Teenage Vaping: A Persuasive Campaign
Created byKaren Fugate
16 views0 downloads

Teenage Vaping: A Persuasive Campaign

Grade 7English40 days
In this 7th-grade English project, students create a persuasive campaign to reduce teenage vaping in their community. They explore the health risks associated with vaping, develop evidence-based arguments, and refute common pro-vaping claims. Students use persuasive writing techniques and incorporate feedback to maximize the impact of their campaign, aiming to persuade their peers to stop vaping.
Teenage VapingPersuasive CampaignHealth RisksCounterclaimsEvidence-Based ArgumentsPersuasive WritingFeedback
Want to create your own PBL Recipe?Use our AI-powered tools to design engaging project-based learning experiences for your students.
📝

Inquiry Framework

Question Framework

Driving Question

The overarching question that guides the entire project.How can we, as concerned students, create a persuasive campaign using evidence-based arguments and persuasive writing techniques, to effectively reduce or stop teenage vaping in our community, while addressing common pro-vaping arguments and incorporating feedback to maximize our impact?

Essential Questions

Supporting questions that break down major concepts.
  • Why do teens vape?
  • What are the health risks associated with vaping?
  • What are the benefits of not vaping?
  • How can we persuade teens to stop vaping?
  • What are some common arguments in favor of vaping, and how can we refute them?
  • How can we use persuasive writing techniques to create an effective anti-vaping campaign?
  • How can we use evidence to support our claims about the dangers of vaping?
  • How can we organize our campaign to be as persuasive as possible?
  • How can we use formal, academic language to make our campaign more credible?
  • How can we incorporate feedback from others to improve our campaign?

Standards & Learning Goals

Learning Goals

By the end of this project, students will be able to:
  • Develop persuasive arguments against teenage vaping using evidence.
  • Understand the health risks and benefits associated with vaping and not vaping.
  • Refute common arguments in favor of vaping with evidence-based counterclaims.
  • Improve persuasive writing through feedback and collaboration.
  • Use formal, academic language to enhance credibility.
  • Organize persuasive content effectively (introduction, body, conclusion).
  • Interpret and incorporate feedback to refine arguments.

Teacher Standards

State Opinion
Primary
I can state my opinion.Reason: Forms the basis of persuasive writing.
Support Opinion
Primary
I can support my opinion.Reason: Essential for building a persuasive argument.
Define Claim/Counterclaim
Primary
I can define a claim and counterclaim.Reason: Necessary to construct a balanced and effective argument.
Write Claims/Counterclaims
Primary
I can write claims and counterclaims.Reason: Practical application of defining claims and counterclaims.
Support Claim with Evidence
Primary
I can support my claim with evidence.Reason: Crucial for substantiating arguments and increasing persuasiveness.
Refute Counterclaims with Evidence
Primary
I can explain why the counterclaims are incorrect using evidence.Reason: Strengthens the primary claim by disproving opposing arguments.
Organize Writing
Primary
I can organize my writing into introduction/body/conclusion.Reason: Provides a clear and logical structure for persuasive writing.
Use Formal Language
Primary
I can use formal, academic language to argue.Reason: Enhances the credibility and professionalism of the argument.
Explain Evidence
Primary
I can explain how my evidence supports my claim.Reason: Connects evidence to claims, reinforcing the argument's validity.
Use Feedback
Secondary
I can use feedback to improve my thinkingReason: Incorporating feedback is key to refining arguments and improving the overall campaign.
Interpret Ideas
Secondary
I can interpret other people’s ideas to improve my own.Reason: Enhances the development of well-rounded and persuasive arguments.

Entry Events

Events that will be used to introduce the project to students

Vaping Emergency

A local teen collapses due to a vaping-related illness, sparking a school-wide debate. Students examine news reports, interview health professionals, and analyze the teen's social media to understand the circumstances and the impact of vaping on their community. This event fosters inquiry into the health risks and social pressures associated with vaping.
📚

Portfolio Activities

Portfolio Activities

These activities progressively build towards your learning goals, with each submission contributing to the student's final portfolio.
Activity 1

Take a Stand: Opinion Statement Builder

Students will begin by choosing a specific position on teenage vaping (e.g., complete ban, regulated use, etc.) and articulating their personal opinion. They will then brainstorm initial reasons to support their viewpoint.

Steps

Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.
1. Review the definition of 'opinion' and 'persuasion'.
2. Choose a specific stance on teenage vaping.
3. Write a clear opinion statement (e.g., "I believe that teenage vaping should be banned because...").
4. Brainstorm at least three reasons to support your opinion.

Final Product

What students will submit as the final product of the activityA well-defined opinion statement with at least three supporting reasons.

Alignment

How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsCovers 'State Opinion' and 'Support Opinion'. Introduces the concept of persuasive arguments and the importance of taking a stance.
Activity 2

Claim vs. Counterclaim: The Debate Begins

Students will explore common arguments made in favor of teenage vaping and formulate counterclaims. They will practice writing clear and concise claims and counterclaims.

Steps

Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.
1. Research common arguments in favor of teenage vaping (e.g., stress relief, social acceptance).
2. For each pro-vaping argument, write a counterclaim that challenges its validity.
3. Ensure counterclaims directly address the original claim.

Final Product

What students will submit as the final product of the activityA list of common pro-vaping claims with corresponding counterclaims.

Alignment

How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAddresses 'Define Claim/Counterclaim' and 'Write Claims/Counterclaims'. Students learn to anticipate and address opposing viewpoints.
Activity 3

Evidence Power-Up: Research and Cite

Students will research the health risks and social consequences of teenage vaping and gather evidence to support their claims and refute counterclaims. They will cite sources appropriately.

Steps

Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.
1. Research the health risks and social consequences of teenage vaping using reliable sources (e.g., CDC, NIH).
2. Find evidence to support your initial opinion statement.
3. Find evidence to refute the pro-vaping claims identified in Activity 2.
4. Create an annotated bibliography, citing each source and summarizing its relevance to your argument.

Final Product

What students will submit as the final product of the activityAn annotated bibliography of evidence supporting their opinion and refuting pro-vaping claims.

Alignment

How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsFocuses on 'Support Claim with Evidence' and 'Refute Counterclaims with Evidence'. Students learn to substantiate their arguments with credible evidence.
Activity 4

Connecting the Dots: Evidence Explanation

Students will write explanations connecting their evidence to their claims and counterclaims. They will practice articulating how the evidence supports their position and weakens opposing arguments.

Steps

Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.
1. For each piece of evidence, write a paragraph explaining how it supports your main claim.
2. For each piece of evidence used to refute a pro-vaping claim, write a paragraph explaining how it weakens the opposing argument.
3. Use clear and concise language to explain the connection between evidence and arguments.

Final Product

What students will submit as the final product of the activityA series of paragraphs explaining the link between their claims, counterclaims, and supporting evidence.

Alignment

How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsCovers 'Explain Evidence'. Students learn to connect evidence to their claims in a clear and logical manner.
Activity 5

Feedback Fusion: Revise and Refine

Students will participate in peer review, providing and receiving feedback on their persuasive messages. They will use feedback to revise and improve their writing.

Steps

Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.
1. Exchange drafts with a partner.
2. Provide constructive feedback on your partner's message, focusing on clarity, evidence, and organization.
3. Revise your own message based on the feedback you receive.

Final Product

What students will submit as the final product of the activityA revised persuasive campaign message, incorporating feedback from peers.

Alignment

How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsFocuses on 'Use Feedback' and 'Interpret Ideas'. Students learn to improve their work through constructive criticism.
🏆

Rubric & Reflection

Portfolio Rubric

Grading criteria for assessing the overall project portfolio

Persuasive Campaign Against Teenage Vaping Rubric

Category 1

Opinion Statement and Initial Support

This category assesses the student's ability to articulate a clear opinion on teenage vaping and provide initial supporting reasons.
Criterion 1

Clarity of Opinion

The clarity and strength of the opinion statement.

Beginning
1 Points

Opinion statement is vague, unclear, or missing. Reasons provided are irrelevant or do not support the opinion.

Developing
2 Points

Opinion statement is somewhat clear but lacks focus. Reasons are loosely connected and provide limited support.

Proficient
3 Points

Opinion statement is clear, focused, and directly addresses the issue of teenage vaping. Reasons are relevant and provide solid support.

Exemplary
4 Points

Opinion statement is exceptionally clear, compelling, and takes a strong stance on teenage vaping. Reasons are highly relevant, persuasive, and offer nuanced support.

Criterion 2

Supporting Reasons

The relevance, quality, and number of reasons supporting the opinion.

Beginning
1 Points

Provides one or no reasons, which are not relevant.

Developing
2 Points

Provides 2 reasons with limited relevance.

Proficient
3 Points

Provides 3 relevant reasons.

Exemplary
4 Points

Provides more than 3 highly relevant and persuasive reasons.

Category 2

Claims and Counterclaims

This category evaluates the student's ability to identify and refute common arguments in favor of teenage vaping.
Criterion 1

Identification of Pro-Vaping Claims

The ability to accurately identify common arguments in favor of teenage vaping.

Beginning
1 Points

Fails to identify any pro-vaping arguments or presents inaccurate arguments.

Developing
2 Points

Identifies one or two pro-vaping arguments but demonstrates a limited understanding of their nuances.

Proficient
3 Points

Accurately identifies several common pro-vaping arguments.

Exemplary
4 Points

Identifies a comprehensive range of pro-vaping arguments, demonstrating a deep understanding of the topic.

Criterion 2

Quality of Counterclaims

The quality and effectiveness of the counterclaims in challenging pro-vaping arguments.

Beginning
1 Points

Counterclaims are missing, irrelevant, or fail to address the original claims.

Developing
2 Points

Counterclaims are weak, unclear, or only partially address the original claims.

Proficient
3 Points

Counterclaims are clear, logical, and effectively challenge the original claims.

Exemplary
4 Points

Counterclaims are insightful, persuasive, and provide compelling rebuttals to the original claims.

Category 3

Evidence and Research

This category assesses the student's ability to research, gather, and cite evidence to support their arguments and refute counterclaims.
Criterion 1

Quality of Research

The breadth and depth of research on the health risks and social consequences of teenage vaping.

Beginning
1 Points

Demonstrates minimal research and relies on unreliable sources.

Developing
2 Points

Conducts limited research and uses a mix of reliable and unreliable sources.

Proficient
3 Points

Conducts thorough research using reliable sources (e.g., CDC, NIH).

Exemplary
4 Points

Conducts extensive research, exploring a variety of reliable sources and demonstrating a deep understanding of the topic.

Criterion 2

Relevance of Evidence

The appropriateness and relevance of the evidence used to support the student's opinion and refute pro-vaping claims.

Beginning
1 Points

Evidence is missing, irrelevant, or does not support the claims.

Developing
2 Points

Evidence is weak, limited, or only loosely connected to the claims.

Proficient
3 Points

Evidence is relevant, credible, and provides solid support for the claims.

Exemplary
4 Points

Evidence is compelling, persuasive, and provides strong support for the claims while effectively refuting opposing arguments.

Criterion 3

Annotated Bibliography

The accuracy and completeness of the annotated bibliography, including proper citation of sources.

Beginning
1 Points

Annotated bibliography is missing, incomplete, or contains significant errors in citation.

Developing
2 Points

Annotated bibliography is partially complete and contains some errors in citation.

Proficient
3 Points

Annotated bibliography is complete and accurately cites all sources.

Exemplary
4 Points

Annotated bibliography is comprehensive, well-organized, and provides insightful summaries of each source's relevance.

Category 4

Connecting Evidence to Arguments

This category evaluates the student's ability to explain how evidence supports their claims and refutes counterclaims.
Criterion 1

Clarity of Explanations

The clarity and coherence of the explanations linking evidence to claims and counterclaims.

Beginning
1 Points

Explanations are missing, unclear, or fail to connect evidence to claims.

Developing
2 Points

Explanations are weak, confusing, or only partially connect evidence to claims.

Proficient
3 Points

Explanations are clear, concise, and logically connect evidence to claims and counterclaims.

Exemplary
4 Points

Explanations are insightful, persuasive, and demonstrate a deep understanding of the relationship between evidence and arguments.

Criterion 2

Depth of Understanding

The depth of understanding demonstrated in explaining how evidence supports the student's opinion and weakens opposing arguments.

Beginning
1 Points

Demonstrates minimal understanding of the evidence and its implications.

Developing
2 Points

Demonstrates a basic understanding of the evidence but struggles to explain its significance.

Proficient
3 Points

Demonstrates a thorough understanding of the evidence and its implications for both supporting their claim and refuting counterclaims.

Exemplary
4 Points

Demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the evidence, offering nuanced insights into its implications and effectively using it to strengthen their arguments and weaken opposing viewpoints.

Category 5

Feedback and Revision

This category assesses the student's ability to provide and utilize feedback to improve their persuasive writing.
Criterion 1

Quality of Feedback

The quality and relevance of the feedback provided to peers.

Beginning
1 Points

Provides minimal or irrelevant feedback.

Developing
2 Points

Provides some feedback, but it lacks depth and relevance.

Proficient
3 Points

Provides constructive feedback that is relevant and helpful.

Exemplary
4 Points

Provides insightful and actionable feedback that significantly contributes to the improvement of the peer's work.

Criterion 2

Incorporation of Feedback

The extent to which the student incorporates feedback to revise and improve their own work.

Beginning
1 Points

Fails to incorporate feedback or makes minimal changes.

Developing
2 Points

Incorporates some feedback, but the revisions are superficial or ineffective.

Proficient
3 Points

Incorporates feedback effectively to revise and improve their work.

Exemplary
4 Points

Demonstrates a thoughtful and comprehensive revision process, significantly improving their work based on feedback.

Reflection Prompts

End-of-project reflection questions to get students to think about their learning
Question 1

How has your understanding of teenage vaping evolved throughout this project?

Text
Required
Question 2

What was the most challenging aspect of creating a persuasive campaign against teenage vaping, and how did you overcome it?

Text
Required
Question 3

To what extent do you believe your campaign could effectively reduce or stop teenage vaping?

Scale
Required
Question 4

How did receiving and incorporating feedback from your peers impact the final persuasive message of your campaign?

Text
Required
Question 5

Which specific piece of evidence had the most significant impact on your argument, and why?

Text
Required