding questions:

1. Do the texts share any similar perspectives?

2. How do you think that Salatin (from the Pollan selection) would respond to the data presented in the Natasha Gilbert article?

3. Do the claims and arguments in both texts make sense to you? If not, why?

4. In your opinion, which text presented a more convincing argument?

5. What evidence was not presented in the texts?

6. What do you need to know more about in order to have an informed opinion about the benefits of organic and conventional agriculture?