7th Grade Writing Quiz: Provide Concluding Statement For Argument

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Provide Concluding Statement For Argument, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for 7th Grade Writing.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

Question 1

1. Because peer tutoring offers affordable help, improves tutors’ learning, and builds community, our school should create an after-school program and invite students to sign up.
2. Peer tutoring could help many students learn and connect, so the school should launch it along with new fundraising events to pay for updated sports equipment. (correct answer)
3. These benefits work together to make peer tutoring a practical way to help students succeed, so the school should move forward with a clear plan.
4. Overall, peer tutoring is a smart idea because it helps learners and tutors at the same time while making the whole school feel more supportive.

Explanation: The task is to spot the conclusion that adds a new idea not found in the original argument. A good conclusion should pull together only the reasons already given: affordable help, stronger learning for tutors, and a more supportive community. The choice about launching tutoring "along with new fundraising events to pay for updated sports equipment" is the answer, because sports equipment and fundraising were never part of the argument—this drags in a fresh topic instead of wrapping up the ones presented. The choice that names affordable help, tutor learning, and community and then calls for a sign-up sticks to the stated reasons and asks for action, so it fits. The choice saying the benefits "work together" to help students succeed also synthesizes the same reasons without adding anything new. The choice calling peer tutoring a smart idea that helps learners and tutors while making the school more supportive simply restates the argument's own points, so it belongs too. Only one option smuggles in an unrelated goal, and a strong conclusion never introduces new claims—it powerfully sums up the evidence you already gave.

Question 2

1. Yes, because it wraps up by reminding readers that parks are a good place for the whole community to spend time.
2. Yes, because it points readers toward a related project the town could fund with the money families save on bottles.
3. No, because it shifts to a different topic and never restates or ties together the reasons about refill stations. (correct answer)
4. No, because it keeps repeating the same reason about hydration instead of adding a fresh idea to close the argument.

Explanation: A strong conclusion should pull an argument together by restating the claim and tying back to the reasons you gave. Here the reasons are all about refill stations—less plastic trash, saving families money, and staying hydrated. The best answer notices that the conclusion suddenly jumps to building a skate park, a brand-new topic that never connects back to any of those reasons, so it does not support the argument. The choice claiming the conclusion works because parks are good for the community is wrong: liking parks is not the same as summarizing the specific reasons about refill stations. The choice saying it points to a related project the town could fund is also wrong, because a skate park is a new idea, not a wrap-up of the argument's evidence. The choice about repeating the hydration reason is wrong too, since the conclusion does not repeat anything—it changes the subject entirely. When you write a conclusion, stay on your topic and remind readers of your own reasons instead of introducing something new.

Question 3

1. Therefore, adding refill stations is a smart choice because it cuts plastic trash, saves money, and supports healthier habits in our parks. (correct answer)
2. In conclusion, our town's parks are important gathering places that families and neighbors value throughout the year for many reasons.
3. Therefore, the town should also build a new skate park and repaint the library so that our public spaces feel fresh and welcoming.
4. Therefore, refill stations reduce plastic waste, which is one important benefit that shows why our town should invest in them.

Explanation: A strong conclusion for an argument pulls together all the reasons and restates the main claim so the case feels complete. The best answer does this: it says refill stations are a smart choice and ties back to all three reasons—cutting plastic trash, saving money, and supporting health. The choice about parks being important gathering places sounds related, but it never mentions refill stations or the specific reasons given, so it doesn't synthesize the argument. The choice about building a skate park and repainting the library adds brand-new ideas the argument never discussed, so it drifts off-topic instead of wrapping up. The choice about reducing plastic waste is true, but it repeats only one reason and leaves out the money and health points, so it fails to bring everything together. Only the first choice both restates the claim and unites every reason, which is exactly what a good concluding statement should do.

Question 4

1. For these reasons, a daily vegetarian main dish would include more students, could control costs, and may reduce waste, so the cafeteria should offer this choice each day. (correct answer)
2. In conclusion, the cafeteria should let students bring their own soda to lunch, since many students think soda tastes far better than the milk currently offered on the menu.
3. In short, vegetarian food is served in many restaurants and homes, so students who enjoy it can usually find plenty of tasty options available somewhere in their town.
4. For these reasons, the cafeteria should offer vegetarian options daily, and the school should also build a much bigger gym and repaint all of the faded hallways soon.

Explanation: A strong conclusion should pull together the argument's own reasons and restate the claim without dragging in anything new. The best answer does exactly that: it ties back to including more students, controlling costs, and reducing waste, then repeats the call for a daily vegetarian main dish. The soda choice drifts to a completely different topic that was never part of the argument, so it cannot conclude this claim. The choice about restaurants and homes never restates the claim or the three reasons; it only makes a vague point that vegetarian food exists somewhere, which does not follow from the argument. The choice about a bigger gym and repainting hallways starts on topic but then adds two unrelated building projects, so it introduces new subjects the argument never supported. When you write a conclusion, stay focused on your original claim and the reasons you already gave instead of adding fresh ideas.

Question 5

1. In conclusion, redo policies are a reasonable idea, and schools should think about doing what is best for students overall. (correct answer)
2. Because redos promote learning from mistakes, perseverance, and deeper understanding, allowing partial-credit redos would improve how students learn, so the policy should be adopted.
3. Overall, giving students a chance to redo major work supports real learning and not just one-time performance, which is why redos build the perseverance worth encouraging.
4. These benefits show that assignment redos can help students correct mistakes and understand the material more deeply, so teachers should allow them for partial credit.

Explanation: A strong conclusion should pull together the exact reasons the argument gave: learning from mistakes, building perseverance, and reaching deeper understanding. The best answer here fails at that. Even though it mentions redos, it stays vague—saying schools should "do what is best for students overall"—and never ties back to any of the three specific reasons. It could end almost any school argument, so it is the weakest conclusion. The choice that names all three reasons—mistakes, perseverance, and understanding—and links them to adopting the policy is a genuinely strong conclusion, not the weakest, so it is wrong. The choice about supporting "real learning" does connect to perseverance and understanding from the paragraph, making it a decent conclusion rather than a vague one, so it is also wrong. The choice about correcting mistakes and understanding the material more deeply restates two of the specific reasons and connects them to the recommendation, so it too works as a solid conclusion. Only the vague option drifts away from the specific evidence, which is exactly what the question asks you to spot.

Question 6

1. In conclusion, phones are a popular part of student life, and many students enjoy using them to text friends and play games throughout the school day.
2. Because phones distract students, increase cheating, and waste instructional time, a phone-free class time policy would improve learning; our school should adopt it. (correct answer)
3. In conclusion, since phones cause so many problems in the hallways and cafeteria, our school should ban phones from the entire building for the whole day.
4. In conclusion, a phone-free policy might help a little, but students would probably still find other ways to get distracted and cheat during class.

Explanation: A strong conclusion pulls together the reasons you already gave and restates your claim. The best answer ties back to the three reasons in the argument—distraction, cheating, and lost teaching time—and then states clearly that the school should adopt the policy. That is exactly what a concluding statement should do: synthesize the evidence and reinforce the main point. The choice about phones being popular and fun to use never connects to any reason in the argument; it actually gives a reason people might want phones, which works against the claim. The choice about banning phones from the whole building goes beyond what the argument supports—the writer only argued about class time and gave no evidence about hallways or the cafeteria, so this introduces a new claim the argument never proved. The choice saying the policy 'might help a little' but students will still cheat and get distracted undercuts the writer's own reasons, so it weakens the argument instead of supporting it. Only the answer that restates the three reasons and firmly backs the policy both follows from and supports the argument.

Question 7

1. Because e-books are available instantly and can be adjusted for readability, our school should add them so students can enjoy reading and build a lifelong habit.
2. Since e-books are always available online and won’t ever get lost or damaged, our school should replace all physical books with digital copies right away.
3. Since e-books can be checked out right away, customized for easier reading, and protect the library’s physical collection, our school should add an e-book borrowing option to help more students read successfully. (correct answer)
4. Because some students find new technology confusing and prefer paper pages, our school should keep the library exactly as it is and not offer e-books at all.

Explanation: A strong argumentative conclusion pulls together the reasons the writer gave and restates the claim with a clear call to action. The best answer names every reason from the editorial—instant checkout, adjustable readability, and protecting physical books—and ties them to helping more students read, then urges the school to act. The choice about instant availability and readability only mentions two of the three reasons and drifts into a vague point about lifelong habits, so it doesn’t fully close the argument. The choice about replacing all physical books goes too far: the writer wanted to add e-books, not remove paper ones, and its absolute claims aren’t supported. The choice about keeping the library the same contradicts the entire argument the writer is defending. Only one option synthesizes all three reasons while staying true to the writer’s actual claim.

Question 8

1. Since these lessons build important skills, the school should require every teacher to test students on misinformation, communication, and privacy at the end of each month.
2. Because students need practice spotting misinformation and staying safe online, the school should add these short monthly lessons to the schedule so everyone makes smarter, safer choices. (correct answer)
3. For all of these reasons, the school should trust students to research digital citizenship on their own instead of spending class time on monthly lessons.
4. Given how much time students spend online, the school should offer these lessons only to students who have already gotten in trouble for their behavior.

Explanation: A strong argumentative conclusion should pull together the argument's reasons and tell the reader exactly what to do next. The best answer ties the reasons—spotting misinformation and staying safe online—to the outcome of smarter, safer choices, and then calls for the specific action the student wants: adding the short monthly lessons to the schedule. The choice about testing students each month adds a call to action, but it demands graded tests the student never argued for, changing the argument instead of concluding it. The choice about trusting students to research on their own contradicts the whole point, since the argument was that the school should require the lessons, not drop them. The choice about offering lessons only to students already in trouble also works against the argument, which was about preventing problems for everyone through regular practice. Only the keyed answer restates the reasons and asks for the exact action the argument supports, which is what a fitting call to action does.

Question 9

1. Limiting weekend homework would support students’ mental health, respect family time, and improve Monday focus, so teachers should assign more work during the week instead.
2. Because weekends help students recharge, manage responsibilities, and return ready to learn, the school should set clear limits on weekend homework.
3. In conclusion, following good rules is important, and the school should make choices that are best for everyone in our community. (correct answer)
4. These reasons show that reducing weekend homework would benefit students without harming learning, making it a smart policy for our school.

Explanation: A strong conclusion should pull together the exact reasons the argument gave: rest and mental health, family time, and better Monday focus. The best answer here is the one about following good rules and doing what is best for everyone in the community. Even though it now sounds polished and complete, it never names a single reason from the argument—it could be pasted onto any school topic at all, which makes it the vaguest and weakest ending. The choice about recharging, managing responsibilities, and returning ready to learn directly restates all three reasons and lands on a clear recommendation, so it is strong. The choice listing mental health, family time, and Monday focus connects well too, but its ending—assigning more work during the week—actually contradicts the argument's goal, so it is not the weakest for being vague. The choice saying the reasons show reducing homework benefits students without harming learning summarizes the argument and ties back to the specific point about learning, so it is also a well-connected conclusion. Watch for endings that sound nice but float free of the actual evidence.

Question 10

1. Because walking is such a healthy habit for people of every age, everyone in town should try to walk more starting today.
2. Since safety and health matter, the school should cancel all its bus routes and require every student to walk to class instead.
3. Given the safety, traffic, and health benefits, the city and school should work together to start a safe routes to school program this year. (correct answer)
4. Because roads already have painted crosswalks in many places, students clearly have all the safe walking routes they could possibly need already.

Explanation: A strong argument conclusion should pull together the reasons you just gave and tell readers exactly what to do next. The best answer does this: it names the three benefits the argument built (safety, less traffic, and health), then makes a clear call to action by saying who should act (the city and school) and when (this year). The choice about everyone walking more picks up only the health idea and turns it into a personal habit, ignoring the specific program the argument supports. The choice about canceling all bus routes adds an extreme new demand the argument never made—it argued for safer routes, not for forcing students to walk. The choice claiming crosswalks already exist misreads the argument, which asks for a new program; noting that some roads have crosswalks does not conclude the argument or call for any action. Only the answer that combines all three benefits with a specific next step truly concludes the argument.

Question 11

1. Keeping the library open after school would support studying, provide internet access, and strengthen research skills, so it’s a change our school should make.
2. In conclusion, our school should keep the library open later and also lower the cost of school lunches so more families can afford them. (correct answer)
3. These reasons show that after-school library hours would help many students study, get online, and succeed, so the school should extend the schedule.
4. Because students need quiet study space, internet, and research help, extending library hours is a practical way to support learning beyond the last bell.

Explanation: A strong conclusion should pull together only the reasons the writer already gave, not slip in a brand-new idea. This argument names exactly three benefits of longer library hours: a quiet place to study, reliable internet, and help from librarians finding trustworthy sources. The sentence that should be revised keeps the library point but suddenly adds lowering the cost of school lunches—a topic the argument never mentions. Even though lunch cost sounds like a reasonable school issue, it doesn't belong in a conclusion for this argument, so that concluding sentence breaks the writer's focus. The other three all stay inside the argument's scope: one lists studying, internet access, and research skills; one says the reasons show library hours would help students study, get online, and succeed; and one names quiet study space, internet, and research help. Because each of these restates ideas the writer actually argued, none of them introduces a new topic, so none needs revising for that reason. When you write a conclusion, check that every part connects back to a reason you already explained.

Question 12

1. In conclusion, printing flyers costs money, so switching to email is the modern and responsible choice for a school that cares about its students.
2. In conclusion, a weekly digital newsletter would cut waste, save staff time, and help families stay informed, so our school should switch from most paper flyers to one organized email update. (correct answer)
3. In conclusion, our school should communicate better with everyone by sharing news more clearly, so that families always know exactly what is happening each week.
4. In conclusion, our school should keep paper flyers because printed copies are easier to notice and harder for busy families to accidentally overlook or ignore.

Explanation: A strong conclusion should pull the argument's reasons together and restate the specific action being recommended. The best answer does both: it names all three benefits the argument gave—cutting waste, saving staff time, and keeping families informed—and then ties them to the exact proposal of switching from paper flyers to one weekly email. The option about printing costing money grabs only one narrow idea and adds a claim about being 'modern' that the argument never made, so it fails to synthesize the reasons. The option about communicating 'better' sounds related but stays vague—it never names the digital newsletter or any of the argument's actual reasons, so it doesn't follow from the evidence. The option about keeping paper flyers argues against the writer's whole position, so it cannot serve as this argument's conclusion at all. Only one choice truly gathers the argument's points and restates its recommendation, which is what a concluding statement must do.

Question 13

1. In conclusion, our school should focus on serving tastier food and giving students longer lunch periods so cafeteria time feels more enjoyable for everyone.
2. To sum up, reusable trays would cut cafeteria waste, lower long-term costs, and teach students responsible habits, so our school should make the switch. (correct answer)
3. In conclusion, reusable trays are one option a school might consider, since trays of many kinds are already a common sight in cafeterias everywhere.
4. In conclusion, our school could try reusable trays, but the extra washing and effort probably outweigh any small benefits they might bring us.

Explanation: A strong conclusion pulls together the reasons already given and restates the writer's main claim without introducing anything new. The best answer does exactly that: it gathers the three points from the argument—less waste, lower costs, and teaching responsibility—and ends by urging the school to switch. The choice about tastier food and longer lunch periods fails because it adds brand-new topics the argument never discussed, so it doesn't sum up what was said. The choice saying trays are 'a common sight in cafeterias everywhere' just repeats an obvious fact and never restates the claim or the reasons, so it doesn't actually conclude anything. The choice about washing and effort outweighing the benefits fails because a conclusion should support the argument, and this one contradicts it by arguing against making the switch. Only the answer that restates the reasons and reinforces the claim truly concludes the argument.

Question 14

1. In conclusion, lunch is an important part of the school day for everyone, and students deserve a break in the middle of their busy hours before they head off to their afternoon classes.
2. For these reasons, a quiet lunch study hall would give busy students the time they need and help them submit stronger work, so the school should offer this option. (correct answer)
3. A quiet study hall could help students who are busy after school finish their assignments, but supervising it during lunch would likely be too hard, so the school probably shouldn't try it after all.
4. Because students want a better lunch experience, the school should also improve the cafeteria menu and add more clubs so that everyone's break in the middle of the day feels more fun and relaxing.

Explanation: A strong argument conclusion should pull the reasons back together and restate the claim so the argument feels complete. The best answer does exactly that: it ties the reasons about busy schedules and better work to a clear restatement that the school should offer the study hall. The choice about lunch being important for everyone stays too vague—it never connects to the specific reasons about time, quiet, or completed work, so it doesn't support the actual claim. The choice about supervision being too hard sounds reasonable, but it turns against the argument by concluding the school shouldn't try the study hall, which contradicts the claim it should be reinforcing. The choice about the cafeteria menu and clubs drifts to new topics the argument never raised, so it doesn't grow out of the reasons the student gave. Only the answer that synthesizes the reasons and confirms the claim truly follows from and supports the argument.

Question 15

1. Planting more trees is a good idea because everyone knows that trees are an important and beautiful part of the natural world all around us.
2. The school should plant more trees near the playground because the play area is too small and clearly needs several brand-new swings and slides.
3. Since trees would add shade for safety, clean the air, and make outdoor time more inviting, planting more trees near the playground would improve students’ health and recess. (correct answer)
4. Trees might provide some shade and cleaner air, but since they could take years to grow tall, there is really no good reason for the school to try.

Explanation: A strong conclusion should tie together the exact reasons the argument already gave and connect them back to the claim. The best answer does this: it restates shade for safety, cleaner air, and more inviting outdoor time, then explains that these benefits together improve students’ health and recess. The choice about trees being an important, beautiful part of nature sounds pleasant, but it is vague and never mentions any of the specific reasons in the argument, so it does not truly support the claim. The choice about the play area being too small and needing new swings and slides adds brand-new issues that were never part of the original argument, so it wanders off topic. The choice saying trees might help but take years to grow starts to acknowledge the benefits, yet it ends by undercutting the whole argument, telling readers there is no reason to try—the opposite of what a conclusion should do. A good concluding statement gathers your reasons and reinforces your position rather than introducing new problems or giving up on it.

Question 16

1. Conclusion 2 is better because it keeps the ending short and simple, and readers usually remember a brief final sentence more easily than a long, detailed one.
2. Conclusion 2 is better because it names one real problem from the argument, and focusing on a single reason gives the ending a clear, sharp point instead of listing everything.
3. Conclusion 1 is better because it pulls together the reasons about sleep, learning, and calmer mornings and adds a clear call to action for the district to make the change. (correct answer)
4. Conclusion 1 is better because it introduces the fresh idea of longer weekends, and a strong conclusion should give readers a brand-new reason they had not considered before.

Explanation: The stronger conclusion ties the whole argument together. Conclusion 1 wins because it synthesizes all three reasons the argument gives—better sleep for health, improved attention and learning, and calmer family mornings—and then turns them into a clear call to action asking the district to make the change. That is exactly what a good argument conclusion does. Picking Conclusion 2 because it is short and easy to remember uses the wrong standard: brevity does not matter if the ending fails to sum up the reasons. Saying Conclusion 2 is better because it makes one 'sharp point' misreads it—"school mornings are hard" is vague and does not restate the claim or the specific reasons. Choosing Conclusion 1 for introducing 'longer weekends' is wrong too, since that idea appears nowhere in the argument, and a conclusion should pull together the reasons already given, not invent a new one. Only Conclusion 1 does the real job of a concluding statement: it gathers the evidence and points readers toward action.

Question 17

1. It brings up the cost of buying new reusable utensils, a concern that changes the argument instead of wrapping it up.
2. It sounds unsure and does not match the strength of the reasons by clearly restating the claim or urging action. (correct answer)
3. It restates all three reasons word for word, making the ending drag on far longer than a conclusion should.
4. It shifts the focus onto how students behave, drifting away from the argument about switching to reusable utensils.

Explanation: A strong conclusion should sound as confident as the reasons that came before it and remind the reader of the claim or push for action. The reasons here are firm—reusable utensils cut trash, save money, and model responsibility—but the conclusion says the school 'should maybe think about it someday if it's not too hard.' That wording is unsure and weak, so it does not restate the claim or call for action. The best choice points out exactly this mismatch. The choice about the cost of buying new utensils is wrong because the conclusion never raises a new cost concern; it simply hedges. The choice claiming the ending restates all three reasons word for word is wrong because the conclusion is a single short, vague sentence that repeats nothing. The choice about shifting focus onto student behavior is wrong because the conclusion does not narrow onto responsibility—it just sounds hesitant about the whole idea. When you write your own conclusion, match the confidence of your reasons and clearly restate what you want to happen.

Question 18

1. In conclusion, our school should offer a short daily mindfulness break to students because it is a simple change worth trying this year.
2. In conclusion, lowering stress matters for everyone, so people of all ages should look for calming activities that help them feel better each day.
3. By reducing stress, improving focus, and supporting better behavior, a daily mindfulness break would strengthen the learning environment, so the school should add it. (correct answer)
4. In conclusion, a mindfulness break would also give students a good chance to eat snacks and relax with friends before the next lesson begins.

Explanation: A strong conclusion pulls the argument's separate reasons together and shows how they add up. The best answer names all three benefits from the argument—reducing stress, improving focus, and supporting better behavior—and explains that together they strengthen the learning environment before recommending the policy. That is true synthesis, not repetition. The choice saying the school should offer a break because it's 'a simple change worth trying' only restates the original claim and adds a new reason instead of combining the ones given. The choice about lowering stress for people of all ages drifts away from the argument's focus on students and the school, so it doesn't synthesize the reasons presented. The choice about eating snacks with friends introduces an idea the argument never made, so it can't be a conclusion that summarizes the writer's actual reasons. Only the answer that weaves the three stated benefits together and shows their combined effect does what the stem asks.

Question 19

1. Test scores clearly matter a great deal, so every student should simply try their hardest and take each exam seriously all year long.
2. Allowing one retake would help students reflect on errors, lower unhealthy stress, and show what they truly learned over time, so our school should adopt this policy each quarter. (correct answer)
3. Students should get unlimited retakes on every single quiz and test throughout the year, so that no student ever fails a class again for any reason.
4. In conclusion, teachers work incredibly hard, plan careful lessons, and truly deserve our respect, so students should always be grateful for everything they do.

Explanation: The winning conclusion pulls together all three of the argument's reasons—reflecting on errors, lowering unhealthy stress, and showing true learning over time—and then ends with a clear call to action: the school should adopt the one-retake policy each quarter. That combination of synthesis plus a decisive ending is what a strong argumentative conclusion does. The choice saying scores matter and students should try their hardest is too vague; it never mentions retakes or connects to any of the three reasons. The choice calling for unlimited retakes on every quiz and test goes beyond the original claim of just one retake per quarter, introducing a new idea the argument never supported. The choice praising teachers' hard work drifts off-topic, since the argument is about retakes, not gratitude toward teachers. Only one option stays true to the claim and weaves the reasons together into a strong finish.

Question 20

1. It shifts to a new topic that was never argued and does not follow from the reasons about passing time. (correct answer)
2. It restates every reason in too much detail and drags on far longer than a strong conclusion should.
3. It pulls together the reasons about crowding, tardies, and stress into one clear final statement.
4. It works well because it repeats the original claim about longer passing time between classes.

Explanation: A strong conclusion should tie back to the reasons you actually gave. This argument is all about longer passing time reducing crowding, tardies, and stress—so the conclusion should reinforce that. The best answer points out that the conclusion suddenly talks about after-school clubs, a topic that was never argued, so it doesn't follow from any of the reasons. That is the real flaw. The choice saying the conclusion restates every reason in too much detail is wrong because the conclusion is actually very short and mentions none of the passing-time reasons. The choice saying it pulls the reasons together into a clear final statement is wrong because it does the opposite—it abandons those reasons entirely. The choice saying it works well by repeating the original claim is wrong because the conclusion never mentions passing time at all; it switches to clubs. When you write a conclusion, make sure every part connects back to the evidence and reasons you already presented instead of introducing something new.