Would this reason matter to your reader?

“We should have the tray because I like recommending books.”

The writer has expressed enthusiasm and given a reason. But what does the reader still need explained? Why might that enthusiasm matter to someone deciding whether to support the proposal?

For your next Year 4 persuasive-writing lesson, make that missing connection the focus of your modelling. Keep a proposal constant, change its intended reader, and ask students to explain why their reason could matter to that person.

Keep the proposal the same

This is an original suggested classroom task: propose a one-week trial of a book-recommendation tray beside the classroom library, using existing books. Recommendations would explain who might enjoy each book. Students would take turns returning the books.

Compare messages to classmates considering using the tray and to the teacher considering approving it. These arrangements are proposals for discussion; the possible benefits have not been measured.

Before writing, ask students to identify the proposed action and its supporting reason in the opening sentence. Then name the intended reader. For this task, use audience to mean the intended reader or listener, and purpose to mean what the writer wants the message to achieve.

If students cannot yet separate the action from the reason, rehearse aloud: “We want to try a recommendation tray. Our reason is…” Establish the shared proposal before asking students to adapt it for different readers.

Compare reasons for different readers

Display these worked revisions together. Read each as a possible appeal to a reader, then use the final column to question your assumptions.

Ask whether either reason could matter to both audiences. A classmate may care about an organised shelf; a teacher may care about finding an enjoyable book. A reader’s role gives you something to investigate, but it does not tell you everything that person values.

Show the connection explicitly

Model your thinking: “This message suggests that recommendations could help classmates choose a book. The words ‘because each recommendation would explain who might enjoy it’ explain how the proposed tray could help with that decision.” Underline that explanation on your classroom copy.

In the teacher’s message, identify the proposed arrangements first: existing books and turns returning them. Then underline the explanation beginning with “so”. Ask students which arrangement connects to cost and which connects to organisation. Check whether the proposed return routine needs more detail before a reader could judge it.

This focus connects with Year 4 expectations for creating texts for purposes and audiences, developing ideas with details, and planning and revising persuasive writing with relevant, connected ideas. See the QCAA Year 4 English curriculum alignment.

The NSW Stage 2 audience and purpose reading guidance also addresses identifying audiences and considering how authors shape texts for them. Here, that reading focus informs an original writing comparison; it is not an additional Year 4 writing requirement.

Revise without inventing evidence

Offer this sentence for discussion: “Everyone will find their favourite book immediately.” Ask students what information would justify that promise. The proposed tray has not been trialled, and nothing in the scenario establishes that outcome.

Compare it with: “The recommendations could give readers a starting point when choosing a book.” This states a possible benefit. It still needs a reader to judge whether that benefit matters.

Ask what students would need to find out before making a stronger claim. They might ask classmates what makes a recommendation useful, then collect feedback if the trial goes ahead. Keep anticipated responses separate from information actually collected.

The NSW guidance’s literacy progression entries include examining supporting detail and evidence, and evaluating relevance to audience and purpose. These indicators can inform teaching and observation; they are not fixed Year 4 attainment requirements.

Try the comparison, then check the explanation

1. Ask students to write a revised reason for classmates and a revised reason for the teacher. Keep the proposal and known facts the same.
2. Have students underline the words explaining why each reader should care.
3. Ask a partner to name the possible reader concern and point to the words connecting the reason to it.
4. Have the partner flag any unsupported promise and suggest a question for the actual reader.

For support, offer oral rehearsal and the stem “This could matter to ___ because ___”. Let students dictate their sentences if spelling is getting in the way of showing their reasoning.

Use a narrow assessment question: has the student connected a reason to a plausible reader concern while preserving the facts? If the connection is missing, model another explanation before asking for more persuasive devices. If it is clear, invite feedback from a reader who disagrees and ask the student to revise in response. Treat this sample as information for your next teaching move, rather than proof of mastery.

An optional broader writing sequence

For a broader sequence, the supplied catalogue description for the Persuasive Texts Year 4 Unit lists the learning focus “Identify how purpose and audience shape text organisation and language choices.” It also names the “Audience Appeal Match-Up” activity. The tray comparison above is an original suggested task, separate from the product’s listed outdoor-learning assessment.

Take it back to a current draft

Choose one reason from a current draft. Name its reader, then add the explanation that shows why it could matter to them. Ask a partner to point to that connection.

Use the resulting sentences to decide whether students need further modelling or are ready to test their reasoning with an actual reader.