I know myself but I struggle to explain this well.
Anyone got any ideas?
Thanks
:-)
Critical Thinking Forum » Critical Thinking
Explaining the difference between evidence and an example
(13 posts)-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Examples are types of evidence, but evidence can include, so to speak, lots of examples. Thus we can quote the example of Sweden where, because of high taxes, alcohol is almost twice the price that it is in the UK. We could use this example in an argument about the effectiveness of controlling alcohol consumption by price, by claiming that the high price of alcohol in Sweden hasn’t solved the problem of binge-drinking. But we need to look for evidence of the price:consumption relationship in a range of other countries, in order to provide a stronger argument.
The ‘Daily Mail’ might be happy to draw a general inference from the claim ‘Boy has fit playing violent computer game’ but we would see the example of this boy as insufficient evidence to draw any useful inference about violent computer games. ‘49% of the UK population believes that we should execute murderers’ is evidence drawn from (presumably) thousands/millions of examples. It could be used (with care) to draw an inference about whether capital punishment should be re-introduced.
Drawing inferences from examples is, of course, not always illegitimate. The great critical thinker Charles Darwin did precisely that. But he saw the need to have lots of examples before he could claim that his argument was based on evidence.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Further thoughts on this subject: the difference between an example and evidence is rooted in context. As I said before, an example is a type of evidence (and sometimes, a highly significant piece of evidence). As the context gets bigger, big things can become examples; as the context gets smaller, small things can become evidence. As illustration, if we’re looking to draw inferences about ‘failed states’, then Somalia is an example that we could legitimately use. If we’re looking at the state of health care in Somalia, then the level of TB and polio in the country would be relevant evidence. In this way, there is no intrinsic difference between examples and evidence. It is the context which gives the difference.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Today I had a problem justifying the mark scheme for Summer 2008 Unit 4, Question 21(b). Question asks candidates to "name and explain the function of the following elements in the structure of the argument". Element was:
"The most gifted child runners usually do not go on to be Olympic champions"
The mark scheme says:
Example (accept analogy / comparison) used to support the claim that ‘there is no guarantee that a brilliant child will make a brilliant adult.’
Does this mean that a candidate gets no marks if he identifies this as evidence? If so, that seems a bit harsh to me.
Posted 1 year ago # -
My reply to FajrC's original query is that I define "evidence" in very simple terms by saying that is information that has come - or could have come - from an experiment, survey or questionnaire. Perhaps this is to simplistic, I leave others to decide.
But, using my usual definition of evidence, I would agree wholeheartedly with David. The statement about gifted child runners is indeed an example to support the writer's claim. And how do we know about these runners? presumably someone, somewhere, has collected the data; therefore it comes under the definition of evidence.
If I was going over this question with candidates, I'd like to be telling them that 'example' or 'evidence' would attract marks. I'd find it hard to justify the fact that an examiner allows the other 3 answers but not 'evidence'.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Harsh because wrong. If the author had said that 'x was a gifted child runner but did not go on to become an Olympic champion', then we might be happy to see this as no more than an example. But in that it is using lots of examples (in fact, the word 'usually' might mean hundreds or thousands of examples), the 'function' of this reference is that of providing evidence. One could, of course, say that 'gifted child runners' are an example in a more general category of early promise not translating into later achievement. In this way, we have an example. But not to award credit for offering 'evidence' as the answer is not only wrong, but is also possibly litigious.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Thanks for all your replies.
And for highlighting an error on the paper!
:-)Posted 1 year ago # -
Hi
Another unit 4 query jan 09 legacy."Graffiti cost Londoners £100m a year, and the country as a whole more than a billion, we are told"
Why haven't they allowed this as evidence? As Roy says above isn't it evidence used as an example? so shouldn't they get something for evidence?
ThanksPosted 1 year ago # -
UPDATE
Looking at the examiners report it says it is evidence!
How can they publish a mark scheme which is different?Bearing in mind I have no confidence teaching A2 this really doesn't help.
Posted 1 year ago # -
This confused me as well - it must have been evidence rather than example. An unfortunate slip.
I have to say that I do find the Unit 4 mark schemes and examiner reports very well-written, useful and often quite amusing. The mark schemes on their own don't tell the whole story, as they are generally written pre-standardisation.
Posted 1 year ago # -
With regard to David's comment regarding the accuracy of markschemes, having been involved in writing these for many years, my experience was that you produced a markscheme when you wrote the paper,then it was changed at the editing stage, then you would make any necessary changes at standardisation, and then ensure that the version that went to print was the correct version. David, you're far too kind (and insufficiently critical).
For me the episode shows a fuzziness in thinking about the nature of evidence and example.
Posted 1 year ago # -
In my defence, I thought I would try to give credit where I think it's due. I have noticed that the Unit 4 mark schemes and examiner reports are being written to try to help teachers rather than just providing a scheme for examiners. It is useful, for example, that they are now providing justifications for the multiple choice questions, although sadly this is the last session where there will be such a section on the Unit 4 paper.
I agree though that we have identified problems in distinguishing between evidence and examples. It is important that students can identify the structure in reasoning but is there really such value in insisting that they identify the argument elements so precisely?
Posted 1 year ago # -
David's last point in which he questions the value of precise identification of the components of an argument is very timely. Does it really matter whether x is evidence or example? Does it make any difference to the nature of the argument? No, in both cases. Analysis of argumentation has value in illuminating the nature of the sequence of reasoning but this value is mainly because of then being able to do evaluation of the reasoning. Whether x is an example or evidence becomes at best a footnote in this evaluative task.
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.