All questions
Question 1
In a short video commentary for a media class, Talia argues about screen time at home.
Main argument/thesis: Families should set a “no screens during homework” rule.
Claim 1 (supported): Talia says multitasking makes homework take longer. She gives a reason: switching attention between apps and assignments breaks concentration, so students need extra time to re-focus.
Claim 2 (supported): She says the rule is realistic because it only applies during homework time, not all day. She explains that students can still use screens afterward, which makes the rule easier to follow.
Claim 3 (unsupported): She says, “All students will get straight A’s if they do this,” with no evidence.
Claim 4 (unsupported): She adds, “Anyone who disagrees just doesn’t care about learning,” which attacks people instead of giving support.
Which choice identifies a claim that Talia does not support with reasons or evidence?
- Multitasking makes homework take longer because switching attention breaks concentration.
- The rule is realistic because it only applies during homework time, not all day.
- All students will get straight A’s if they follow this rule while doing their homework. (correct answer)
- Families should set this rule because a no-screens time helps students stay on task.
Explanation: The answer is that all students will get straight A’s if they follow the rule. Talia states this as a guarantee but never backs it up—she gives no studies, examples, or reasoning to show why the rule would raise everyone’s grades. It is a bare promise, so it is a claim with no support.
The choice about multitasking making homework take longer is supported: Talia explains that switching attention breaks concentration, which is a reason. The choice about the rule being realistic is also supported: she explains it only applies during homework time, so students can still use screens later. The choice about families setting the rule is Talia’s main argument, and she does support it with reasoning about staying on task—so it is not an unsupported claim either.
To find an unsupported claim, ask, “How does the speaker know this? What proof is offered?” Be extra skeptical of “too good to be true” promises like “all students will get straight A’s,” which sound powerful but rest on nothing.
Question 2
At a community meeting with families and students, a coach speaks against canceling after-school sports to create more tutoring time. He makes several statements during his speech:
Main argument/thesis: The school should keep after-school sports while also offering tutoring.
The coach makes the following four statements as he explains his position to the audience.
Which statement does the coach support with data (numbers) rather than just an opinion?
- Sports are the only reason that any students in our school still come to class each day.
- Athletes had a 96% average attendance rate last semester, compared to 92% for the non-athletes. (correct answer)
- Tutoring never works anyway, so spending more school time on it would just be wasted effort.
- Practice builds the kind of teamwork and discipline that helps students succeed in their classes.
Explanation: The right answer is the statement about athletes having a 96% average attendance rate compared to 92% for non-athletes. This is the only choice backed by data, meaning actual numbers or statistics you could check, instead of just the speaker's opinion.
The claim that sports are the only reason students come to class is an exaggerated opinion; the coach offers no numbers or proof, and 'only reason' is an extreme statement no evidence supports.
The claim that tutoring never works is also just an opinion, and an unfair one, because it uses the absolute word 'never' with no examples or data behind it.
The statement that practice builds teamwork and discipline sounds reasonable and even supports the coach's argument, but it is still an opinion about qualities like teamwork, not a measurable fact with numbers.
Remember: data means quantifiable evidence such as percentages, statistics, or counts. When you look for the data-supported claim, hunt for the choice with real numbers you could verify, not the one that simply sounds convincing or dramatic.
Question 3
In a product pitch to the PTA, two students, Sam and Priya, propose selling healthy snack packs at school events.
Main argument/thesis: The PTA should approve healthy snack packs instead of candy-only sales.
Claim 1 (supported): They say many families want healthier options. They report results from a quick survey of 120 event-goers: 78 said they would buy a snack pack with fruit, popcorn, and water.
Claim 2 (supported): They say the plan can still raise money. They show a simple calculation: if each pack costs 1.20tomakeandsellsfor2.00, the profit is $0.80 per pack.
Claim 3 (unsupported): Sam says, “These snack packs are the healthiest food you can eat,” without nutrition facts or comparisons.
Claim 4 (unsupported): Priya says, “If we sell these, our events will be the most popular in the whole city,” without evidence.
Which statement is best supported by evidence in the pitch?
- These snack packs are the healthiest food you can eat.
- Many families want healthier options, supported by a survey where 78 out of 120 people said they would buy the pack. (correct answer)
- Our events will be the most popular in the whole city.
- Candy-only sales are always bad for everyone.
Explanation: This question assesses CCSS.SL.6.3: Delineate a speaker's argument and specific claims, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not. Delineating means describing or outlining the argument structure clearly by identifying the main argument (the speaker's overall position or thesis), specific claims (particular statements supporting that position), and determining how claims are supported (or not); well-supported claims have specific evidence like statistics, survey data, expert opinions, or logical reasoning with clear connections, while unsupported claims rely on exaggeration, bare assertions, or vague promises without backing. The correct answer B demonstrates the standard because it identifies the claim best supported by evidence - Sam and Priya provide specific survey data (78 out of 120 event-goers said they would buy the pack), which is concrete numerical evidence showing actual demand for healthier options rather than just asserting that families want them. The distractors fail because A and C are explicitly labeled as unsupported claims (no nutrition facts for "healthiest food"; no evidence for becoming "most popular in the whole city"), while D merely restates a version of the main argument rather than identifying a specific supported claim. This error reveals that students may not recognize the difference between claims with specific, quantifiable support (survey results with numbers) versus claims that use superlatives or absolute language without evidence, or they may think that positive-sounding statements don't need support. To teach this skill, emphasize the importance of specific evidence: compare "many families want healthier options" (vague) with "78 out of 120 people surveyed said they would buy it" (specific); teach students to look for concrete support like numbers from surveys, specific calculations, or cited sources rather than accepting broad claims. Practice evaluating evidence quality by creating a scale from "no support" to "strong support": no support = bare assertion ("it's the healthiest"), weak support = vague claim ("many people want"), strong support = specific data ("78 out of 120 surveyed"); have students rate claims from various speeches and justify their ratings; focus on teaching that the best-supported claims have specific, verifiable evidence rather than emotional appeals or exaggerated promises.
Question 4
During a student council meeting, Maya gives a 3-minute persuasive speech to classmates arguing that the school should move homeroom to the end of the day instead of the beginning.
Main argument/thesis: Homeroom should be at the end of the school day.
Claim 1 (supported): Maya says end-of-day homeroom would reduce late arrivals. She cites the assistant principal’s announcement that “tardies are highest in first period,” and she adds that when students miss the bus or get dropped off late, they would miss homeroom instead of a class that teaches new material.
Claim 2 (supported): She says it would improve organization. She explains that teachers could use the last 10 minutes to check planners, remind students of tomorrow’s materials, and help students pack what they need, which logically prevents forgetting items.
Claim 3 (unsupported): Maya says, “Everyone would feel less stressed immediately,” but she gives no survey, example pattern, or expert source.
Claim 4 (unsupported): She adds, “No teachers would mind this change,” without any evidence from teachers.
Which claim is supported by reasons and evidence in Maya’s speech?
- Everyone would feel less stressed immediately.
- No teachers would mind this change.
- End-of-day homeroom would reduce late arrivals because tardies are highest in first period and students who arrive late would miss homeroom instead of class. (correct answer)
- Homeroom should be moved because it would be better overall.
Explanation: This question assesses CCSS.SL.6.3: Delineate a speaker's argument and specific claims, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not. Delineating means describing or outlining the argument structure clearly by identifying the main argument (the speaker's overall position or thesis), specific claims (particular statements supporting that position), and determining how claims are supported (or not); supported claims have reasons (logical explanations) and/or evidence (facts, statistics, expert opinions, research findings, examples showing patterns), while unsupported claims are bare assertions, opinions stated as facts, emotional appeals, vague generalizations, single anecdotes, or circular reasoning lacking factual backing. The correct answer C demonstrates the standard because it accurately identifies a claim that Maya backs with both evidence (the assistant principal's announcement about "tardies are highest in first period") and logical reasoning (explaining that late students would miss homeroom instead of instructional class time), making this a well-supported claim rather than a mere assertion. The distractors fail because A and B are explicitly labeled as unsupported claims in the passage (Maya provides no survey data, examples, or expert sources for "everyone would feel less stressed" or "no teachers would mind"), while D merely restates the main argument/thesis rather than identifying a specific supporting claim with evidence. This error reveals that students may confuse unsupported assertions with supported claims, not recognizing that statements like "everyone would feel" or "no teachers would mind" require evidence to be considered supported, or they may confuse the main argument with specific supporting claims. To teach this skill, first help students identify argument structure using a graphic organizer with the main argument at top and specific claims branching below with evidence listed under each claim; then teach what counts as evidence (facts/statistics/data, expert opinions with credentials, research findings, specific examples showing patterns, logical reasoning) versus non-evidence (bare assertions, opinions as facts, emotional appeals, vague language, single anecdotes); practice by having students highlight evidence in transcripts and circle unsupported claims, then discuss the differences. Focus on the analytical skill of identifying whether claims are backed by reasons/evidence or are merely assertions, teaching students to ask "What evidence does the speaker provide for this claim?" rather than "Do I agree with this claim?"
Question 5
At a 6th-grade student council meeting, Maya gives a short persuasive speech arguing that the school should create a phone-free lunch zone in half of the cafeteria.
Main argument/thesis: The school should set aside a phone-free lunch area so students can talk more and feel better at lunch.
Claim 1: Students would socialize more. Support: Maya says her group counted 60 students at lunch for three days; in the area where fewer phones were out, students had about 2 conversations per table instead of 1.
Claim 2: A phone-free zone would reduce lunch stress. Support: She quotes the school counselor, Mr. Alvarez, who says he sees more friendship conflicts that start from group chats during lunch and that “a short break from phones can calm conflicts.”
Claim 3: “Everyone will be happier immediately.” Support: Maya does not give any facts, examples, or expert statements—she just says it’s obvious.
Claim 4: The zone would be easy to try. Support: She explains the school could start with a two-week trial using signs and student volunteers, then collect feedback.
Which claim is not supported by reasons or evidence in Maya’s speech?
- Students would socialize more in a phone-free lunch area.
- A phone-free zone would reduce lunch stress.
- Everyone will be happier immediately. (correct answer)
- The phone-free zone would be easy to try as a short trial.
Explanation: This question assesses CCSS.SL.6.3: Delineate a speaker's argument and specific claims, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not. Delineating means describing the argument structure clearly by identifying the main argument (speaker's overall position), specific claims (statements supporting that position), and evaluating how claims are supported - supported claims have reasons (logical explanations) and/or evidence (facts, statistics, expert opinions, research findings, examples showing patterns), while unsupported claims are bare assertions, opinions stated as facts, emotional appeals, vague generalizations, single anecdotes, or circular reasoning lacking factual backing. The correct answer C demonstrates the standard because it identifies Maya's claim "Everyone will be happier immediately" as unsupported - the stimulus explicitly states Maya "does not give any facts, examples, or expert statements—she just says it's obvious," making this a bare assertion without evidence. The distractors fail because they identify claims that actually have support: A has observational data (counted students and conversations), B has expert opinion (school counselor quote), and D has logical reasoning (explaining the trial process). This error reveals students may not understand what qualifies as evidence versus mere assertion, may accept statements at face value without checking for backing, or may confuse having an opinion with supporting that opinion. To teach this skill, use a graphic organizer with Main Argument at top, specific claims branching below, and evidence listed under each claim; teach what counts as evidence (facts/statistics/data, expert opinions with credentials, research findings, specific examples showing patterns, logical reasoning) versus NOT evidence (bare assertions, opinions as facts, emotional appeals, vague language, single anecdotes); practice with transcripts where students highlight evidence and circle unsupported claims, focusing on the analytical skill of evaluating whether claims are backed by reasons/evidence or are mere assertions.
Question 6
In a classroom debate, Priya argues that the school should keep daily recess for middle school.
Main argument/thesis: Middle school students should have daily recess because it supports learning and health.
Claim 1 (supported): Priya says movement helps the brain. She gives logical reasoning: after sitting for long periods, students get restless; a short break lets them return to class calmer and more ready to learn.
Claim 2 (supported): She cites the school nurse’s report that visits for “headache/stress” were higher on days when indoor recess was canceled for testing practice (she says the nurse counted 18 visits on a canceled-recess day compared to 9 on a normal day).
Claim 3 (unsupported): Priya says, “If we remove recess, students will stop caring about school,” but she gives no evidence.
Claim 4 (unsupported): She says, “Schools without recess have the worst behavior,” but she does not cite any study or examples.
Which statement is an example of logical reasoning (a cause-and-effect explanation) used as support?
- The nurse counted 18 headache/stress visits on a canceled-recess day compared to 9 on a normal day.
- After sitting a long time, students get restless; a short break helps them return calmer and ready to learn. (correct answer)
- If we remove recess, students will stop caring about school.
- Schools without recess have the worst behavior.
Explanation: This question assesses CCSS.SL.6.3: Delineate a speaker's argument and specific claims, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not. Delineating includes identifying types of support; logical reasoning means cause-and-effect explanations showing how one thing leads to another, while other evidence types include statistics, expert opinions, or examples. Answer B correctly identifies logical reasoning because it presents a clear cause-and-effect chain: sitting for long periods → students get restless → short break allows movement → students return calmer and ready to learn, showing how each step logically leads to the next. The distractors fail because A is statistical evidence (specific visit counts), C is an unsupported prediction without reasoning, and D is an unsupported comparison without evidence. This error reveals students may confuse statistical data with logical reasoning, not recognize cause-effect chains as a form of support, or think any prediction constitutes logical reasoning even without explaining the connection. To teach this skill, teach the structure of logical reasoning: "If A happens, then B results because..."; model cause-effect chains using arrows (long sitting → restlessness → break for movement → calmer return → better learning readiness); contrast logical reasoning with other evidence types using a chart: Statistics (numbers/counts), Expert Opinion (authority quotes), Examples (specific instances), Logical Reasoning (if-then-because explanations); practice identifying reasoning by looking for connection words ("after," "because," "leads to," "results in"); have students create their own cause-effect chains for classroom situations and explain each link. Focus on recognizing that logical reasoning explains HOW something works through connected steps, not just stating THAT it works.
Question 7
In a classroom presentation, Leo proposes a new policy: a 15-minute silent reading time at the start of every day.
Main argument/thesis: The school should add 15 minutes of silent reading every morning.
Claim 1 (supported): Leo says it would help students read more books. He cites the class library checkout record: in the month when their teacher tried “reading warm-up” twice a week, checkouts rose from 60 to 92.
Claim 2 (supported): He argues it would improve focus. He gives logical reasoning: starting with a quiet activity helps students transition from the hallway to learning, so teachers spend less time settling the class.
Claim 3 (unsupported): Leo says, “This will raise everyone’s test scores,” but he doesn’t provide any study, data, or explanation.
Claim 4 (unsupported): He adds, “No one will complain about losing 15 minutes,” without evidence.
Which claim is supported by statistical evidence?
- Silent reading will raise everyone’s test scores.
- No one will complain about losing 15 minutes.
- Silent reading would help students read more books, supported by checkouts rising from 60 to 92 during a trial month. (correct answer)
- Silent reading improves focus because quiet time helps students transition into learning.
Explanation: This question assesses CCSS.SL.6.3: Delineate a speaker's argument and specific claims, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not. Delineating means describing or outlining the argument structure clearly by identifying the main argument (the speaker's overall position or thesis), specific claims (particular statements supporting that position), and determining how claims are supported (or not); statistical evidence specifically refers to numerical data, measurements, percentages, or quantifiable information that supports a claim, as opposed to other types of evidence like expert opinions, logical reasoning, or examples. The correct answer C demonstrates the standard because it accurately identifies the claim supported by statistical evidence - Leo cites specific numbers from the class library checkout record showing checkouts rose from 60 to 92 during a trial month, which is quantifiable data supporting his claim that silent reading would help students read more books. The distractors fail because A and B are explicitly labeled as unsupported claims (no study, data, or explanation provided for test scores; no evidence for "no one will complain"), while D identifies a claim supported by logical reasoning rather than statistical evidence (the explanation about quiet time helping transitions is reasoning, not numerical data). This error reveals that students may not distinguish between different types of evidence, possibly thinking any supported claim has "statistical evidence" or not recognizing that statistics specifically means numbers/data rather than other forms of support like logical explanations. To teach this skill, explicitly teach evidence types: Statistics (numbers, percentages, measurements with sources like "60 to 92 checkouts"), Expert opinions (credentials plus statements like "Dr. X found..."), Examples (specific instances showing patterns), Logical reasoning (if-then explanations like "quiet time helps transitions because..."), and Research (studies or surveys cited); create a chart with columns for each evidence type and have students sort evidence from various speeches. Practice identifying statistical evidence specifically by looking for numbers, percentages, counts, or measurements; use the question "Does this claim have numbers/data to back it up?" to help students recognize statistical support versus other types; emphasize that logical reasoning, while valid support, is different from statistical evidence.
Question 8
A student entrepreneur, Lena, pitches a fundraiser idea to her homeroom: selling reusable water bottles with the school logo.
Main argument/thesis: The school should run Lena’s reusable bottle fundraiser.
Claim 1: Students want the product. Support: Lena says she surveyed 80 students; 52 said they would “probably” or “definitely” buy one.
Claim 2: The fundraiser can make a profit. Support: She shows numbers: bottles cost 4eachinbulk,andsheproposessellingthemfor9, leaving $5 per bottle before other costs.
Claim 3: “These bottles are the best quality on the planet.” Support: She gives no tests, reviews, or comparisons.
Claim 4: It could reduce plastic waste. Support: She reasons that if students refill bottles, they buy fewer single-use drinks.
Which claim is supported by survey data?
- Students want the product. (correct answer)
- The fundraiser can make a profit.
- These bottles are the best quality on the planet.
- The fundraiser could reduce plastic waste.
Explanation: This question assesses CCSS.SL.6.3: Delineate a speaker's argument and specific claims, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not. Delineating requires identifying different types of evidence - survey data involves collecting responses from multiple people to show patterns or preferences, distinct from financial calculations, unsupported assertions, or logical reasoning. The correct answer A demonstrates the standard because Lena's claim "Students want the product" is supported by survey data: "she surveyed 80 students; 52 said they would 'probably' or 'definitely' buy one" - this is numerical data collected through surveying students about their preferences. The distractors fail because B uses financial calculations (cost/price numbers), C is explicitly unsupported ("gives no tests, reviews, or comparisons"), and D uses logical reasoning (if-then explanation about refilling bottles). This error reveals students may not recognize survey data as a specific evidence type, may confuse different kinds of numerical evidence, or may not understand that asking people and recording responses constitutes survey support. To teach evidence types, create clear categories with examples: Survey Data (asked X people, Y% said), Financial Data (costs/prices/budgets), Expert Opinion (credentials + quotes), Logical Reasoning (if-then explanations); practice identifying evidence types in real speeches; teach that surveys involve asking questions and reporting responses numerically, making them strong support for claims about what people want or think.
Question 9
In an oral editorial for the school news show, a student argues that the school should keep arts classes (music and art) every year instead of cutting them.
Main argument/thesis: The school should not cut arts classes.
Claim 1: Arts classes help academic skills. Support: The speaker mentions a district report showing students who took at least one arts class had higher average attendance than students who took none.
Claim 2: Arts classes build confidence. Support: The speaker gives an example of three students who felt more comfortable presenting after performing in a concert.
Claim 3: “If we cut art, the school will stop being a real school.” Support: The speaker does not explain what “real school” means or provide evidence.
Claim 4: Cutting arts would save less money than people think. Support: The speaker cites the proposed budget showing arts supplies are $1,200 for the year, which is less than 1% of the total activity budget.
Which claim is supported by specific budget numbers?
- Arts classes help academic skills.
- Arts classes build confidence.
- If we cut art, the school will stop being a real school.
- Cutting arts would save less money than people think. (correct answer)
Explanation: This question assesses CCSS.SL.6.3: Delineate a speaker's argument and specific claims, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not. Delineating requires identifying specific types of evidence - budget numbers are concrete financial data showing costs, percentages, or monetary comparisons, distinct from attendance data, examples, or unsupported predictions. The correct answer D demonstrates the standard because the claim about saving less money is supported by specific budget numbers: "arts supplies are $1,200 for the year, which is less than 1% of the total activity budget" - these are concrete financial figures with a calculated percentage. The distractors fail because A uses attendance data (not budget numbers), B uses examples of students (not financial data), and C is explicitly unsupported with no explanation of what "real school" means. This error reveals students may not distinguish between different types of numerical evidence, may not recognize budget/financial data as a specific evidence category, or may confuse any numbers with budget-specific numbers. To teach evidence types, create clear categories: Budget/Financial (dollars, costs, percentages of spending), Statistics (survey results, attendance rates), Examples (specific instances), Expert Opinion (quoted authorities); practice sorting evidence from speeches; emphasize that budget numbers specifically relate to money/costs/spending, making them ideal support for claims about financial impact or savings.
Question 10
During a morning announcement, the assistant principal argues that the school should start a recycling program in every classroom.
Claim 1: The program would reduce trash. Support: He says the custodians reported the school throws away about 18 large bags of paper each week, and paper can be recycled.
Claim 2: Recycling teaches responsibility. Support: He gives a reason: when students sort materials, they practice making careful choices that help the community.
Claim 3: “Other schools are doing this and they’re all cleaner.” Support: He does not name any schools, give numbers, or describe how he knows.
Claim 4: The plan is realistic. Support: He explains that the city’s recycling department provides free bins and will pick up once a week.
Which statement best describes the assistant principal’s main argument?
- The school throws away about 18 bags of paper, so reducing trash is the main goal.
- The school should place recycling bins in classrooms and have a weekly pickup. (correct answer)
- Sorting recycling teaches students responsibility and helps the whole community.
- The plan works because the city provides free bins and picks them up once a week.
Explanation: The main argument is the one big thing the speaker wants everyone to agree to: the school should put recycling bins in classrooms and have a weekly pickup. Everything else he says is a reason meant to support that idea. Reducing about 18 bags of paper is one claim he uses to back up his position, but it is a supporting point, not the overall goal. Saying sorting teaches responsibility and helps the community is another supporting claim about a benefit, not the plan he is asking for. Pointing out that the city gives free bins and weekly pickup explains why the plan is realistic, but it only supports his position rather than being the position itself. To find the main argument, ask, 'What is the speaker trying to get us to do or believe?' The answer is the recycling bins and weekly pickup—the single idea all the other claims are built to defend.
Question 11
In a debate about school rules, Priya argues that the school should allow hats indoors (as long as faces are visible).
Main argument/thesis: Students should be allowed to wear hats inside school.
Claim 1: Hats can help students feel comfortable and confident. Support: Priya says some students feel self-conscious about hair or medical conditions, and that feeling comfortable can help them focus.
Claim 2: Allowing hats would not harm safety if faces are visible. Support: Priya describes how the rule could work in practice, giving specific steps the school could follow.
Claim 3: Teachers secretly want this rule too. Support: Priya says she is sure the teachers agree with her about the rule.
Claim 4: Other schools allow hats. Support: Priya says that lots of schools nearby already let students wear hats indoors.
Which claim has the strongest support because Priya explains a clear, practical reason for how it would work?
- Hats can help students feel comfortable and confident, because comfortable students focus better.
- Allowing hats would not harm safety, because faces stay visible and hats come off for ID checks. (correct answer)
- Teachers secretly want this rule too, because they would enjoy a more relaxed school atmosphere.
- Other schools allow hats, because many nearby schools already trust students with this rule.
Explanation: The strongest claim is that allowing hats would not harm safety, because Priya explains exactly how the rule would work: faces stay visible and hats come off during ID checks. That is a clear, practical plan that answers the biggest worry about the rule, so its support is the most solid.
The claim that hats help students feel comfortable gives a reason, but it only describes a feeling — it does not explain how the rule would actually operate. The claim that teachers secretly want the rule offers no proof at all; Priya just says she is sure, with no survey or quotes to back it up. The claim that other schools allow hats sounds convincing but stays vague, since Priya never names any school or gives numbers. Only the safety claim comes with a workable step-by-step explanation, which is what 'strongest support' means here.
Question 12
In a short debate statement to the class, Jordan argues about school schedules. Jordan says teens need more sleep, citing the American Academy of Pediatrics that teens need 8–10 hours per night, and adds that “many students in our school get less than 8 hours.” He says later start times can improve attendance, referring to a 3-year study by Dr. Elena Ruiz (a sleep researcher at Metro University) of 12 schools where schools that started after 8:30 had about 10% fewer tardies. He also claims, “Sports practices won’t be affected at all,” and, “Parents will definitely love this change,” though he gives no details for either. Which statement best identifies Jordan’s main argument?
- Teens should get 8–10 hours of sleep each night to stay healthy.
- Schools that start after 8:30 tend to have about 10% fewer tardies.
- The school day should start about 30 minutes later than it does now. (correct answer)
- Parents and coaches will definitely support a later school start time.
Explanation: Jordan's main argument is the overall position he wants the class to accept: that the school day should start about 30 minutes later. Everything else he says is a reason meant to support that position. The point about teens needing 8–10 hours of sleep is a supporting claim backed by the pediatrics group—it explains why a later start would help, but it isn't what he is trying to convince you to do. The statement about schools after 8:30 having fewer tardies is also a supporting claim, backed by Dr. Ruiz's study; it's evidence for the change, not the change itself. The idea that parents and coaches will support the change is an unsupported claim—Jordan offers no schedule details or evidence—so it is one of his weakest points, not his central thesis. To find a speaker's main argument, ask, "What is this person trying to get me to believe or do?" The answer is usually a call to action or a should-statement, while the other sentences give reasons that back it up.
Question 13
A student entrepreneur, Leila, pitches a proposal to the principal to start a “Borrow-a-Book Box” outside the cafeteria.
Main argument/thesis: The school should approve and fund the Borrow-a-Book Box because it will increase reading.
Claim 1 (supported): Leila says students will use it. She reports a survey of 90 students: 54 (60%) said they would borrow a book if it was easy to grab at lunch.
Claim 2 (supported): She says the cost is manageable. She shows a list of prices from two local stores: a weatherproof box costs 45–55, and paint and labels cost about $15.
Claim 3 (unsupported): She says, “It will completely end boredom at lunch,” but gives no evidence.
Claim 4 (unsupported): She claims, “Students will never lose or damage books,” without support.
Which claim does Leila make that is not supported by reasons or evidence?
- A weatherproof box plus supplies will cost around 60–70, based on store prices.
- About 60% of surveyed students said they would borrow a book if it was easy.
- The Borrow-a-Book Box will completely end boredom at lunch. (correct answer)
- The proposal includes buying a weatherproof box.
Explanation: This question assesses CCSS.SL.6.3: Delineate a speaker's argument and specific claims, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not. Delineating means describing the argument structure clearly by identifying specific claims and determining whether they have support; unsupported claims are bare assertions, opinions stated as facts, emotional appeals, or vague generalizations lacking factual backing, while supported claims have reasons or evidence like statistics, expert opinions, or specific examples. Answer C correctly identifies an unsupported claim because "It will completely end boredom at lunch" is presented without any evidence - it's an exaggerated promise with no data, examples, or reasoning to back it up. The distractors fail because A provides specific cost evidence from store prices ($60-70 based on actual price research), B cites survey data (60% of 90 students), and D is not a claim but rather a factual description of what the proposal includes. This error reveals students may not recognize hyperbolic statements as unsupported claims, may confuse factual descriptions with argumentative claims, or may not understand that even positive-sounding statements need evidence to be considered supported. To teach this skill, contrast supported versus unsupported claims side-by-side: "54 of 90 students said they would use it" (supported with survey data) versus "It will completely end boredom" (unsupported assertion); teach students to ask "What evidence does the speaker provide for this claim?" and if the answer is none, it's unsupported; practice identifying absolute language ("completely," "never," "always") as red flags for unsupported claims unless backed by comprehensive data; use highlighters to mark evidence in green and unsupported claims in red, discussing why sweeping promises without proof are unsupported regardless of how appealing they sound. Focus on the analytical skill that claims need independent support, not just enthusiastic assertion.
Question 14
In a morning announcement (public service message), the assistant principal encourages students to bring reusable water bottles.
Main argument/thesis: Students should use reusable water bottles to reduce waste and save money.
Claim 1 (supported): She says the school throws away a lot of plastic. She cites the custodian’s count from one week: about 1,050 single-use bottles were found in trash and recycling combined.
Claim 2 (supported): She says reusables can save families money. She gives an example calculation: if a student buys 2 bottled waters a week at 1.25each,that’s2.50 per week, about $90 over a 36-week school year.
Claim 3 (unsupported): She says, “Reusable bottles make water taste better,” but provides no source.
Claim 4 (unsupported): She says, “Our school will become famous for being eco-friendly,” without evidence.
Which choice best describes how the speaker supports the claim that reusables can save money?
- By using a specific cost example and doing the math for a school year. (correct answer)
- By saying water tastes better from reusable bottles.
- By predicting the school will become famous.
- By repeating the claim several times so it sounds true.
Explanation: This question assesses CCSS.SL.6.3: Delineate a speaker's argument and specific claims, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not. Delineating means describing how claims are supported; evidence includes facts, statistics, expert opinions, research findings, or specific examples with logical reasoning, while unsupported claims lack such backing. Answer A correctly describes how the speaker supports the money-saving claim by using a specific cost example (1.25perbottle×2bottles/week=2.50/week) and calculating the total over a school year ($90 over 36 weeks), which demonstrates mathematical evidence with concrete numbers and logical calculation. The distractors fail because B refers to an unsupported claim about taste, C mentions an unsupported prediction about fame, and D describes repetition rather than evidence (repetition doesn't make something true or supported). This error reveals students may confuse repetition with evidence, not recognize mathematical calculations as a form of support, or think subjective claims about taste or predictions constitute evidence. To teach this skill, model different types of evidence support: statistical (numbers/percentages), mathematical (calculations showing costs/savings), expert opinion (credentials + statement), logical reasoning (if-then connections), and examples (specific instances); contrast these with non-evidence like repetition, predictions without basis, or subjective preferences; have students practice categorizing how speakers support claims - "The speaker supports this by: giving numbers? doing math? citing an expert? explaining cause-effect? or just repeating/asserting?"; emphasize that showing mathematical work (bottle cost × frequency × time = total) is strong evidence for financial claims. Focus on recognizing that concrete calculations provide objective support versus mere assertions or predictions.
Question 15
In an oral opinion piece for the school news show, Carlos argues about homework.
Main argument/thesis: Teachers should limit homework to no more than 30 minutes per night in middle school.
Claim 1 (supported): Carlos says too much homework reduces sleep. He cites a class poll of 28 students: 19 said they go to bed later on nights with “over an hour” of homework.
Claim 2 (supported): He says shorter homework can still help learning if it’s focused. He gives a reason: practicing a few key problems shows what you understand, and teachers can see mistakes without assigning lots of pages.
Claim 3 (unsupported): Carlos says, “Long homework is pointless busywork,” but he doesn’t give examples from assignments.
Claim 4 (unsupported): He claims, “All parents agree homework should be cut,” without any survey or quotes.
Which claim is presented as a sweeping statement without evidence?
- Nineteen out of 28 students said they go to bed later when they have over an hour of homework.
- Focused practice on a few key problems can show what you understand without assigning many pages.
- Every single parent agrees that homework should be cut down for students. (correct answer)
- Long homework is nothing but pointless busywork that wastes students' time.
Explanation: The correct answer is the statement that every single parent agrees homework should be cut. This is a sweeping statement because it claims that ALL parents feel the same way, yet Carlos gives no survey, no quotes, and no data. Words like "every" and "all" cover everyone, so they need very strong proof—and here there is none. That makes it a broad generalization presented without any evidence.
The statement about nineteen out of 28 students going to bed later is actually backed by specific poll data, so it is a supported claim, not an unsupported sweeping one. The statement that focused practice can show what you understand gives a clear reason explaining how shorter homework still helps learning, so it too is supported. The statement that long homework is nothing but pointless busywork is an opinion, but it is not about "all" or "every"—Carlos states it as a bare claim without proof, but it is not the sweeping generalization about everyone that the question asks for. Watch for absolute words like "all," "every," "always," and "never": they signal a claim that would need wide evidence to be true.
Question 16
In a short commercial played on the school announcements, a student promotes a new after-school club: Board Game Club.
Main argument/thesis: Students should join Board Game Club.
Claim 1: Board games build problem-solving skills. Support: The speaker gives a reason that many games require planning ahead, predicting moves, and adjusting strategies.
Claim 2: The club already has interest. Support: The speaker says 23 students signed an interest sheet at lunch last Friday.
Claim 3: “This will be the most popular club in the whole school.” Support: The speaker provides no comparison to other clubs and no data.
Claim 4: The club is easy to run. Support: The speaker explains they can meet in the library and use donated games.
Which claim is supported by a specific number (statistical evidence)?
- Board games build problem‑solving skills.
- The club already has interest. (correct answer)
- This will be the most popular club in the whole school.
- The club is easy to run.
Explanation: This question assesses CCSS.SL.6.3: Delineate a speaker's argument and specific claims, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not. Delineating requires recognizing statistical evidence - specific numbers, counts, or data points that provide concrete support, distinct from logical reasoning, unsupported predictions, or general explanations. The correct answer B demonstrates the standard because the claim about existing interest is supported by a specific number: "23 students signed an interest sheet at lunch last Friday" - this is statistical evidence showing measurable student interest. The distractors fail because A uses logical reasoning (explaining how games build skills), C is explicitly unsupported ("no comparison to other clubs and no data"), and D provides practical explanation but no numbers. This error reveals students may not recognize that specific counts constitute statistical evidence, may overlook numerical data in speeches, or may not distinguish between different evidence types. To teach evidence recognition, emphasize that statistical evidence includes any specific numbers: counts (23 students), percentages (52%), measurements, survey results; practice identifying "number words" in speeches that signal statistical support; create evidence charts where students categorize support as Statistical (has numbers), Logical (explains why), Example (tells specific story), or Expert (quotes authority); highlight that even simple counts like "23 students signed up" provide stronger support than vague claims like "lots of interest."
Question 17
On the morning announcements, the principal gives a short editorial-style message about recess.
Main argument/thesis: Sixth graders should keep daily recess.
Claim 1 (supported): The principal says recess helps students return to class ready to learn. She references a district memo summarizing a study of 12 schools showing that classes after recess had fewer behavior interruptions.
Claim 2 (supported): She says physical activity supports health. She quotes the school nurse, who explains that movement helps the body and can improve mood.
Claim 3 (unsupported): She claims, “Kids who don’t get recess become lazy,” but she offers no data or expert support for that statement.
Claim 4 (unsupported): She adds, “Every successful school has lots of recess,” without examples or proof.
Which claim is presented as an opinion or generalization without support?
- Recess helps students return to class ready to learn, according to a district memo summarizing a study of 12 schools.
- Physical activity supports health, according to the school nurse’s explanation.
- Kids who don’t get recess become lazy. (correct answer)
- Sixth graders should keep daily recess.
Explanation: This question assesses CCSS.SL.6.3: Delineate a speaker's argument and specific claims, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not. Delineating means describing or outlining the argument structure clearly by identifying the main argument (the speaker's overall position or thesis), specific claims (particular statements supporting that position), and determining how claims are supported (or not); unsupported claims include opinions stated as facts, emotional appeals, vague generalizations, single anecdotes, or circular reasoning that lack factual backing like statistics, expert opinions, research findings, or logical explanations. The correct answer C demonstrates the standard because it accurately identifies a claim presented as an opinion or generalization without support - the principal simply asserts "Kids who don't get recess become lazy" without providing any data, research, expert opinion, or even logical reasoning to back this sweeping generalization about student behavior. The distractors fail because A is supported by research evidence (district memo summarizing a study of 12 schools), B is supported by expert opinion (school nurse's explanation about movement and mood), and D is the main argument/thesis rather than a specific claim needing support. This error reveals that students may not recognize sweeping generalizations as unsupported claims, possibly thinking that if an authority figure (like a principal) says something it doesn't need evidence, or they may not distinguish between statements that sound authoritative but lack backing versus those with actual support. To teach this skill, focus on recognizing generalizations and opinion statements: teach students to identify absolute language ("all," "every," "become") and sweeping statements about groups as red flags for potential unsupported claims; model asking "What evidence backs this up?" for each claim, noting when the answer is "none." Practice with examples of supported versus unsupported claims about student behavior: "Study shows students with recess have fewer disruptions" (supported) versus "Kids without recess become lazy" (unsupported generalization); use a T-chart labeled "Opinion/Generalization" and "Evidence-Based Claim" to sort statements from speeches; emphasize that even principals and experts need to provide evidence for their claims, and that critical listening means evaluating support regardless of who is speaking.
Question 18
A coach speaks to students at an assembly and argues for a new rule: students should spend at least 30 minutes outside each day (during recess, after school, or weekends).
Main argument/thesis: Students should aim for 30 minutes outside daily.
Claim 1: Outdoor time improves mood. Support: The coach cites a children’s hospital newsletter that says sunlight and movement can help reduce stress.
Claim 2: Outdoor time can reduce screen time. Support: The coach reasons that time is limited—if you’re outside playing, you’re not on a device during that same time.
Claim 3: Kids today spend their whole lives glued to screens. Support: The coach describes today’s students and their daily habits.
Claim 4: The goal is flexible. Support: The coach explains students can split the time into two 15-minute parts.
Which claim does the coach make that is a sweeping generalization the coach does not back up with reasons or evidence?
- Spending time outdoors can help improve a student's mood and lower stress.
- Choosing to play outside often means less time spent staring at a screen.
- Kids today spend their whole lives glued to screens instead of going outside. (correct answer)
- The daily 30-minute goal is flexible and can be split into two shorter parts.
Explanation: The best answer is the claim that kids today spend their whole lives glued to screens instead of going outside. This is a sweeping generalization: it makes a huge statement about all students but the coach offers no data, examples, or logical reasoning to back it up—just a broad description. When a speaker makes a big claim about an entire group, you should expect proof, and here there is none.
The claim that outdoor time helps improve a student's mood and lower stress is supported—the coach points to a children's hospital newsletter as evidence, so it is not unbacked.
The claim that playing outside often means less screen time is supported by reasoning: if you're outside during a certain time, you can't be on a device at that same time, so the two compete for the same minutes.
The claim that the 30-minute goal is flexible is supported too—the coach explains exactly how it works by splitting it into two 15-minute parts.
Only one claim describes a whole group with no support behind it, and that is the sweeping generalization the question asks you to find.
Question 19
In a short commercial played on the school’s video announcements, a student promotes the cafeteria’s new “Power Parfait.” The student makes several claims about why students should choose it for breakfast.
Main argument/thesis: Students should choose the Power Parfait for breakfast because it is a healthy, energizing option.
Claim 1: The parfait has 12 grams of protein and 6 grams of fiber, based on the cafeteria recipe.
Claim 2: Protein helps you feel full longer, so you’re less likely to get distracted by hunger in first period.
Claim 3: It’s the most popular breakfast in the entire city.
Claim 4: One bite will make you a better student.
Which claim in the ad is supported by statistical evidence?
- The parfait has 12 grams of protein and 6 grams of fiber, based on the cafeteria recipe. (correct answer)
- It is the most popular breakfast in the entire city, chosen by more students than any other.
- One bite of the parfait will make you a better student in class every day.
- Protein keeps you feeling full longer, so hunger won’t distract you in first period.
Explanation: Statistical evidence means specific numbers, measurements, or quantities you could count or verify. The claim about 12 grams of protein and 6 grams of fiber uses exact measurements from the cafeteria recipe, so it is backed by statistical evidence. The claim that it is the most popular breakfast in the entire city sounds like it could be counted, but the ad gives no sales figures, survey, or source—it's just an assertion, not real data. The claim that one bite makes you a better student is an exaggerated promise with no numbers or proof of any kind behind it. The claim that protein keeps you full so hunger won't distract you is actually supported, but by reasoning (a cause-and-effect explanation), not by statistics—there are no numbers in it. Only the protein-and-fiber claim offers measurable, numerical data, which is exactly what statistical evidence is.
Question 20
In a public service message played during advisory, a student leader argues that students should bring a healthy snack instead of candy.
Main argument/thesis: Students should choose healthier snacks at school.
Claim 1: Healthier snacks help students focus. Support: The speaker explains that sugary snacks can cause an energy spike and then a crash, making it harder to pay attention.
Claim 2: Many students already want healthier options. Support: The speaker cites a cafeteria suggestion-box count: 34 notes asked for fruit cups or yogurt, while 9 asked for more candy.
Claim 3: “Candy is basically poison.” Support: The speaker moves quickly to the next point and offers this as a personal reaction.
Claim 4: Healthy snacks can be affordable. Support: The speaker names low-cost snacks like a banana or carrots, though without listing exact prices.
Which claim is presented as an opinion stated like a fact without any facts, examples, or reasons to back it up?
- Healthier snacks help students focus, and the reasoning about an energy spike and later crash explains how this affects attention.
- Many students already want healthier options, and the suggestion-box count of 34 requests versus 9 gives a number behind the claim.
- Candy is basically poison, an extreme statement offered as a strong personal reaction rather than backed by any source or reason. (correct answer)
- Healthy snacks can be affordable, and named examples such as a banana or carrots show the kind of cheap options being described.
Explanation: The best answer is that candy is basically poison. Calling something "poison" is an extreme, dramatic statement, and the speaker offers it only as a personal reaction—no source, definition, or reason is given to prove it. That makes it an opinion dressed up like a fact. The other choices all give something to back them up. The claim that healthier snacks help students focus is supported by reasoning about a sugar energy spike and crash that hurts attention. The claim that many students want healthier options is supported by actual numbers from the suggestion box: 34 requests for fruit or yogurt against 9 for candy. The claim that healthy snacks can be affordable is supported by named examples like a banana or carrots—even without exact prices, the speaker still points to specific cheap options. When a speaker makes a big, strong claim, look for evidence: a reason, a number, or an example. The "poison" claim is the only one that gives none, so it is the opinion stated like a fact.