Copy Of 9

When people argue something they do not always have the correct answer, but people can persuade people because they are persuasive. In the play “twelve angry men” by Reginald Rose twelve jurors argue over a case where a nineteen year old boy is convicted for killing his father. If the kid was found guilty he would’ve been put to death, but they thought he was innocent the boy would be let go. During the vote of the jury there was a 11-1 vote guilty to innocent. The one juror that believed that that boy was innocent was known as juror eight. He was able to convince everyone in that courtroom because he was moreover correct than he was persuasive. Juror 8 was mostly correct and not that persuasive. He was mostly correct because he was able to prove that the testimonies that they listened to could have been lies. The testimony for the old man was that he was in his bed when he heard the kid say “I AM GOING TO KILL YOU” (28) gets out of his bed and goes to the door at the end of the hallway in 15 seconds, “a man who’s had two strokes in the last 3 years” (28) though as juror eleven points out “he can only walk very slowly.” They even had to help him get into the witness chair. After juror eight does a test to prove that it would have at least taken the old man 40 seconds to get from his bed to the stairs and even if the kid wiped the knife and ran out the door it would only have taken him 30 seconds. Juror eight then makes this assumption of what happened, “the old man had heard the fight between the boy and his father a few hours earlier”. Afterwards “while lying in bed, he heard a body hit the floor in the boy's apartment, and he heard the woman scream from across the street. He got up, he tried to get to the door, heard someone racing down the stairs and assumed it was the boy.” Juror eight then started thinking about the woman’s and said this “I don't know - I'm guessing! I'm also guessing that she probably didn't put her glasses on when she turned to look casually out of the window, and she herself testified the killing took place just as she looked out, the lights went off a split second later.”(61) Following that he says “she couldn’t have had the time to put them on!.” (61) Once he makes that statement he was able to convince the last juror, (juror three) to say there was a doubt and that the kid was innocent. This shows how juror eight was more correct than persuasive. Though on the other hand some may disagree and think that juror eight was more persuasive than correct. Juror eight was able to prove that the kid was innocent based on tests and theories that there was a doubt that the kid didn’t kill his father. As juror eight did he was able to convince the entire jury that there was a doubt based on his own life experiences. He convinced them based on how el trains were so loud that you even hear yourself think if you lived next to them and one go by with the window open. Though that also is mainly true so it also proves that he was correct in that matter and that is why he was persuasive. Before that juror eight also was talking about how the kid lost his mom when he was nine and grew up in the slums all his life, he wasn’t able to convince anybody then until he used facts because he was correct to convince juror 9 to think that the boy is innocent. In conclusion this is how juror eight was effective because he was primarily correct and not persuasive. This essay shows how juror eight used tests, logic, prior knowledge and experience to convince everyone in the jury to think there’s a reasonable doubt that the nineteen year old boy wasn’t guilty. This is how juror 8 was primarily effective because he was correct.

TASK RUBRIC PROBLEM FORMULATION: (Not Scored)

Inquiry Question: Is the eighth juror effective primarily because he is correct or primarily because he is persuasive? 3.0

2.0

I can classify textual evidence as support for claims and counterclaims.

I can identify textual evidence as support for my claim.

Even with help, With help, I can I cannot identify identify textual textual evidence as evidence as support for my support for my claim. claim.

I can accurately analyze and I can accurately use relevant analyze and and sufficient use relevant direct and and sufficient inferential direct evidence evidence to to answer my answer my question. question.

I can use relevant direct evidence to answer my question.

With help, I can use relevant direct evidence to answer my question.

Even with help, I cannot use relevant direct evidence to answer my question.

I can introduce and establish I can introduce clear and order ideas COMMUNICATION relationships I can introduce and information : among ideas and groups within and Incorporates ideas and information ideas and across and supporting within and information paragraphs and evidence across through a basic use transitions purposefully using paragraphs and use of in a way that structures that use transitions paragraph allows the demonstrate the in a way that structure and audience to line of reasoning. clarifies the transitions. follow the reasoning and argument. logic of the argument.

With help, I can introduce and groups ideas and information through a basic use of paragraph structure.

Even with help, I cannot introduce and groups ideas and information through a basic use of paragraph structure.

PRECISION: Assures that the final product meets all disciplinespecific standards

With help, I can submit a final product that attempts ELA standards.

Even with help, I cannot submit a final product.

Learning Goals

4.0

RESEARCH: Collects information I can and data necessary investigate to solve the outside sources problem as for relevant formulated, drawing textual evidence from evidence to informational texts, support claims conducting an counterclaims, investigation, or and rebuttals. generating data. INTERPRETATION : Synthesizes multiple sources of data to support a claim, solve a problem, or answer a question.

1

I can submit a final product that meets or exceeds all ELA standards

I can submit a final product that meets all ELA standards for language,

I can submit a final product that attempts1 all ELA standards for

1.0

Academic vocabulary (inference, circumstantial evidence, fallacy, etc.) may be missing.

0.0

for language, terms, expressions, rules, terminology, and conventions.

for language, academic vocabulary, and conventions.

academic vocabulary, and conventions.

language and conventions.

To request regrading of this assignment after the grade has been entered on JumpRope: 1) Meet with Mr. Farrell after school to discuss proposed changes and receive approval 2) Email [email protected] when your changes have been made