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.
A student argues that the school should start a peer tutoring program after school. The student's reasons are that peer tutoring gives students extra help without the cost of private tutoring, tutors strengthen their own understanding by teaching, and the program can build a more supportive school community. Which conclusion introduces new information and is therefore not a good match for the argument?
7th Grade Writing Quiz
Practice Provide Concluding Statement For Argument in 7th Grade Writing with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.
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.
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.
A student argues that the school should start a peer tutoring program after school. The student's reasons are that peer tutoring gives students extra help without the cost of private tutoring, tutors strengthen their own understanding by teaching, and the program can build a more supportive school community. Which conclusion introduces new information and is therefore not a good match for the argument?
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.
Read this argument: "Our town should add more public water bottle refill stations in parks. Refill stations reduce plastic waste because people can reuse bottles instead of buying new ones. They also save families money since they don't have to purchase bottled water as often. Finally, refill stations encourage people to drink more water while exercising, which supports better health." Which conclusion provides the best closure and synthesis of the reasons?
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.
A student writes an argument claiming the cafeteria should offer a vegetarian main dish every day. The student supports the claim by explaining that some students cannot eat meat for religious or health reasons, vegetarian options can be cheaper when planned well, and offering choices can reduce food waste because more students will find something they will actually eat. Which conclusion best follows from the argument without adding new topics?
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.
A student writes: "Students should be allowed to redo major assignments for partial credit. Redos help students learn from mistakes instead of just accepting a low grade. They also encourage students to keep trying, which builds perseverance. Finally, redos can lead to better understanding of the material, not just better grades, because students must correct what they got wrong." Which conclusion is weakest because it is too vague and doesn't connect to the specific reasons?
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.
A student writes an argument: "Our school should start a 'phone-free class time' policy. When phones are on desks, students check messages and lose focus, which lowers learning. Phones also make it easier to cheat by looking up answers during quizzes. Finally, teachers spend extra time reminding students to put phones away, so less class time is spent teaching." Which conclusion best follows from and supports this argument?
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.
A student argues that the school should require a short digital citizenship lesson each month. The student explains that students need practice spotting misinformation, learning respectful online communication can reduce conflicts, and understanding privacy settings can keep students safer. Which conclusion best includes a call to action that fits the argument?
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.
A student argues that the school should limit weekend homework. The student's reasons are that students need time to rest to stay mentally healthy, weekends are often used for family responsibilities and activities, and rested students focus better on Monday. Which conclusion is the weakest because it is too vague and does not connect to the specific reasons?
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.
Read the argument: "Our community should create a 'safe routes to school' program. Marked crosswalks and crossing guards would make it safer for students who walk or bike. Fewer parents would feel they must drive, which could reduce morning traffic near the school. With safer routes, more students could walk or bike, giving them daily exercise." Which conclusion best adds an appropriate call to action based on the argument?
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.
A student argues: "School libraries should stay open for one hour after school. Some students don't have a quiet place to study at home, so the library gives them a calm workspace. Others need reliable internet to complete online assignments. Also, extra library hours would give students access to librarians who can help them find trustworthy sources for research." Which concluding sentence should be revised because it introduces a new topic not discussed in the argument?
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.
A student's argument says: "Our school should replace most paper flyers with one weekly digital newsletter. Digital newsletters reduce paper waste and keep the school greener. They also save time because staff won't need to print and hand out stacks of papers. Finally, families are less likely to lose important information when everything is in one organized message." Which option is the best revised conclusion for this argument?
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.
Read the argument: "Our school should switch to reusable trays in the cafeteria. Reusable trays would reduce the amount of trash from disposable paper boats and plastic baskets. Over time, the school could also save money because it would buy fewer disposable items each week. Finally, using reusable trays sets a good example by teaching students to think about waste and responsibility." Which conclusion best supports the argument without adding new ideas?
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.
Read the argument: "Seventh graders should have a later school start time. Many students are still growing and need more sleep to stay healthy. When students are better rested, they pay attention more easily and remember what they learn. A later start can also reduce morning stress for families who struggle to get everyone out the door before sunrise." Two possible conclusions are: Conclusion 1: "Because more sleep supports health, attention, and calmer mornings, moving the start time later would help students learn and feel better, so the district should make this change." Conclusion 2: "In conclusion, school mornings are hard." Which conclusion better supports the argument and why? Choose the best answer.
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.
A student writes an argument to the principal claiming that the school should create a quiet study hall during lunch for students who want to work. The student supports the claim by explaining that (1) many students have busy after-school schedules and need time to finish assignments, (2) a quiet space would reduce hallway noise and distractions, and (3) students who use study hall would likely turn in more complete work. Which conclusion best follows from and supports the argument?
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.
A student writes an argument claiming the school should plant more trees around the playground. The student supports the claim by stating that trees provide shade that can prevent heat-related problems, improve air quality, and make the playground more enjoyable so students are more likely to be active outside. Which conclusion best follows from and supports the argument?
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.
A student argues that the school should replace single-use plastic utensils with reusable ones. The reasons given are that reusable utensils reduce trash, save money over time because the school buys fewer supplies, and set a good example of responsibility for students. The student's conclusion is: "We should maybe think about it someday if it's not too hard." What is the main problem with this conclusion?
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.
A student writes an argument claiming that students should be allowed to redo one major test per quarter. The student explains that retakes encourage students to learn from mistakes, reduce extreme test anxiety, and reward improvement rather than one bad day. Which conclusion best synthesizes these reasons and ends the argument strongly?
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.
In an editorial, a student claims the school should allow students to borrow e-books from the library. The student argues that e-books are available instantly (so students don't wait for popular titles), they can be adjusted for readability (font size and brightness), and they can reduce the number of lost or damaged physical books. Which conclusion best supports the argument and provides strong closure?
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.
A seventh grader argues that the town should add more public water bottle refill stations in parks. The reasons given are that refill stations reduce plastic bottle trash, save families money because they can reuse bottles, and keep people hydrated during sports and hot weather. The student's conclusion is: "Therefore, the town should build a new skate park downtown." Does this conclusion follow from and support 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.
Read this argument: "Our school should offer a short mindfulness break once a day. A five-minute break can lower stress and help students reset, especially on busy days with tests. When students feel calmer, they can focus better during lessons. Mindfulness can also improve behavior because students practice pausing before reacting." Which conclusion best synthesizes the reasons instead of just repeating the claim?
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.
A student argues: "Seventh graders should have at least 10 minutes of passing time between classes. Longer passing time would reduce hallway crowding and pushing because students wouldn't feel rushed. It would also cut down on tardies since students could stop at lockers without sprinting. Finally, it would lower stress, helping students start class calmer and more ready to learn." The student's conclusion is: "In conclusion, schools should offer more after-school clubs." What is the best description of what is wrong with this conclusion?
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.