What this deck covers
This deck focuses on Apply Reading Standards To Literary Nonfiction, giving you a quick way to review the definitions, rules, and examples that matter most for 7th Grade Writing.
Study Apply Reading Standards To Literary Nonfiction in 7th Grade Writing with focused flashcards that help you recognize the idea, recall the key rule, and apply it in practice-style prompts.
0% Complete
Identify the fallacy: "Do not trust her argument; she is too young to understand."
Tap card or press Space to flip
Ad hominem. Attacks the person instead of their argument.
How well did you know it?
Card 1 / 55
Space to flip · ← / → to move · once flipped, → Got it · ← Still learning
This deck focuses on Apply Reading Standards To Literary Nonfiction, giving you a quick way to review the definitions, rules, and examples that matter most for 7th Grade Writing.
Work through these flashcards in short sessions. Try to answer each prompt before flipping the card, then revisit any cards you miss until the explanation feels automatic.
Answer: Ad hominem. Attacks the person instead of their argument.
Answer: A central position supported by reasons and evidence. Arguments require logical support, not just opinions.
Answer: Evidence that directly relates to and supports the claim. Relevant evidence must connect to the specific claim.
Answer: Evidence is insufficient for the scope of the claim. One example can't support claims about all cases.
Answer: Facts, examples, data, or quotations used to support a claim. Concrete proof that backs up what the author argues.
Answer: Follow how claims, reasons, and evidence connect across the text. Tracing shows how ideas build throughout the text.
Answer: False dilemma (either-or). Presents only two options when more exist.
Answer: Enough credible support to justify accepting the claim. Multiple strong pieces of evidence prove the claim.
Answer: A statement the author asserts as true. Claims must be proven with evidence and reasoning.
Answer: Bandwagon (appeal to popularity). Assumes popularity equals truth, which is illogical.
Answer: The author relies mostly on one anecdote or a single example. One example rarely proves a broad claim.
Answer: A one-sided perspective that unfairly favors a viewpoint. Bias shows prejudice that compromises objectivity.
Answer: The author's response that refutes a counterclaim. Defends the original claim against opposing views.
Answer: Unsupported reasoning; opinion is not evidence. Personal feelings cannot substitute for facts.
Answer: Ad hominem. Attacks the person, not their argument's merit.
Answer: School uniforms should be required to reduce distractions. This states a position that needs supporting evidence.
Answer: A firsthand account or original document used as direct evidence. Primary sources provide unfiltered, direct evidence.
Answer: A source that interprets or summarizes primary sources. These analyze primary sources from a distance.
Answer: A flaw in logic that weakens the argument. Faulty reasoning undermines the argument's validity.
Answer: The explanation that connects evidence to the claim. It shows why the evidence proves the claim is true.
Answer: The logic is valid and the conclusion follows from the evidence. Sound reasoning uses proper logic without gaps or errors.
Answer: A justification that explains why a claim should be accepted. Reasons connect claims to evidence logically.
Answer: The explanation linking evidence to the claim. Shows how evidence logically supports the claim.
Answer: Is there enough credible evidence to justify the claim. Ensures adequate proof exists for the conclusion.
Answer: The main position the author wants the reader to accept. It's the thesis that all supporting points work to prove.
Answer: A response that refutes a counterclaim. It disproves the opposing view to defend the main claim.
Answer: A verified statistic. Data provides objective, measurable support.
Answer: A fact is verifiable; an opinion is a belief or judgment. Facts can be proven true/false; opinions express feelings.
Answer: Historical fact. Dates and laws are verifiable historical facts.
Answer: Bandwagon (appeal to popularity). Assumes popularity equals correctness.
Answer: Ad hominem (attacking the person, not the argument). Attacks character instead of addressing the argument.
Answer: False dilemma (either-or fallacy). Presents only two options when more exist.
Answer: Central claim → supporting claims → evidence → reasoning → conclusion. This sequence shows how arguments build logically.
Answer: There is enough strong evidence to support the claim convincingly. Multiple pieces of quality evidence make claims believable.
Answer: District report showing suspensions fell by 20% after the policy. Statistical data provides measurable proof.
Answer: Follow claims, reasons, and evidence from start to finish. Map the logical progression of the author's argument.
Answer: An opposing position to the author's claim. Authors address counterclaims to strengthen their position.
Answer: A primary source account. Firsthand accounts offer direct, reliable evidence.
Answer: Logical connections where conclusions follow from reasons and evidence. Sound reasoning avoids logical fallacies.
Answer: Does this information directly support the claim. Tests if evidence connects to the specific claim.
Answer: A study comparing on-task behavior before and after uniform adoption. Direct research data best supports distraction claims.
Answer: Facts, examples, data, or quotations used to support a claim. Evidence must be verifiable and specific.
Answer: An opposing viewpoint or argument against the author's claim. Challenges the author's position with alternative views.
Answer: A smaller point that helps prove the central claim. Builds toward the main argument with specific evidence.
Answer: False dilemma (either-or fallacy). Presents only two options when more exist.
Answer: A flawed pattern of reasoning that weakens an argument. Invalid logic that undermines credibility.
Answer: Bandwagon fallacy (appeal to popularity). Popularity doesn't determine truth or validity.
Answer: Because it saves money, uniforms help families. "Because" signals reasoning, not factual evidence.
Answer: It directly relates to and supports the claim being made. Relevant evidence must connect to the specific claim.
Answer: Not relevant. Muscle building doesn't connect to sleep quality.
Answer: The logic is valid and connects evidence to the claim. Clear, logical connections without gaps or errors.
Answer: A smaller point that helps prove the central claim. These sub-arguments build evidence for the main thesis.
Answer: Slippery slope. Assumes extreme consequences without logical steps.
Answer: Facts, examples, data, or quotations supporting a claim. Concrete proof that validates the author's claims.
Answer: A fact is verifiable; an opinion is a belief or judgment. Facts can be proven; opinions express personal views.