Home > Strategies and Skill Development > Social Reasoning Strategy Families > Reconciliation


Reconciliation strategies are strategies for dealing with the fact that the same situation or idea may be perceived differently by different people, who may then create very different textual accounts of the same underlying object. When perspectives and beliefs differ, it is often necessary to reconcile these differences—at least in one's own mind—and to attempt to bridge differences to achieve a clearer understanding or adopt a common purpose. Such strategies include methods for identifying when differing accounts can be squared by considering differences in background knowledge or point of view; methods for evaluating the credibility of a source or witness; and methods for assembling a common story by piecing together multiple pieces of evidence. The hypothesized development of these skills is presented in Development Table 6.


Literature Note - Reconcilation

Development Table 6. Hypotheses about Development of ReconciliationSkills


Level
Interpretation
Deliberation
Expression
Preliminary
(oral)
Can identify an author’s purpose and viewpoint.
Can distinguish between the author’s viewpoint and one’s own.
Can explain in a sentence why an author wrote a particular text.
Foundational
(fundamental literacies)
Using formal features as cues, can distinguish between first-hand and second-hand accounts of events. Correcting for differences in perspective, can identify different descriptions of the same events or actions.
Can deploy comparison strategies in which one examines multiple accounts of the same events and identifies shared and contrasting elements.
Can prepare short factual reports that present the common, agreed-upon information across a set of accounts that differ in viewpoint and immediacy.
Basic
(text-based literacy)
Can recognize bias and loaded language; in general, can identify aspects of a text that represent subjective evaluations rather than objective descriptions.
Can deploy evaluation strategies that consider how an author’s perspective and/or bias has influenced the selection and presentation of information.
Can prepare an objective review of the information provided by a source, outlining both the information provided by the source and factors that might support or weaken confidence in its reliability.
Intermediate
(multiple perspectives)
Can integrate information provided by multiple sources to form an internally consistent causal model of events.
Can deploy evaluation strategies that examine primary sources and extract evidence that bears on their truthfulness and reliability.
Can deploy evaluation strategies that analyze how secondary sources make use of information from primary sources.
Can prepare objective reports that combine information from multiple perspectives, making selective use of sources in order to correct for the effectives of bias and perspective.
Advanced
(discourse communities)
Can consistently evaluate the veracity and reliability of sources, taking into account a variety of factors, including immediacy of knowledge, general reliability, bias, perspective, and the testimony of other witnesses or sources whose reliability is not in question.
Can deploy analytical strategies that map how different sources agree and disagree and trace possible causes for differences in perception of and reaction to the events described.
Can prepare a written analysis of a historical event (or other disputable situation) that considers multiple sources of evidence, evaluates multiple causal explanations, and determines what interpretation of the course of events best accounts for the evidence.



Home | About CBAL | Acknowledgments | Contact Us

© 2012 Educational Testing Service. The Common Core State Standards © copyright 2010 National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved.

All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.