We started an activity on April 12th in class where we began to evaluate our evidence for claims.
For example, does the evidence on page 3 of I Am the Cheese really match the question, “Is Adam a person who doesn’t give up?” or is the passage on page 33 a better piece of evidence?
We want our evidence to match the question we are trying to answer.
Another example is whether “Adam is strong and confident.” Which example mentioned in class allows us to conclude this?
We learned that our conclusions must only be within our evidence, nothing more.
The thinking activity
The follow up homework is to look closely at the language of your evidence, just like we did when we annotated poetry in the last unit.
Which words support your claim? Would the claim be true if the passage had different words?
What can you conclude about what makes good evidence?
Please comment on this post as a response to the questions above. Write as concisely as you can. The response is part of formative assessment for this unit and will address Criterion A, Content.
NOTE: As promised, here is the link to the Ways of Knowing diagram that we looked at in today’s lesson.
The Learner's Toolbox 
The evidence that I have to show that Adam is strong and confident is on page seven when he throws the green and black pills in the garbage and says “I want to do it without aid”. An example in which Adam shows that he is strong is when he says “I feel strong and resolute”. The words “Strong” and “Resolute” help me to support my claim because I stated that Adam Farmer was a strong and confident character and being strong and resolute helps one to be strong and resolute. In my own opinion, the claim may not have been true if the passage had different words because the passage could have said, “I feel scared and unable to go on.” The claim would not have been true if the passage said this but if the passage said, “I feel powerful and bold,” then the claim still would have been true. If the passage changes and the passage is different in a negative way, then the claim would not be true but if the passage was different in a positive way, then the claim could still be true. I can now conclude that the things that make good evidence is by giving true facts that support the claim because facts are what give power towards your claim, which is shown on page seven of the book, “I am the Cheese”. Another thing that makes good evidence is the personality of the character, which is shown where Adam doesn’t want to give up and he is confident that he will survive until he makes it to Rutterburg, Vermont.
Kelvin
I claimed that Adam was strong and independent boy. First he decided not to take the pill, because he wanted to ride to Vermont using his own strength not the medicine, and also he had decided to ride a bike alone to Vermont, although he can easily ride on bus, but he want to use his own strength(page 33, and 7). If the passage was different then the claim shouldn’t be true.
To conclude good evidence are fact that really showed in the book. For example personality, life, environment, and behavior that the book talk about are all good evidence. So as long as there are things that show that the claim is true then it true. Good evidences are things that show that the claims are true.
* I don’t really get the question, so I don’t know if this is the answer you want from us. So if it not please explain the question to me please. Thank you
The best evidences would be passages or words that would clearly express your claim. “Adam is strong and confident”, this claim can be be ascertained with proof from the novel “I am a cheese.”, few examples of those proofs would be “I gained momentum and knew I would go, nothing would stop me, nothing” from page 7 and where we found out he biked 5 miles in one hour in page 18 (one of the topics we discussed in class). His belief that nothing can stop him shows his confident that he would reach his goal, and how he was able to bike 5 miles without stopping shoes that he is strong physically and mentally.
Descriptive words and repeated ideas are the main evidences that can support my claims. For instance, if there was a sentence ” Jack was too thin. His face looked pale every single day. No one ever saw him smiling.” in one of the passage, I can claim that he rarely eats food and he doesn’t have a passion is his daily life. I could argue with that opinion because that quote had a description about him. The description showed how the character looked like and what the character did. Even though the passage had different words it would be still true because there are important words and unnecessary words in the whole book. But in most case, the main characters/plots of the text is shown by the important words such as descriptive and repeated words. For example, if there was a sentence, “One day, he ate 2 big mac with a joy in his face.” Will this affect my opinion? Maybe yes but yet we don’t know if it was happening temporary or frequently. So still, it doesn’t really matter. Overall, detailed and accurate sources can make a good evidence.
Descriptive words and repeated ideas are the main evidences that can support my claims. For instance, if there was a sentence ” Jack was too thin. His face looked pale every single day. No one ever saw him smiling.” in one of the passage, I can claim that he rarely eats food and he doesn’t have a passion is his daily life. I could argue with that opinion because that quote had a description about him. The description showed how the character looked like and what the character did. Even though the passage had different words it would be still true because there are important words and unnecessary words in the whole book. But in most case, the main characters/plots of the text is shown by the important words such as descriptive and repeated words. For example, if there was a sentence, “One day, he ate 2 big mac with a joy in his face.” Will this affect my opinion? Maybe but yet we don’t know if it was happening temporary or frequently. So still, it doesn’t affect. Overall, detailed and accurate sources can make a good evidence.
*(the examples aren’t related to the “I am the cheese” book. I just made it)
My evidence to prove that Adam is a neurotic person is on P.5, as the words “Terrible feeling of suffocation” when he is talk about elevators. More evidence of Adam being neurotic is that he also fears large spaces, for example in baseball, he says “I felt as though I’d be swept off the face of the planet, into space.” Additional, if the words were different, his point and message would still be the same as it is understandable that people have many different fears. This shows that the evidence I have is good evidence because the message is clear and good evidence has to be related to the question. So, when you are finding evidence to support your claim, your evidence must prove your claim clearly in a way that it is understandable and also that it must be completely related to your claim.
“Even though Adam is brave but he is scared of dog.”
The evidence is on page 30 proves that Adam scared of dog “The dog is ferocious and I am terrified”
The evidence that shows he’s brave is on page 8. Although his leg is so tired and couldn’t pedal anymore but he still isn’t giving up by saying take it easy and he will be covered one mile at a time.
The another evidence that shows that even though he’s scared of dog but he’s braved enough to stop thinking of it and be brave enough to take himself out of the place where the dog is staying. (33)So this shows that he uses his bravery to against over his fear.
the words that support our claims are the words that represents and matches the meaning with the claim. The passage might not have been true if it had different word because in that passage the never give up word makes the evidence so good. We can conclude about what makes good evidence is the correct choice of word and the situation that matches with your claim.
Adam is a observer, because he is finding out about his family. He talks about the clues many times. For example, on page 36:” Maybe the dog is the clue.” The word clue supports the claim and if it is replaced with a different word, the claim would not be true. Good evidence resolves from having a fact to support it, or a prove from the book. This will show that it really had happened and it is not a opinion.
I think page 33 is better evidence to prove how Adam doesn’t give up on going to Vermont with his bike. In page 3, it is mostly about where Adam is located at, how the weather is, how the bike looks like and in page 4, the page is about Adam leaving his home for his journey. However, in page 33, it is clear that Adam is determined to keep his journey, with a lot of details in the story. He knows what he is doing, and he is going to achieve his goal. That is very clear in page 33.
The way I thought like that is probably because we usually know that the first page or the first chapter of the book, is to introduce the story or introduce the main character. So, as the reader, I could think that the first page (which is page 3) is only for introducing what Adam Farmer is going to do in the future. Also, because before page 33, we know what happens to Adam before he becomes determined.
The evidence that show how Adam is courageous and persistent are shown in more than 1 page such as page 7 where he is brave because he think that he will be able to go to his father without the pill driving miles and miles of bicycle, and he also almost turn back but decided to go anyway. Although the example in page 7 show that he is courageous and persistent the example in page 33 is more effective. Since it shows that he is very courageous due to the fact that he has mention that he is terrified of dog (5), and now he is facing a real one when he is riding a bike to Rutterburg, Vermont and he is very afraid of it because the dog kept on dashing in front of his bike and attacking him while trying to stop the bike too. Facing the ferocious is a very hard task for Adam but he still try to stop his fear and keep on pedaling showing his courage and how persistent he is in the desire to visit his dad because he could just have turn back and don’t need to deal with the dog. The fact that he quietly state that “ and I keep yelling to myself, it’s all right, it’s all right” (32) and when he said “continue my way, feeling as though I will never stop, never stop” (33) have showed that he is persistent and brave. The word “it will be alright” and “never stop” have support my claim that he is a courageous and a persistent character because the word never showed that he will never give up and the phrase it’s all right showed that he will comfort himself whenever he is in fear and will get over it and become very brave overcoming the fear. The claim would not be true if the passage have different word for example if the phrase “never stop” is “will not go” then it wouldn’t show that he is persistent. But the claim could also be true even though the word is changed for example if the phrase “never stop” is “I will continue” then it would still mean the same thing and Adam would still be a persistent character. So it is up to the meaning of weather it is the same meaning as the passage or not.
I can now conclude that the things that make a good evidence is by giving true facts and that the evidence must match the thing that we are trying to prove, because facts are what support our claim and the thing that we are trying to prove. Evidence must also be in the thing we are trying to prove so it won’t mess it. Another thing that makes good evidence is the habit or the personalities of a character because a character’s personalities is exact and sometimes do not change throughout the whole story which make it reliable and very effective.
I wrote that Adam is independent and brave because he travels alone and the evidence that support my claim is on page 3. The passage is “I am riding the bicycle and I am on Route 31 in Monument, Massachusetts, on my way to Rutterbug, Vermont…”. He is riding the bicycle alone with no one with him, therefore he is brave. If the passage had different words such as “I am riding the bicycle WITH…” the claim wouldn’t be true because he has someone with him therefore he is not brave enough to travel alone. The second claim that I have is Adam likes to contradict himself and the evidence that support the claim is on page 17. The passage is “I want to get away but he’s a nice old man.”, at first he said he wants to get away, then he said he wants to stay. If the passage had different words such as “I DON’T want to get away because he’s a nice old man.” Then the claim would be invalid because he didn’t contradict himself. My last claim is that Adam is good at reading and writing and the evidence that support my claim in on page 4. The passage is “I did a book report on The Web and the rock and Mr. Parker in English II regarded me with suspicion and gave me a B- instead of the usual A.”. If the B- change to F and A change to C then my claim wouldn’t be valid because Adam usually get a C which wouldn’t make him good at reading and writing.
I can conclude that a good evidence must be related to the claim and nothing more. A good evidence must also be a specific sentence not a vague sentence such as the evidence on page 33; it clearly said that “And I say hello and goodbye to Fairfield and continue on my way, feeling as though I will never stop, never stop.”. The phase “I will never stop” is clear and specific, therefore it is a very good evidence that support the claim “Is Adam a person who doesn’t give up”.
I wrote that Adam is independent and brave because he travels alone and the evidence that support my claim is on page 3. The passage is “I am riding the bicycle and I am on Route 31 in Monument, Massachusetts, on my way to Rutterbug, Vermont…”. He is riding the bicycle alone with no one with him, therefore he is brave. If the passage had different words such as “I am riding the bicycle WITH…” the claim wouldn’t be true because he has someone with him therefore he is not brave enough to travel alone. The second claim that I have is Adam likes to contradict himself and the evidence that support the claim is on page 17. The passage is “I want to get away but he’s a nice old man.”, at first he said he wants to get away, then he said he wants to stay. If the passage had different words such as “I DON’T want to get away because he’s a nice old man.” Then the claim would be invalid because he didn’t contradict himself.
I can conclude that a good evidence must be related to the claim and nothing more. A good evidence must also be a specific sentence not a vague sentence such as the evidence on page 33; it clearly said that “And I say hello and goodbye to Fiarfield and continue on my way, feeling as though I will never stop, never stop.”. The phase “I will never stop” is clear and specific, therefore it is a very good evidence that support the claim “Is Adam a person who doesn’t give up”.
When we are going to express something, we don’t need anything to support the sentence but when we are giving out a chunk of knowledge of understanding we need evidence to support the fact. Due to the Ways of Knowing I suppose that there are 3 levels of evidence leading to the understandings. The most direct ways of knowing is yourself/ourselves with our emotions, reasoning then the basic knowledge around us like mathematics history. Then the least information that supports our statement which is belief, values and certainty.
When we claim something (facts) we use language to communicate but if we used what we only think of, other people will have a doubt or have a totally different misunderstanding, so for example, I like ice-cream. This statement is confusing because people tend to need evidence to support my claim so if I say I like ice-cream because ….. would be a more direct statement and people won’t get the wrong idea of what we’re actually trying to talk about.
Good evidence to me is actually just what you’re thinking plus a little support from basic facts such as, math and some “true” history because it’s important to tell facts so people can at least believe you.
Adam is a brave person. In page 7, the second paragraph said: “I went to the kitchen and took out the bottle of pills from the cabinet and decided not to take one. I wanted to do this raw, without crutches, without aid, alone. I opened the bottle of pills and turned it over and let the pills fall out – they are capsules, actually, green and black – and i watched them disappear into the mouth of the garbage disposal. I felt strong and resolute.” The words “strong and resolute” tells us that Adam is feeling confident and brave. If Adam is not brave, he will not feel strong. The passage didn’t tell us much about the pills, but it mentions “I want to do this raw, without crutches, without aid, alone.” The sentence tells us that the pills helps him in some way, probably helps his mind or body, but he said he wants to do this without help from anything. A brave person will not ask for help, he would just do it. If the paragraph have different words, my claim would not be true. The paragraph hardly told us anything about the pills. If the paragraph never said the pills is some kind of aid, there would not be any proof that the pills would help Adam, and it would be brave to not take it. In fact, he could even be afraid to take the pills, and brave people are not like that. The last sentence of the paragraph, “I felt strong and resolute.” tells us that Adam feels strong. If that tiny sentence is missing, he would not look brave, because he could be shaking in the inside and scared to go outside. That sentence force us to not think of him as like that when we read it.
Good evidence is evidences that directly support the claim. Using the description of the pills being green and black, and saying Adam has been taking scary-looking pills, doesn’t support the claim that he is brave. Using the evidence of WHY he didn’t take the pills is better at supporting the claim, because it said that Adam don’t want any help. Brave people don’t need help from others, they can do things independently. When making a claim, ignore everything except the good evidences.
Good evidence should be made up of accurate facts. For example, unaltered photographs/recordings/tapes are good evidence, because of the fact that they can capture the details we need for the argument. I’d argue that good evidence is the evidence that fits what we require, what proves that we are correct in our arguments.
Thus, the conclusion is that good evidence is the evidence that does the best job of supporting our claims. For example, if someone sees a slice of cheese (think Kraft) in a bowl, and tells the blind man beside him that there is cheese in the bowl, the blind man might instead think of fondue, for reason that it is a bowl. His assumption being made, he’d say that there is no cheese. However, if the person says that there is instead a slice of cheese, the blind man would realize that he hadn’t reached the cheese yet. This concludes that the best evidence would be the type of evidence that is *accurate* and supports our claim/argument/side the best/most/effectively.