Open Up - Grade 7 - ELA - Module 2 - Mid Unit 2 Assessment
By Formative Library
starstarstarstarstarstarstarstarstarstar
Last updated almost 3 years ago
4 Questions
Part I: Read and Analyze Argument: “Are Social Epidemics Real?”
Directions: Read the following article, then complete the note-catcher below to analyze the argument in the article.
Are Social Epidemics Real?
By EL Education for assessment purposes
The idea that human behaviors can spread like diseases is a powerful one. It can help us explain what we do and how we feel. Still, some authors wonder whether the comparison is valid. A recent article in The Economist magazine questions whether “the analogy between ideas and germs is a good one” (“Conflicting Ideas”). Ideas and emotions don’t spread exactly like germs or viruses. But we can still learn a lot about social behavior from the study of diseases. There are two main reasons that comparing social elements to epidemics makes sense. Social epidemics seem to spread according to similar rules and patterns as those that govern diseases. Also, scientists have theories about how people might actually “catch” things like emotions and behaviors from another person. Together, these support the argument that social contagion is real.
Social epidemics appear to follow rules as they spread. In his book The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell writes about the rules that make “[i]deas and products and messages and behaviors spread just like viruses do.” He uses the example of Hush Puppies shoes to show how one of these rules, the Law of the Few, works. Around 1995, Hush Puppies became suddenly popular again after being considered “uncool” for a long time. Nobody knew why. Then people realized that a small group of young adults in a fashionable New York neighborhood had started wearing them. They wore the shoes “precisely because no one else would wear them” (Gladwell). The kids might have wanted to be different. But soon everyone was copying them. Within two years, sales of Hush Puppies increased by about fifty times. It only took a few people to “infect” others with “the Hush Puppies virus” (Gladwell). That is what Gladwell calls the “Law of the Few.” Epidemic researchers have a comparable theory. They also know that it only takes a few people for contagion to grow. In their book Connected, Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler write about something similar. They describe the famous “sidewalk experiment” by Stanley Milgram. Milgram had his assistants stop on the sidewalk and look up at a window for no reason. Then he measured how many passing people also looked in the same direction. He found that having just one assistant looking up caused other people to look about forty-two percent of the time. If five assistants looked up, the number of people copying them almost doubled (Christakis and Fowler). These examples suggest that it only takes a few people to spread a behavior or idea, just like a disease.
There are also similar theories about how people catch ideas and emotions. For example, a recent blog post in Psychology Today writes about how people often “tend to mimic the bodily postures of those around them” (Weinschenk and Wise). The authors propose that this mimicking may also make them “start to feel the feelings of the people around them.” Similarly, Christakis and Fowler write about how imitating facial expressions can lead people to “feel as others do.” In both cases, the postures and the facial expressions imitated affect our feelings. But why imitate in the first place? Scientists have a theory about that, too. They have discovered a “mirror neuron system” in our brains (Christakis and Fowler). When we watch someone do something, our brain cells sometimes fire as if we are doing that same thing. This system allows us to practice others’ behaviors just by watching them (39). It also means that we are built to feel what others feel. In other words, our brains make it easy to “catch” other people’s behaviors and emotions, not unlike the way our bodies “catch” a disease.
Social behavior is complex. Not everything we do can be explained by comparing ideas to epidemics. But the evidence is intriguing. Ideas, behaviors, and emotions appear to be contagious. Social scientists have come up with rules and theories about why this might be so. The Economist points out that these theories might be “hard to test.” But we need to continue testing them. Who knows what more discoveries will be made?
Sources:
Gladwell, Malcolm. The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. Little, Brown, 2000.
Christakis, Nicholas A., and Fowler, James H. Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives—How Your Friends’ Friends’ Friends Affect Everything You Feel, Think, and Do. Back Bay Books, 2011.
T.C. “Conflicting Ideas.” The Economist. 3 Apr. 2012. Web. Used by permission. www.economist.com/babbage/2012/04/03/conflicting-ideas.
Weinschenk, Susan, and Brian Wise. “Emotions Are Contagious.” Psychology Today, 1 June 2016, www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/brain-wise/201606/ emotions-are-contagious.
1
1.
Directions: record the main claim the authors make in the article, the points into which that claim is broken down, and the evidence and reasoning the authors use to support those points. If a point has multiple pieces of supporting evidence and reasoning, record them all in the boxes below the point. Then evaluate whether the evidence is relevant and sufficient and the reasoning is sound, and underline YES or NO in the right-hand column. (RI.7.1, RI.7.8, RI.7.10, L.7.6)
Main Claim: ____________________________________________________________Is this reasoning sound?
Point: ____________________________________________________________Is this reasoning sound?
Evidence: ____________________________________________________________Is this reasoning sound?
Reasoning: ____________________________________________________________Is this reasoning sound?
Directions: record the main claim the authors make in the article, the points into which that claim is broken down, and the evidence and reasoning the authors use to support those points. If a point has multiple pieces of supporting evidence and reasoning, record them all in the boxes below the point. Then evaluate whether the evidence is relevant and sufficient and the reasoning is sound, and underline YES or NO in the right-hand column. (RI.7.1, RI.7.8, RI.7.10, L.7.6)
Main Claim: ____________________________________________________________
Is this reasoning sound?
Point: ____________________________________________________________
Is this reasoning sound?
Evidence: ____________________________________________________________
Is this reasoning sound?
Reasoning: ____________________________________________________________
Is this reasoning sound?
RI.7.6
RI.7.8
RI.7.1
RI.7.10
1
2.
Directions: Write to answer the following prompt:
Evaluate whether the argument is strong. Are the claims supported by relevant and sufficient evidence and sound reasoning?
Directions: Write to answer the following prompt:
Evaluate whether the argument is strong. Are the claims supported by relevant and sufficient evidence and sound reasoning?
RI.7.6
RI.7.8
RI.7.1
RI.7.10
1
3.
Directions: Record any questions you have to discuss in the text-based discussion.
Directions: Record any questions you have to discuss in the text-based discussion.
RI.7.6
RI.7.8
RI.7.1
RI.7.10
1
4.
Part II: Text-Based Discussion: Analyze Argument: “Are Social Epidemics Real?”
Throughout this unit, you have been reading and analyzing argument articles about social epidemics or contagion. For this assessment, you are going to engage in a collaborative text-based discussion to analyze the argument in the article “Are Social Epidemics Real?” that you read in Part I of this assessment. (RI.7.1, SL.7.1, SL.7.1a, SL.7.1b, SL.7.1c, SL.7.1d, L.7.6)
Think about the following prompts:“How do the authors of the article, Are Social Epidemics Real?, argue that social epidemics compare to disease epidemics? Is their evidence sufficient and relevant, and is their reasoning sound?” Is their overall argument strong? Why or why not?
Remember to use details and examples from the text to support and explain your thinking.
Throughout the discussion, refer to:• Discussion Norms anchor chart • The note-catcher you completed for Part I of this assessment
Part II: Text-Based Discussion: Analyze Argument: “Are Social Epidemics Real?”
Throughout this unit, you have been reading and analyzing argument articles about social epidemics or contagion. For this assessment, you are going to engage in a collaborative text-based discussion to analyze the argument in the article “Are Social Epidemics Real?” that you read in Part I of this assessment. (RI.7.1, SL.7.1, SL.7.1a, SL.7.1b, SL.7.1c, SL.7.1d, L.7.6)
Think about the following prompts:
“How do the authors of the article, Are Social Epidemics Real?, argue that social epidemics compare to disease epidemics? Is their evidence sufficient and relevant, and is their reasoning sound?” Is their overall argument strong? Why or why not?
Remember to use details and examples from the text to support and explain your thinking.
Throughout the discussion, refer to:
• Discussion Norms anchor chart
• The note-catcher you completed for Part I of this assessment
SL.7.1.d
RL.7.6
SL.7.1.b
SL.7.1.c
SL.7.1.a
RL.7.1
Source: Open Up Resouces (Download for free at openupresources.org.)