Writing Evidence-Based Claims Flashcards

A student is writing about reducing school lunch waste. Which source would provide the MOST credible statistical evidence?

Answer: A USDA report on school nutrition program waste rates

Government agency reports like those from the USDA provide official, data-driven statistics that are highly credible for academic arguments.

When should a writer use a direct quote instead of a paraphrase?

Answer: When the original wording is especially powerful or precise and would be weakened by rewording

Direct quotes are best used when the author's exact words carry unique authority, impact, or precision that paraphrasing would diminish.

Which of the following best describes a 'counterclaim' in argumentative writing?

Answer: A statement that opposes or challenges the writer's main argument

A counterclaim presents the opposing perspective, which the writer must then rebut to strengthen the overall argument.

A student writes: 'The article says school uniforms help students.' What is missing from this evidence introduction?

Answer: The specific title of the article and/or its author

Effective evidence introduction requires identifying the specific source by title or author so the reader can evaluate its credibility.

How does including multiple sources strengthen an evidence-based argument?

Answer: It demonstrates that the claim is supported across different contexts and by multiple experts

Multiple credible sources show convergence of evidence, making the argument more persuasive and reducing dependence on any single study.

A writer argues that exercise reduces stress. After presenting a study, they write: 'This study proves my point.' Why is this analysis weak?

Answer: The analysis does not explain the specific connection between the study's findings and the claim about stress

Effective analysis must explain specifically how the evidence supports the claim, not just assert that it does.

Which of the following is an example of faulty reasoning when using evidence?

Answer: Concluding that because two events happened together, one caused the other

Assuming causation from correlation is a logical fallacy (post hoc reasoning) that undermines evidence-based arguments.