I'm working on a english discussion question and need a sample draft to help me understand better. There is two questions they are both to be 200-300 words each. Here is question 1: Prior to beginning work on this discussion, read Chapters 7 and 8 in you

Running head: CRITICAL EVALUATION 1

CRITICAL EVALUATION 5

Critical Evaluation: Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Preschool

Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course

Date

Developmentally Appropriate Practices in Preschool

Today, what each child need are strategies to teach that will consider the ballooning population of children who converse in a language other than English in the United States. Thus, the appropriate developmental practice (DAP) promotes the importance of early childhood education for improved learning progressions amongst preschool children (Neuman, Copple, & Bredekamp, 2000). There are three approaches to help these learners achieve their goals; language classroom, bilingual classroom, and English language classroom. According to available literature, dual language learners stand to benefit from participation in high-quality preschool. However, in States like California, dual language learners’ enrolment in preschool is very low compared to non-dual language learners. According to Nunan (1999), the second language learning process is not quick; learners have to attend classes for around six months because the whole process can only be effective after the sixth month.  The big question is, do dual language learners stand a chance to benefit from participation in high-quality preschool?

Supporting claim

First, the answer will be yes. Neuman et al. are on point while stating that DAP promotes the importance of early childhood education and improved learning amongst preschool children, and this will be the first premise. Secondly, there are even three different approaches adopted for different classes to ensure this is achieved. Although America enjoys higher literacy rates, society expects virtually every child to benefit from education, whether English speaking or dual language user. This assertion is all-inclusive, meaning not only English speaking but also dual language learners stand equal chances of benefiting from preschool learning. In other words, DAP promotes the importance of preschool education for all children; dual language learners benefit, and every learner benefits too. From this statement, it is evident that the truth of its premise guarantees the truth of its conclusion, thus a valid argument in a standard form.

In evaluating this reasoning, it can be concluded that it is a formal kind of reasoning. As Hardy et al. (2015) put it, formal reasoning is used to evaluate and examine the logical relationship between the conclusion and supporting assertions. Therefore, since the conclusion has been determined by establishing the truth of the supporting premises, then the argument is formal reasoning which is deductive in nature. Formal reasoning is deductive in nature. In simple terms, as argued above, any conclusion of a valid formal argument goes in line with the premises and in its conclusion produces no new information but reconstructs what is already known into a new proclamation of the same information. Therefore, dual language learners stand to benefit from participation in high-quality preschool because DAP promotes the importance of early childhood education for improved learning progressions amongst preschool children.

Opposing side

On the opposing side, our main topic question can still be subjected to a lot of critics. Consider the statement once again, “dual language learners stand to benefit from participation in high-quality preschool." This can mean only dual language learners stand chances of benefiting from high-quality preschool learning. However, the assertion by Neuman, Copple, & Bredekamp (2000) that, “DAP promotes the importance of early childhood education for improved learning progressions amongst preschool children” makes the conclusion invalid because DAP's early childhood activities are all-inclusive and consider all children both dual speaking and English speaking learners. Secondly, there are three approaches to help different learners achieve their goals. There is a language classroom, a bilingual classroom, and an English language classroom. This means that there is no single child is sidelined with this program. The establishment of different classes ensures that no learner is left behind. Third, in States like California, dual language learners' enrolment in preschool is very low compared to non-dual language learners. The essence of this is that the majority are going to benefit from this program for English learners. Lastly, according to Nunan (1999), the second language learning process is not quick and takes longer before learners can adapt to it. Therefore, learners are required to attend classes for around six months because the whole process can only be effective after the sixth month. How then can they stand a chance of benefiting more compared to others?

Although this argument was intended to be true, all the premises that led to its conclusion are not true. For any argument to be a sound argument, then validity is necessary. The point is DAP provides equal opportunity to all learners, and all participants will automatically benefit. Since the conclusion doesn't qualify, and all three of the premises are not true, then the statement is invalid with misguided reasoning. Most researchers will also term this kind of reasoning misguided. There exist approximately four theories on how to determine whether a conclusion follows from the premises. In this context, though it was intended to be true, the argument is invalid according to formal logic because it only addresses the probability of the truth of the premises and the conclusion. Therefore, dual language learners stand to benefit from participation in high-quality preschool. This statement contradicts the assertion that the appropriate developmental practice promotes the importance of early childhood education for improved learning progressions amongst all preschool children. The benefit is for all preschool learners.

Reference

Hardy, J., Foster, C., & Zúñiga y Postigo, G. (2015). With good reason: A guide to critical thinking

Neuman, S. B., Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2000). Learning to read and write: Developmentally appropriate practices for young children. National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching & Learning. Heinle & Heinle Publishers, 7625 Empire Dr., Florence, KY 41042-2978.