Analyzing Text Portfolio
Organizer
For this portfolio, you will write an essay in which you analyze and evaluate conflicting information based on two informative texts on genetically modified fish you read in the unit.
Use the table below to begin brainstorming information for your essay.
Genetically Modified Salmon Can Feed the World
Say No to Genetically Engineered Salmon
Summary
(A good way to summarize is SWBST:
Somebody…
Wanted…
But…
So…
Then…)
Persuasive Techniques Used
(See Unit 7, Lesson 5 to review.)
Points where the texts disagree (conflicting information):
Points where the texts interpret information differently:
Summary:
Genetically Modified Salmon Can Feed the World: The text argues that genetically modified salmon can help solve the global food crisis by providing a sustainable and plentiful source of food. It highlights the advantages of genetically modifying salmon, such as faster growth rates and disease resistance.
Say No to Genetically Engineered Salmon: This text opposes genetically engineered salmon, claiming that it poses significant environmental and health risks. It argues that the introduction of genetically modified fish may harm natural ecosystems and potentially cause unknown health problems for consumers.
Persuasive Techniques Used:
Genetically Modified Salmon Can Feed the World: The text uses logical reasoning to support its claims, presenting scientific evidence and statistics. It also appeals to the audience's sense of urgency regarding the global food crisis.
Say No to Genetically Engineered Salmon: This text uses emotional appeal to evoke fear and concern in the audience. It presents anecdotal evidence and personal narratives to emphasize the potential negative consequences of genetically modified fish.
Points where the texts disagree (conflicting information):
1. The first text argues that genetically modified salmon can provide a sustainable and abundant source of food to help address the global food crisis. The second text opposes genetically modified salmon, raising concerns about its potential negative impact on ecosystems and personal health.
2. The first text claims that genetically modified salmon have faster growth rates and are more disease-resistant, allowing for increased production and reduced environmental impact. The second text argues that the potential spread of genetically modified fish in the wild may disrupt natural ecosystems and harm native species.
Points where the texts interpret information differently:
1. The first text interprets the advantages of genetically modified salmon, such as faster growth rates and disease resistance, as beneficial for sustainable food production. The second text interprets the same information as potential threats to ecosystems and human health.
2. The first text focuses on the potential benefits of genetically modified salmon in solving the global food crisis. The second text emphasizes the potential risks associated with genetically modified fish and argues for caution and regulation in their use.