RAW Q4

• CRITICAL READING AS REASONING

  Goes beyond extracting information from a text; rather it involves recognizing the writer's purpose, identifying the tone and persuasive elements, and recognizing biases.
• Duncan


  According to him, critical reading is a process of analyzing, interpreting, and, sometimes, evaluating.
• READING'S PURPOSE


  To get a basic grasp of the text.
• READING'S ACTIVITY


  Absorbing/Understanding
• READING'S FOCUS


  What a text SAYS
• QUESTIONS FOR READING


  • What is the text saying?

  • What information can I get out of it?
• DIRECTION OF READING 


  WITH the text ( taking for granted it is right)
• RESPONSE (READING)


  Restatement, summary
• CRITICAL READING'S PURPOSE


  To form a judgment about HOW a text works
• CRITICAL READING'S ACTIVITY


  Analyzing, Interpreting, Evaluating
• CRITICAL READING'S FOCUS


  What a text DOES and MEANS
• QUESTIONS FOR CR


  • How does a text work? How is it argued?

  • What are the choices made? The patterns that result?

  • What kinds of reasoning and evidence are used?

  • What are the underlying assumptions?

  • What does the text mean?
• DIRECTION (CR)


  AGAINST the text (questioning its assumptions and argument, interpreting meaning in context)
• RESPONSE (CR)

  Description, interpretation, Evaluation
• STRATEGIES FOR EFFECTIVE CRITICAL READING

  1. Read the text with open mind to see how ideas are developed and organized.
  2. Think critically throughout the reading process.
  3. Ask higher-order questions whenever possible.
  4. Try to check if there are gaps and inconsistencies
  5. Check for accuracy and reliability of the sources
  6. Examine the facts and examples and distinguish facts from opinions.
  7. Assess if the conclusions are acceptable.
  8. Evaluate the credibility of the writer.
• 3 WAYS THAT WRITERS ESTABLISH THEIR CREDIBILITY

  1. By showing their knowledge of subject (using facts and statistics)
  2. By building common ground with readers (base reasoning on shared beliefs)
  3. By responding fairly to objections and opposing arguments (does the writer respond to objections or ignore them and assume everyone agrees with him or her)
• EVALUATIVE STATEMENT


  a statement that states one's sound judgement about something through writing which is supported by reasons and evidences.
• EVALUATIVE STATEMENT


  It also presents the strengths and weaknesses of something based on a set of criteria which needs to be factual, substantial, and unbiased.
• ASSERTION


  declarative sentences that give one’s belief about something else as if it is true though it may not be. It is expressed as an argument.
• FACT, CONVENTION, OPINION, PREFERENCE

  4 TYPES OF ASSERTION WHICH CAN BE CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO THE DEGREE OF CERTAINTY
• FACT


  is a statement that can be proven objectively by direct experience, testimonies of witnesses, verified observations, or the results of research.
• FACT


  Example: According to experts, seawater contains high amounts of minerals such as sodium, chloride, sulfate, magnesium and calcium.
• CONVENTION


  is a way in which something is done similar to traditions and norms. Its truthfulness can be verified only by reference to historical precedents, laws, rules, usage, and customs. Something to note about conventions is that they may sound factual due to their being derived from customs, but because they are socially accepted ways of doing things, they cannot be verified objectively by measurements.
• CONVENTION


  Example: Seawater is classified as a heterogenous and homogenous mixture.
• OPINION


  is a statement based on facts but is difficult to objectively verify because of the uncertainty of producing satisfactory proof of soundness. ____ result from ambiguities; the more ambiguous a statement, the more difficult it is to verify. Thus, they are open to disputes.
• OPINION


  Example: is a statement based on facts but is difficult to objectively verify because of the uncertainty of producing satisfactory proof of soundness.
• PREFERENCE


  states a personal choice in which the writer is under no obligation to support or prove the truthfulness of the statement. They are subjective and cannot be objectively proven or logically attacked.
• PREFERENCE 


  Example: I love to make frequent trips to places with seawater rather than those without it.
• TEXTUAL EVIDENCES


  • defined as the details given by the author to support his/her claims.
• TEXTUAL EVIDENCES


  • It reveals the position of the writer and makes the reading more interesting.
• TEXTUAL EVIDENCES


  • Evidences are details that strengthen and add variety or weight to any argument.
• Paraphrasing, Summarizing, Referencing, Quoting


  FOUR WAYS OF PRESENTING TEXTUAL EVIDENCES IN YOUR WRITING
• PARAPHRASING


  • restating the text in your own words
• PARAPHRASING


  EXAMPLE: In the poem Harlem, the author claims that a person may feel disappointed when the dream is deferred for he questions the reader's feeling about withholding dreams. (What happens to a dream deferred?)
• SUMMARIZING


  • stating in a shorter way the text and other relevant details to support the idea
• SUMMARIZING


  EXAMPLE: The movie Seven Sundays (2017) is a heartwarming story and shows the importance of family in our lives. The movie tells about the Bonifacio siblings who were reunited because of their father who was mistakenly diagnosed with cancer. It presented the different struggles of their lives and how they were able to overcome them.
• REFERENCING


  • mentioning a specific section in the text
• REFERENCING


  EXAMPLE: The Department of Education ensures the delivery of quality education and safety of the learners in the opening of classes for this school year amidst COVID-19 as stated in the DepEd Order no. 7 s. 2020 on DepEd
• QUOTING

  • directly restating a part of the text.
• QUOTING


  EXAMPLE: Langston Hughes described deferred dreams as if they "stink like rotten meat" in his poem which suggests an unpleasant image, giving me the feeling of resentment. He also ends the poem with the line "Or does it explode?" that made me think of a person who boils over in anger.