Module 4 -> Lesson 4

Close reading, writing to learn

Confirm or Challenge

Police should be trusted to use facial recognition technology for the safety and betterment of all citizens.

Anchor Text(s) for this Module

  • Anchor texts & activity guides from Lessons 1 - 3

Supporting Text(s)/ Resources for this Module

Lesson Overview

In this lesson, students in need of additional writing support are provided with explicit instruction for writing claims, identifying evidence that aligns with the claim and reasoning that links the two. This lesson reteaches the concepts covered in Module 2 but uses content from Module 4. The goal of this lesson is to prepare students to engage is a much more robust SPAR debate in the next lesson.

Nota Bene

Based on your students needs, either extend this previous lesson into a second class period to allow students more time to engage with the BONUS challenge or use this Lesson 4, a writing intensive day that provides students with support for writing three distinct claims with reasoning and evidence pulling from all previous lessons up to this point. Another option, is to group students strategically: for those who are NOT in need of further support for writing claims, evidence and reasoning, they can use this period to engage in deeper research uses recommended reading extensions or independently directed research. Students in need of additional writing support will benefit from this reteach of claims, evidence and reasoning using content from this module.


Students will be able to...

  • Draft a claim that accounts for the influence of a particular type of bias on the impacts of FRT;

  • Identify evidence that aligns with claims;

  • Connect claim and evidence with sound reasoning

Suggested Duration

45 minutes (adjust according to your students' needs)

NYS Next Generation ELA Standards

  • SL4: Present claims, findings, and supporting evidence clearly, concisely, and logically; organization, development, substance, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.

  • WHST1: Write arguments based on discipline-specific content.

  • W1c: Use precise language and content-specific vocabulary to express the appropriate complexity of the topic.

NYS Computer Science & Digital Fluency Standards

  • 9-12.IC.1 Evaluate the impact of computing technologies on equity, access, and influence in a global society.

  • 9-12.IC.3 Debate issues of ethics related to real world computing technologies.

  • 9-12.IC.5 Describe ways that complex computer systems can be designed for inclusivity and to mitigate unintended consequences.


  • oversight (noun): the state of being in charge of someone or something

  • guidelines (noun): rules or instructions that are given by an official organization telling you how to do something, especially something difficult

  • claim (noun): a statement that something is true although it has not been proved and other people may not agree with or believe it; a person’s stated position in a debate.

  • evidence (noun): the facts, signs, or objects that make you believe that something is true.

  • reasoning (noun): the process of thinking about things in a logical way; in debate, you use reasoning to connect the claim and evidence to explain how/ why the evidence supports your claim.


Present the following prompt to students:

Read the following claim. What type of evidence would support this claim? Write an example piece of evidence OR actual evidence you remember from a source you have read or watched that supports this claim. What type of evidence would disprove this claim?

CLAIM: "FRT should NOT be used for policing until regulations have been put in place."

Facilitate a full class discussion to hear students ideas. Be sure to elicit a balance of evidence that prove and disprove the claim.


Present definitions for claim, evidence, and reasoning [included in slide deck]. Present students with the claims "Police department guidelines ensure the FRT is safely applied in policing" and "FRT should NOT be used for policing until regulations have been put in place" and break down what makes this a claim rather than evidence or reasoning. Present evidence from an article/video students have read in previous lessons in this module [see slide deck] and break down or elicit from students why this is evidence. Finally, elicit from students how they can explain the connection between the evidence and the claim. [Sample reasoning/ analysis is included in slide deck.] Model this on the Evidence Tracker graphic organizer.


Students must write at minimum two distinct claims with evidence and reasoning pulling on the readings and videos they explored in Module 4 but should certainly be encouraged to write more. One claim must account for the ways in which bias influences the reliability of FRT. Another claim must address the roles of guidelines/ regulations. Students are also challenged to complete the center of the evidence tracker, which prompts them to identify "middle ground" arguments.

Once students have come up with at least two new claims, the can begin drafting their opening statements for the SPAR debate in the next lesson. Be sure to assign sides so you have an equal number of students arguing affirmative and negative positions in response to the prompt: FRT should NOT be used for policing until regulations have been put in place.

Wrap Up

Depending on where your students are in this process, you can do a quick wrap up showing students how they will incorporate these new claims, evidence and reasoning into their SPAR opening statements and give them some time to start on that; OR you can just give that quick wrap up, encourage them to work on that at home, and start lesson 5 with 10 minutes for refining opening statements.

Last updated