Analyzing Arguments — Practice · Grade 10 English

Chapter: Argument, Rhetoric & Tragic Choices

What this practice covers

By the end of Analyzing Arguments you should be able to:

11 questions, multiple choice and written answer, each with a worked explanation.

Vocabulary used: relevant evidence, sufficient evidence, valid reasoning, warrant, credibility.

Problem 1

A writer claims a new bike lane made a street safer and offers, as proof, that the lane is 'very popular with cyclists.' What is the problem with this evidence?
  1. It is false.
  2. It is not relevant — popularity speaks to how many people use the lane, not to whether the street is safer.
  3. There is too much of it.
  4. It is an emotional appeal, so it cannot be evidence at all.
Answer and explanation

It is not relevant — popularity speaks to how many people use the lane, not to whether the street is safer.

The evidence is on-topic but off-target: popularity bears on usage, not on safety, so it is not relevant to the specific claim.

Problem 2

A company advertises, '9 out of 10 dentists recommend our toothpaste,' without saying how many dentists were surveyed. Explain why this evidence might be insufficient.
Answer and explanation

Without the sample size, the impressive-sounding ratio could hide a tiny survey — '9 out of 10' might mean 9 out of 10 dentists total, which is far too few to support a broad claim about dentists in general. Sufficiency depends on how much credible evidence there is, and the ad conceals exactly that.

Problem 3

'The new study lounge opened in September, and the school's average GPA rose in October, so the lounge must be raising grades.' What UNSTATED assumption (warrant) does this argument depend on?
  1. That the school has more than one lounge.
  2. That GPA is a number.
  3. That nothing else that could affect grades changed between September and October.
  4. That study lounges are usually quiet.
Answer and explanation

That nothing else that could affect grades changed between September and October.

The leap from 'scores rose after the lounge opened' to 'the lounge caused it' silently assumes no other factor changed — a warrant that would have to be checked before the reasoning is valid.

Problem 4

A blog cites 'five separate studies' proving a supplement works — but all five were funded and run by the company that sells it. Why does this weaken the evidence?
  1. Studies cannot be used as evidence.
  2. The evidence is irrelevant to the claim.
  3. Five studies are always too few.
  4. The studies are not independent, so their credibility is compromised even though the count sounds impressive.
Answer and explanation

The studies are not independent, so their credibility is compromised even though the count sounds impressive.

Sufficiency depends on credible, independent sources — five studies from the same interested party carry far less weight than a few genuinely independent ones.

Problem 5

Explain the 'what would change my mind?' test and why it is a useful tool for analyzing an argument.
Answer and explanation

The test asks what evidence, if it existed, would make you abandon the claim. It is useful because it forces you to look for the argument's real weak points and to check that the claim is genuinely arguable and falsifiable; if you cannot imagine any evidence that would change your mind, the claim may be resting on assumption or belief rather than on evidence and valid reasoning.

Problem 6

Identify the reasoning gap and improve the conclusion. Give a detail and explain its relevance.
Answer and explanation

The sequence shows association, not established causation. Absence may change with season or illness. A qualified conclusion would report the change and call for comparison with other factors.

Use the criteria to compare your reasoning, not to copy the model’s wording. A supported alternative interpretation may earn full credit.

Response criteria

  • Make an accurate, focused claim or revision.
  • Use a relevant detail or a clearly explained language choice.
  • Explain the relationship and recognize a relevant limit.

Problem 7

A learner writes: “The author is wrong because I prefer shorter hours.” Explain the problem and produce a better response.
Answer and explanation

A preference does not test the evidence. Evaluate who was surveyed, how the count was collected, and whether the conclusion exceeds the finding.

Use the criteria to compare your reasoning, not to copy the model’s wording. A supported alternative interpretation may earn full credit.

Response criteria

  • Make an accurate, focused claim or revision.
  • Use a relevant detail or a clearly explained language choice.
  • Explain the relationship and recognize a relevant limit.

Problem 8

Compare what you must inspect in these two cases. What can transfer, and what must be checked again?
Answer and explanation

Separate a claim, reasons, evidence, and the assumption connecting them. A count can support a narrow observation without establishing a broad conclusion. The method transfers, but the particular detail, scope, and context must be read again. The sequence shows association, not established causation. Absence may change with season or illness. A qualified conclusion would report the change and call for comparison with other factors.

Use the criteria to compare your reasoning, not to copy the model’s wording. A supported alternative interpretation may earn full credit.

Response criteria

  • Make an accurate, focused claim or revision.
  • Use a relevant detail or a clearly explained language choice.
  • Explain the relationship and recognize a relevant limit.

Problem 9

Using an assigned reading or one exercise source, write a developed response applying analyzing arguments. Aim for 220–320 words; name the reading or reproduce the sentence you revise.
Answer and explanation

The count supports demand among most responding club members. It cannot represent all students without broader sampling. A survey including nonusers and a staffed pilot could test general demand. A complete response supplies context, a focused claim, a brief supporting detail, explanation, and a relevant qualification. Do not simply repeat this model.

Use the criteria to compare your reasoning, not to copy the model’s wording. A supported alternative interpretation may earn full credit.

Response criteria

  • Make an accurate, focused claim or revision.
  • Use a relevant detail or a clearly explained language choice.
  • Explain the relationship and recognize a relevant limit.

Problem 10

Write two specific feedback comments on a response to this unit: one on accuracy or meaning and one on evidence or language. Then state a revision priority.
Answer and explanation

Check whether the response explains separate a claim, reasons, evidence, and the assumption connecting them. a count can support a narrow observation without establishing a broad conclusion. Ask for a relevant detail and the reason it supports the conclusion. Prioritize the mistaken assumption shown here: “The author is wrong because I prefer shorter hours.”

Use the criteria to compare your reasoning, not to copy the model’s wording. A supported alternative interpretation may earn full credit.

Response criteria

  • Make an accurate, focused claim or revision.
  • Use a relevant detail or a clearly explained language choice.
  • Explain the relationship and recognize a relevant limit.

Problem 11

Choose a fresh sentence or detail from the assigned selection. Explain how this unit’s method applies, and identify one uncertainty or limitation.
Answer and explanation

The report documents litter removal, the resident distinguishes water contamination, and the memo separates funding purposes. The event can be successful within its stated scope while water quality remains unresolved. The response must supply its own precise detail and explain it; copying the model without fresh evidence is insufficient.

Use the criteria to compare your reasoning, not to copy the model’s wording. A supported alternative interpretation may earn full credit.

Response criteria

  • Make an accurate, focused claim or revision.
  • Use a relevant detail or a clearly explained language choice.
  • Explain the relationship and recognize a relevant limit.

Browse all courses