The following is Grizzlybear's counter-argument to the allegation made by his son's teacher:- His son is an average learner, not a delayed learner. He has the ability to learn things in the same way that the other kids do.
<h3>What does the argument determine?</h3>
Wind Wolf is the youngster in the text "An Indian Father's Plea" whose instructor tells his father that he is a slow learner who grasps things too slowly in relation to the other children in the class.
Wind Wolf's father strongly opposes this notion, believing that his child is equally capable of learning in school.
Wind-father Wolf claims that his son's teacher does not know him and that his son is not really a slow learner.
His father's argument is flawed because there is no proof to show that Wind-Wolf is progressing at the same rate as other children his age, as the teacher claims.
Wind-learning Wolf has occurred culturally, and while he is clearly educated as a result, this does not corroborate his father's claim that he is not a slow learner.
He mentions Wind-Wolf having learned differently, but provides no convincing proof to back up his claim.
Although I disagree that Medicine Grizzlybear's thesis was not adequately substantiated, there is evidence that his assertion was not properly supported.
Medicine Grizzly bear and Wind-Wolf are clearly well educated; in fact, in some areas, they are more educated than most pupils, particularly culturally.
Check out the link below to learn more about
brainly.com/question/7645054
#SPJ1
