SL.7.3: Evaluating a Speaker's Reasoning and Evidence
In plain English: SL.7.3 is the Common Core grade 7 ELA standard that asks students to outline a speaker's argument and specific claims, then judge each claim: is the reasoning sound, is the evidence relevant to the claim, and is there enough of it? It builds on SL.6.3 and leads to SL.8.3, which adds spotting irrelevant evidence the speaker brings in.
Delineate a speaker's argument and specific claims, evaluating the soundness of the reasoning and the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence.
Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy · Domain: Speaking and Listening Standards · Cluster: Comprehension and Collaboration · Official standard
In grade 6, students learned to outline a speech and sort its claims into supported and unsupported. SL.7.3 asks a harder question about every claim: how good is the support? To delineate a speaker's argument is to outline it: the argument (the speaker's overall position or request) and each specific claim (one statement the speaker wants listeners to accept) in order. Then students evaluate each claim with three tests. Evidence is relevant when it is actually about the claim. It is sufficient when there is enough of it, from a fair group, for a claim of that size. Reasoning is sound when the claim really follows from the evidence, with no jump in logic.
Two speeches written for this page, with invented speakers and numbers, carry the lesson. In Speech 1, a parent asks a town council to open the town pool ten days earlier; the teacher reads it aloud and the class evaluates it together. In Speech 2, a seventh grader asks the PTA to buy a 3D printer for the science room; students evaluate it on their own and answer the quiz about it. Each speech mixes well-supported claims with claims that fail one test, so students must judge claim by claim. Students hear each speech read aloud with the text face down before they read the transcript, because the standard is about listening.
Learning Objectives
By the end of this lesson, students will be able to:
Delineate a speaker's argument by stating it in one sentence and listing the specific claims in order
Judge whether the evidence for a claim is relevant, and explain why evidence that is true can still be off the point
Judge whether the evidence is sufficient, considering how many cases it covers and whether they are a fair sample
Evaluate the soundness of a speaker's reasoning and name three reasoning traps: after, so because; slippery slope; and only two choices
Prior Knowledge Required
Students should already be comfortable with:
Delineating a speaker's argument and telling supported claims from unsupported ones SL.6.3
Tracing and evaluating the argument and specific claims in a written text RI.6.8
Finding a percent of a quantity as a rate per 100 6.RP.A.3
"A cereal commercial says, 'Nine out of ten kids who tried Crunch-Os loved them!' Before you believe that you would love them too, what would you want to know?"
List the questions on the board. Group them under three headings as they come up: How many kids were asked? (maybe only ten), Which kids? (maybe kids who already liked sweet cereal), and Does that prove it? (kids loving a cereal does not show that it is healthy, or that you will love it). These are the three tests of the lesson: is the evidence sufficient, is it relevant, and is the reasoning sound?
Direct Instruction20 minutes
Part 1: The words of the standard. Hand out the table and Diagram 1. Students keep both for the rest of the lesson.
Words for evaluating a speaker
Word
What it means
Question to ask
Delineate
Outline the argument and each claim in the order the speaker gives them
What is the speaker asking for, and what are the separate points?
Argument
The speaker's overall position or request
What does the speaker want us to believe or do?
Claim
One statement the speaker wants listeners to accept; an argument has several
What is this paragraph trying to prove?
Evidence
Facts, numbers, examples, records or the words of an expert
How does the speaker know?
Relevant
About this claim; true evidence can still be off the point
If this evidence is true, does it help prove this claim?
Sufficient
Enough evidence, from a fair group, for a claim of this size
How many cases? Which ones? Would more change the answer?
Sound reasoning
The claim really follows from the evidence, with no jump in logic
Could the evidence be true and the claim still be wrong?
After, so because
Saying that because B happened after A, A caused B
Could something else have caused it?
Slippery slope
Saying one small step will lead, step by step, to disaster, with no proof for the steps
Is each step shown, or only imagined?
Only two choices
Pretending there are just two options when there are more
What other choices are there?
Part 2: Listen first. Students turn Speech 1 face down. Read it aloud at a normal pace, as Mr. Okafor would at a council meeting. Students write the request and a word or two for each point they hear. Then they turn the page over and follow along as you read it a second time.
1Good evening. My name is Ray Okafor, and I live on Ash Court, a few blocks from the Fairview Town Pool. This year, school lets out on June 4, but the pool does not open until June 15. I'm asking the council to open the pool on June 5, the day after school ends.
2First, families will use the pool in early June. Two years ago, the council opened the pool one week early, on June 8, as a trial. The recreation department's gate count shows that 2,450 swimmers came that week, about the same as a normal week in July.
3Second, kids in Fairview have nothing to do until the pool opens. My two children were bored the whole first week of vacation last year, and so was my neighbor's son.
4Third, the pool is ready to open early. Everyone loved the new water slide last summer. My daughter went down it forty times in one day.
5Fourth, an early opening keeps kids safe. In June of that trial year, the police reported only 4 bike accidents involving children, down from 9 the June before. So opening the pool early means fewer accidents.
6Fifth, opening early would not cost the town much. At the council meeting in March, the recreation director said that the pool costs about $1,500 a day to run, for lifeguards, water and chemicals. During the trial week, the pool took in about $13,000 in entrance fees, more than the $10,500 it cost to run for those seven days. So ten early days should pay for themselves.
7Sixth, if the council says no, families will give up on Fairview. First they'll drive to the pool in Riverton, then they'll shop in Riverton, and soon they'll move to Riverton. Before long, our town will have no young families left.
8So please vote to open the pool on June 5. Families will come, and the early days should pay for themselves. Thank you.
Written for this page (the speaker, town, pool, council, recreation department and all numbers are invented), Open the Pool the Day School Ends (Speech 1: a parent at a town council meeting). Original passage written for this page.
Delineating the argument (paragraphs 1-8)
What is Mr. Okafor's argument, and what are his specific claims?
Result: Argument: the council should open the pool on June 5, the day after school ends, instead of June 15 (paragraph 1, repeated in paragraph 8). Six claims follow, one per paragraph, each opened by an order word from "First" to "Sixth": families will use the pool early (2), kids have nothing to do (3), the pool is ready (4), an early opening keeps kids safe (5), it would not cost much (6), and saying no will drive families away (7).
Relevance (paragraph 4)
Mr. Okafor claims the pool is ready to open early. Is his evidence relevant?
Result: No. The evidence is that people loved the water slide and his daughter rode it forty times. Even if every word is true, it says nothing about readiness: whether lifeguards are hired, the water is treated or the pool has passed inspection by June 5. True evidence can still be off the point, so this claim fails Test 1.
Sufficiency (paragraph 3)
Mr. Okafor claims that kids in Fairview have nothing to do until the pool opens. Is his evidence sufficient?
Result: No. The evidence is relevant, since bored children are what the claim is about, but it covers three children: his two and a neighbor's son. A claim about all the kids in a town needs far more cases than that, and they should not all come from one street. Compare paragraph 2, where the gate count covers every swimmer who came during the trial week.
Soundness (paragraph 5)
Accidents fell from 9 to 4 in the trial June. Does that show that an early opening keeps kids safe?
Result: No. The numbers are specific, but the reasoning is "after, so because": the accidents fell in the same June the pool opened early, so he says the pool caused the drop. Many other things could explain it, such as rainy weather, a new bike lane or plain chance. The evidence could be true and the claim still wrong, so the reasoning is unsound.
Walk through Diagram 1 with paragraph 4 (it stops at Test 1) and paragraph 5 (it passes Tests 1 and 2 but fails Test 3). Explain the order: if evidence is off the point, it does not matter how much of it there is, so relevance comes first. Stress two ideas. A claim that fails a test is not necessarily false: the kids in Fairview may really be bored, but the speaker has not shown it. And one weak claim does not sink the whole argument: listeners decide by looking at what is left once the weak claims are set aside.
Guided Practice15 minutes
Pairs run paragraphs 2, 6 and 7 of Speech 1 through the three tests in Diagram 1, writing one sentence for each test they use. For paragraph 6, they check the speaker's arithmetic. Then debrief and show Diagram 2, the finished argument map.
Debrief.Paragraph 2 is well supported: the gate count is about early June (relevant), it counts every swimmer in a full week (sufficient), and "people came during the trial, so people will come again" is a fair step (sound). Paragraph 6 is also well supported. Ask pairs to check the math: 7 days at $1,500 a day is 7 × $1,500 = $10,500, and the fees of about $13,000 cover that with about $2,500 to spare. For ten days the cost would be 10 × $1,500 = $15,000, so the claim rests on early June drawing as many swimmers as the trial week did; that is a fair question to ask the speaker, not a reason to throw the claim out. Paragraph 7 is unsound: it is a slippery slope. It gives no evidence at all, and each step (driving to Riverton, shopping there, moving there, no families left) is only imagined, and nothing shows that one step leads to the next. In all, two of the six claims (paragraphs 2 and 6) survive all three tests, and the argument now rests on those two.
Independent Practice15 minutes
Students work alone on Speech 2, written for this page: a seventh grader asks her school's PTA (parent-teacher association) to buy a 3D printer, a machine that builds solid plastic objects layer by layer from a computer design. Read it aloud once with the text face down. Students write the argument and list the claims they heard. Then they turn the page over, fill in a blank argument map and answer the quiz: questions 1-10 and 15-20 are about Speech 2, and questions 11-14 use new speakers.
1Good evening. My name is Nadia Brooks, and I'm in seventh grade at Hillcrest Middle School. Hillcrest has 640 students, and every one of us takes science. Tonight I'm asking the PTA to spend $900 of this year's fundraising money on a 3D printer and a year of printing supplies for the science room.
2First, Hillcrest students want a 3D printer. Last week I asked all 14 members of the robotics club whether they would use one, and all 14 said yes.
3Second, our science classes would really use a printer. Ms. Alvarez teaches all four seventh-grade science classes, and her design unit asks each of her 120 students to build and test a small wind turbine. She told me that right now students cut the blades out of cardboard by hand, and many blades bend before the test is over. Brookside Middle School bought the same printer two years ago, and its science teacher keeps a log. The log shows that students printed 212 parts for class projects last year, and the printer broke down only twice.
4Third, this printer is the right one for our school. The company that makes it has more than 50,000 followers online, and one of its videos has over two million views.
5Fourth, the PTA can afford it. The fall fun run raised $4,200. The PTA has already planned to spend $1,800 on field trip buses and $1,200 on supply grants for teachers. That leaves $1,200, which covers the $900 for the printer and supplies.
6Fifth, a 3D printer will make our students better at science. The year after Brookside bought its printer, its science test scores went up. So the printer must have made those students better at science.
7Some parents might say that $900 is a lot to spend on one machine. But either we buy a 3D printer this year, or Hillcrest students will fall behind every other school in the state.
8Please vote yes on the 3D printer. The money is there, Ms. Alvarez's classes are ready to use it, and Brookside's printer has held up for two years. Thank you.
Written for this page (the student, teacher, both schools, the PTA, the printer company and all numbers are invented), A 3D Printer for the Science Room (Speech 2: a seventh grader at a PTA meeting). Original passage written for this page.
Closure5 minutes
Exit ticket: "Name one claim from Speech 2 that fails a test. Which test does it fail first, and what would the speaker need to fix it?" Collect the tickets; sort them by the claim chosen to see which tests the class still mixes up.
Teacher note. Both speeches, their speakers, schools, towns and numbers are invented for teaching, and each transcript says so. A few claims can be argued more than one way. A claim built on too few cases, like paragraph 3 of Speech 1, is sometimes called a hasty generalization, which is a reasoning problem as well as a sufficiency problem; this lesson files it under sufficiency, because the fix is more evidence. Accept either label when a student explains it well. SL.8.3 adds the next step, spotting irrelevant evidence as it is introduced.
Homework. Tonight students listen to a real persuasive speaker, map the argument and test each claim. Show them the directions and the rubric before they leave.
Differentiation Strategies
For Struggling Students
Give a partly filled argument map for Speech 2 with the argument written in and one box per claim labeled with its paragraph number
Let students test one question at a time: first mark every claim relevant or not relevant, then go back for sufficiency, then for reasoning
Pause after each paragraph of Speech 2 during the read-aloud so students can say the claim in their own words before moving on
For Advanced Students
Rewrite paragraph 5 of Speech 1 so its reasoning is sound: what would Mr. Okafor need to compare to show that the pool, and not something else, made the difference?
Decide whether the trial week in paragraph 2 of Speech 1 is enough evidence for every future June, and write the question you would ask the recreation director
Find a claim in Speech 2 that fails two tests, and explain which failure matters more
Assessment Guidance
What to Look For
Strong answers name the test a claim fails and point to the exact words that fail it. Watch for three mix-ups: calling evidence irrelevant just because it is weak (the three bored children in Speech 1 are on topic but too few), treating a specific number as proof (the drop from 9 to 4 accidents is real data, but it does not show that the pool caused the drop), and judging a claim by whether the student agrees with the request. Also listen for students who reject the whole speech because one claim is weak; the standard asks them to evaluate claim by claim and then decide what is left.
02
Classroom Activities
3 Activities
1
Which Test Does It Fail?
12 minPairs
Pairs read 8 claim cards aloud, each from a different invented speaker, and sort them into four piles: well supported, not relevant, not sufficient and unsound reasoning.
The 8 Cards
Card 1: "The band needs new music stands. The music teacher's inventory lists 17 of our 40 stands as broken, and the band has 52 players."
Card 2: "Our class should get a class hamster. Hamsters come in many colors, including gold, white and gray."
Card 3: "The new science textbook is too hard for seventh graders. My friend Theo read the first chapter and said it was confusing."
Card 4: "Our team started wearing green socks in October, and then we won four games in a row. The green socks are making us win."
Card 5: "Either we cancel the spring dance, or there will be no money left for the science fair."
Card 6: "The front office should keep spare pencils. The office log shows 96 students asked to borrow a pencil in September's 20 school days."
Card 7: "Our class should visit the science museum. Its gift shop sells freeze-dried ice cream and glow-in-the-dark stars."
Card 8: "Every seventh grader hates the new lunch schedule. Two kids at my table complained about it on Monday."
Procedure
Partner A reads a card aloud; Partner B, without looking, runs it through the three tests in Diagram 1 and names the pile
Switch roles for each card
For each card in a problem pile, write on a sticky note the question a listener should ask the speaker
Check: each of the four piles should end up with 2 cards
Discussion Questions
Cards 3 and 8 both give evidence that is on topic. Why do they still fail?
Card 1 gives numbers. Show with arithmetic why they are enough to support the claim, even if two players share each stand.
2
Question the Speaker
15 minGroups of 4
The teacher plays Mr. Okafor from Speech 1 at a mock council meeting. Groups act as council members and ask one question for each test.
Procedure
Assign each group one claim from Speech 1 (paragraphs 3, 4, 5 or 7)
Using the question-stem strips, the group writes three questions: one about relevance ("How does ... show that ...?"), one about sufficiency ("How many ...? Who else ...?") and one about soundness ("Could something else explain ...?")
Each group chooses its best question and asks it; the teacher answers in role, sometimes with new evidence and sometimes without
The group decides whether the answer fixes the claim and says which test it now passes
Discussion Questions
Which answer from "Mr. Okafor" really fixed a claim, and which only sounded confident?
Why is "Could something else explain this?" such a strong question for paragraph 5?
Variation for Online Classes
Groups post their questions in the chat, and the teacher answers the three strongest on camera, in role.
3
How Much Is Enough?
15 minGroups of 4
Groups judge one claim as evidence cards are added one at a time, and decide when the evidence becomes sufficient.
The Claim and the 4 Evidence Cards
The claim (invented): "Most of the 480 students at Pine Ridge Middle School would join a lunchtime board game club."
Card A: "My best friend said she would join."
Card B: "Five of the six kids at my lunch table said they would join."
Card C: "In my homeroom, 19 of the 28 students said they would join."
Card D: "The student council asked 120 students, 40 from each grade picked at random from the attendance list, and 71 said they would join."
Procedure
Turn over one card at a time, in order A to D
After each card, the group votes: sufficient or not yet? Record the vote and one reason
For each card, compute the percent who said yes, rounded to the nearest whole percent
At the end, name the card that made the evidence sufficient and explain why
Discussion Questions
Card B has a higher percent (83%) than Card D (59%). Why is Card D still the stronger evidence?
Card C asks 28 students. What makes those 28 an unfair sample of the whole school?
Modification for Large Classes
Give half the groups a second claim with the same four kinds of cards ("Most Pine Ridge students walk to school") and compare where each group decided the evidence was enough.
03
Diagrams & Visual Aids
2 diagrams
Diagram 1: Three Tests for Every Claim
Run each claim through the tests in order. Evidence that is off the point fails at Test 1, too little evidence or an unfair sample fails at Test 2, and a jump in logic fails at Test 3. Only a claim that passes all three is well supported. The band at the bottom names the three reasoning traps taught in this lesson.
Diagram 2: Argument Map of Speech 1
The finished map of Speech 1 (invented): the argument at the top and the six claims from paragraphs 2-7 below, each with its evidence and its main problem. Two claims (paragraphs 2 and 6) pass all three tests. Show it at the end of the Guided Practice debrief.
04
Homework Assignment
~30 min
SL.7.3 Homework: Put a Real Speaker to the Test
Directions: Choose a real speaker who is trying to persuade listeners, and listen to 2-5 minutes of the speech: a public comment at a school board or city council meeting (many are posted online), a student government speech, a commercial or a short talk. Listen once all the way through, then listen again and take notes. Write down who spoke, where and when. Answer in complete sentences.
Part 1: Delineate (Problems 1-2)
In one sentence, state what the speaker wants listeners to believe or do. Then name the situation: who the audience is and why the speaker is talking to them.
List the speaker's specific claims in the order you heard them (at least three), each in your own words, with the time in the recording or the part of the speech where it came.
Part 2: Test the Evidence (Problems 3-4)
For each claim, write the evidence the speaker gives and decide whether it is relevant to that claim. For any evidence that is off the point, explain what it is really about.
Choose the claim with the most evidence and the claim with the least. For each, decide whether the evidence is sufficient: count the cases, say who or what they cover, and explain whether they are enough for a claim of that size.
Part 3: Test the Reasoning and Decide (Problems 5-6)
Choose one claim and explain whether the reasoning is sound. If you find one of the three traps (after, so because; slippery slope; only two choices), name it and quote the words. If the reasoning is sound, explain why the claim really follows from the evidence.
Set aside every claim that failed a test. In four or five sentences, decide whether the claims that are left give you good grounds to agree with the speaker, and name the question you would most like to ask the speaker.
Rubric
Criterion
Full Credit (2 pts)
Partial Credit (1 pt)
No Credit (0 pts)
Delineation
Argument stated as a position or request, and three or more claims listed in order in the student's own words
Argument given as a topic only, or claims out of order or fewer than three
Missing or inaccurate
Relevance
Evidence named for every claim, with each piece correctly judged on or off the point
Evidence named, but relevance judged for only some claims or judged by agreement
No evidence named
Sufficiency
Cases counted and the group they cover described for two claims, with a clear judgment of enough or not enough
Judgment given with no count, or for one claim only
Missing
Reasoning and Decision
A reasoning trap named and quoted, or sound reasoning explained, and a decision based only on the claims that passed
Reasoning judged without quoting, or decision based partly on failed claims
Missing
05
Quiz: 20 Questions
Interactive, with answers
Instructions
Questions 1-10 and 15-20 are about Speech 2, the 3D printer speech in the Independent Practice phase of the lesson plan. Questions 11-14 use new speakers. All speakers, schools and numbers are invented. Your score updates as you answer, and Reset quiz clears everything so you or your students can try again.
Multiple choice: pick an option to check it. Short answer: write your answer, then reveal the model answer.
0 of 20 answered · 0 correct
Question 1 of 20 · Multiple Choice
What is Nadia's overall argument in Speech 2?
Answer: B
Nadia states her request in paragraph 1 ("I'm asking the PTA to spend $900 of this year's fundraising money on a 3D printer") and repeats it in paragraph 8. Choice A takes a detail from paragraph 3, the design unit, for the argument. Choice C turns evidence about Brookside into a claim Nadia never makes. Choice D misreads the robotics club survey in paragraph 2.
Question 2 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which list gives Nadia's first three claims in the order she makes them?
Answer: C
Paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 open with "First," "Second" and "Third": students want a printer, science classes would use it, and this printer is the right one. Delineating means keeping the speaker's order. Choice A starts with paragraph 5. Choice B swaps the first two claims and pulls in paragraph 6. Choice D skips paragraph 3.
Question 3 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In paragraph 2, Nadia asked the 14 robotics club members, and all 14 said they would use a printer. What is the main problem with this evidence?
Answer: D
The evidence is on topic, since it asks students whether they would use a printer, so it passes the relevance test. It fails sufficiency: 14 is a small number, and robotics club members are the students most likely to want a printer, so they are not a fair sample of the whole school. Choice A invents a rule about rooms. Choice B is false; a fair survey can be strong evidence. Choice C names a trap that is not in paragraph 2.
Question 4 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Paragraph 1 says Hillcrest has 640 students. About what percent of them did Nadia ask in her survey (paragraph 2)?
Answer: C
14 out of 640 is 14 ÷ 640 ≈ 0.022, or about 2%. That small share is one reason the evidence is not sufficient. Choice A divides the wrong way: 640 ÷ 14 ≈ 46. Choice B slips a decimal place: 140 ÷ 640 ≈ 22%. Choice D reads the count, 14, as if it were a percent.
Question 5 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In paragraph 4, Nadia supports the claim that "this printer is the right one for our school" with the company's 50,000 followers and a video with two million views. Which evaluation is accurate?
Answer: A
Followers and views measure how popular the company is online. They do not show that the printer is safe, reliable or right for seventh graders, so the evidence fails Test 1. Choice B treats a big number as sufficient without asking whether it is about the claim. Choice C names a trap that paragraph 4 does not use. Choice D adds an assumption Nadia never states, and companies post videos about all their products.
Question 6 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Using the numbers in paragraph 5, how much fun run money would be left after the buses, the supply grants and the printer?
Answer: D
$4,200 - $1,800 - $1,200 - $900 = $300, so the numbers do support the claim that the PTA can afford the printer. Choice A forgets the $1,200 in supply grants ($4,200 - $1,800 - $900). Choice B is the amount left before the printer is paid for. Choice C subtracts only the printer ($4,200 - $900).
Question 7 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In paragraph 6, Nadia says Brookside's science test scores rose the year after it bought a printer, "So the printer must have made those students better at science." What is wrong with this reasoning?
Answer: B
The rise came after the printer arrived, but that does not show the printer caused it: a new teacher, a new test or a stronger class could explain it. The evidence could be true and the claim still wrong, so the reasoning is unsound. Choice A mistakes true evidence for sound reasoning. Choice C is false, since science scores are on topic. Choice D names a trap that is not in the paragraph.
Question 8 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In paragraph 7, Nadia answers parents who think $900 is a lot of money: "either we buy a 3D printer this year, or Hillcrest students will fall behind every other school in the state." Which reasoning trap is this?
Answer: C
Nadia pretends there are just two options, buy the printer now or fall behind every school in the state, when there are others: buy it next year, share one with another school, or teach the unit with better cardboard. She also gives no evidence that Hillcrest would fall behind. Choice A needs a claim about a cause after an event. Choice B needs a chain of steps, and this is one leap between two outcomes. Choice D is wrong because the paragraph gives no evidence at all.
Question 9 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which two claims in Speech 2 pass all three tests: relevant evidence, sufficient evidence and sound reasoning?
Answer: A
Paragraph 3 gives relevant, varied evidence: Ms. Alvarez's design unit for 120 students, the bending cardboard blades and Brookside's log of 212 printed parts with only two breakdowns. Paragraph 5 gives the full budget, and the arithmetic works. Choice B includes paragraph 2, which is not sufficient. Choice C includes paragraph 6, which is "after, so because." Choice D includes paragraph 4, which is not relevant.
Question 10 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which new evidence would best fix the problem with Nadia's claim in paragraph 2 that Hillcrest students want a printer?
Answer: B
The problem is sufficiency: too few students, and not a fair sample. A random survey of about 100 students across all grades fixes both. Choice A repeats the same small, one-sided group. Choice C is about the company's customers, not Hillcrest students, so it is not relevant. Choice D is about other schools, not whether Hillcrest students want one.
Question 11 of 20 · Multiple Choice
A speaker at a school board meeting says: "The school should buy new computers for the library. The library's computers are six years old, and the tech office log shows they broke down 31 times this fall. Also, my cousin's school has computers with bright, colorful screens." Which evidence is NOT relevant to the claim?
Answer: D
The claim is that this school needs new computers because the old ones fail. The cousin's school's screens are about a different school and about looks, not about whether this library's computers work. Choices A, B and C all describe this library's computers and their breakdowns, so they are on the point.
Question 12 of 20 · Multiple Choice
A student says: "If we let people bring snacks to class, then they'll want to bring drinks, then they'll want to order pizza, and soon nobody will do any work at all." How should a listener evaluate this reasoning?
Answer: C
The speaker claims one small step will lead, step by step, to a disaster, but shows no evidence for any step. Choices A and D confuse steps that sound possible or are listed in order with steps that are shown to happen. Choice B needs a claim that one event caused a later one, which this speaker does not make.
Question 13 of 20 · Multiple Choice
A speaker claims, "Most students at our school get to school by walking or biking." Which evidence would be most sufficient?
Answer: A
Counting at every entrance on five different mornings covers the whole school and more than one day, so it is enough for a claim about "most students." Choice B covers three students. Choice C covers one day and only bikers, and a full rack does not say how many students came by car. Choice D is not about how students at this school travel, so it is not relevant.
Question 14 of 20 · Multiple Choice
A parent tells the school board: "The school should start a walking school bus, where parents take turns walking groups of children to school. Many families on the east side live too far from a bus stop, and in last month's survey, 46 east-side families said they would take part." Which statement is the speaker's overall argument?
Answer: C
The argument is the overall request: start a walking school bus. Choice A is a claim that gives a reason for it, and Choice B is the evidence that families would take part. Choice D only describes how the evidence was collected; it is neither the argument nor a claim.
Question 15 of 20 · Short Answer
Delineate Speech 2. State Nadia's argument in one sentence, then list all six of her claims (paragraphs 2-7) in order, each in a few words with its paragraph number.
Model answer: Argument: the PTA should spend $900 of its fundraising money on a 3D printer and a year of supplies for the science room. Claims: (2) Hillcrest students want a printer; (3) science classes would really use it; (4) this printer is the right one for the school; (5) the PTA can afford it; (6) a printer will make students better at science; (7) not buying one now means falling behind every school in the state. Rubric: full credit for the argument as a request and all six claims in order; partial credit for the argument and four or five claims, or claims out of order; no credit if the argument is only the topic ("3D printers").
Question 16 of 20 · Short Answer
Run paragraph 3 of Speech 2 through all three tests. For each test, give your judgment and point to the words in the paragraph that support it.
Model answer: Relevant: yes. The claim is that science classes would use a printer, and the evidence is about exactly that: Ms. Alvarez's design unit asks each of her 120 students to build and test a small wind turbine, and Brookside's students "printed 212 parts for class projects last year." Sufficient: yes. There are two kinds of evidence, a teacher who would use it and a school that already does, and the log covers a full year. Sound: yes. If a unit needs parts that cardboard cannot make well, and a similar school used the same printer for 212 parts, it follows that Hillcrest's classes would use one. A fair question is whether Brookside's classes are like Hillcrest's. Rubric: full credit for a judgment on all three tests with a quotation or exact detail for each; partial credit for two tests; no credit for a summary of the paragraph.
Question 17 of 20 · Short Answer
Paragraph 6 says the printer made Brookside's students better at science. Name the reasoning trap, then describe the evidence Nadia would need for this claim to be sound.
Model answer: The trap is "after, so because": the scores rose after the printer arrived, so Nadia says the printer caused the rise. To make the reasoning sound, she would need to rule out other causes. For example, she could compare Brookside's classes that used the printer with classes in the same year that did not, or show that the scores rose most on the design and engineering part of the test, the part the printer is used for. Rubric: full credit for naming the trap and describing a comparison or other evidence that rules out a different cause; partial credit for naming the trap only; no credit for calling the evidence not relevant.
Question 18 of 20 · Short Answer
Explain the difference between evidence that is not relevant and evidence that is not sufficient, using one example of each from Speech 2.
Model answer: Evidence that is not relevant is off the point: even if it is true, it does not help prove the claim. The company's 50,000 followers (paragraph 4) say nothing about whether the printer fits a school science room. Evidence that is not sufficient is on the point but too little or from an unfair group. The robotics club survey (paragraph 2) really is about whether students want a printer, but 14 club members cannot stand for 640 students. Rubric: full credit for both definitions and a correct example of each; partial credit for correct definitions with one example missing or wrong; no credit if the two ideas are treated as the same.
Question 19 of 20 · Short Answer
Rewrite paragraph 7 of Speech 2 in two or three sentences so that it answers the parents' worry with sound reasoning and relevant evidence Nadia could really collect.
Model answer: "Some parents might say that $900 is a lot to spend on one machine. Spread over the 120 students in Ms. Alvarez's design unit, it is $7.50 a student this year, and Brookside's printer is still working after two years. If it lasts as long, next year's seventh graders can use it too, with only new supplies to buy." (900 ÷ 120 = 7.50.) This version drops the "only two choices" trap and answers the worry about cost with numbers from the speech. Rubric: full credit for a version with no reasoning trap, relevant evidence and a direct answer to the cost worry; partial credit for removing the trap but giving no evidence; no credit if the either-or remains.
Question 20 of 20 · Short Answer
Set aside every claim in Speech 2 that fails a test. Using only the claims that are left, should the PTA vote yes? Answer in three or four sentences and name the claims you kept.
Model answer: Only paragraphs 3 and 5 pass all three tests: the science classes would use a printer, and the PTA can afford it with money to spare. Those two claims are the ones that matter most for a spending decision, because they show the printer would be used and would fit the budget. So the PTA has good grounds to vote yes, even though paragraphs 2, 4, 6 and 7 add nothing. Before voting, a careful PTA member might still ask for a fair survey of students. Rubric: full credit for keeping exactly paragraphs 3 and 5, a decision based only on them and a clear reason; partial credit for a reasonable decision that keeps one failed claim; no credit for a decision based on the failed claims.
0 of 20 answered · 0 correct
06
Frequently Asked Questions
10 Questions
What does SL.7.3 mean?
SL.7.3 means that seventh graders can listen to a speaker, outline the argument and each claim, and judge the support: is the reasoning sound, and is the evidence relevant and sufficient? "SL" stands for Speaking and Listening, and "delineate" means to outline the parts in order.
What is the difference between SL.6.3 and SL.7.3?
SL.6.3 asks whether a claim has support at all; SL.7.3 asks how good that support is. In grade 6, students sort claims into supported and unsupported. In grade 7, a claim with evidence can still fail, because the evidence is off the point, there is too little of it, or the reasoning that links it to the claim does not hold.
What does "sufficiency of the evidence" mean?
It means whether there is enough evidence for the claim being made. Students ask how many cases the evidence covers, whether they are a fair sample and how big the claim is. Three children are enough to show that some kids get bored, but not that every kid in a town has nothing to do.
How is relevant evidence different from sufficient evidence?
Relevant evidence is on the point; sufficient evidence is enough. For the claim "our cafeteria needs a second lunch line," timing the line on one day is relevant but not sufficient, since one day could be unusual. The color of the cafeteria walls is not relevant at all, so it would not help even if the speaker described it in great detail.
What reasoning errors should seventh graders learn to spot?
This lesson teaches three that students hear often: "after, so because" (assuming that what came first caused what came next), the slippery slope (one step must lead to disaster) and "only two choices" (ignoring other options). Formal names such as false cause and false dilemma can wait; students should be able to explain the flaw in their own words.
Does a claim that fails a test have to be false?
No. A claim can fail a test and still be true; the speaker just has not shown it well. A good listener says "not sufficient" or "unsound," not "a lie," and asks what evidence would settle the question.
How is SL.7.3 related to RI.7.8?
They ask for the same evaluation of an argument, in two different forms. RI.7.8 asks students to trace and evaluate the argument in a written text, and SL.7.3 asks them to do it while listening. Listeners cannot reread, so this lesson has students hear each speech with the text face down before they study the transcript.
How can parents practice SL.7.3 at home?
Use commercials and news interviews. After one plays, ask: "What does the speaker want us to do? Was the evidence about that, and was there enough? Does the conclusion really follow?" A claim like "Four out of five dentists recommend..." is a good start: ask how many dentists were asked and what exactly they recommended.
Is SL.7.3 tested on state tests?
It can be, depending on the state. Some state tests have listening sections in which students hear a short recording and answer questions about a speaker's claims and evidence; others leave listening to classroom assessment. Check your state's test guide, and practice with recordings as well as transcripts.
How do I grade SL.7.3 work?
Grade whether the student delineates the argument and claims in order, names the specific test each claim passes or fails, and points to the exact words that decide it. The homework rubric on this page scores delineation, relevance, sufficiency, and reasoning with the final decision. A student who judges claims by whether he or she agrees with the speaker has missed the point of the standard.
07
Related Standards
5 standards
These standards connect to SL.7.3: prerequisites to review first, parallel standards at the same level, and next steps that build on it.
Before this lesson
SL.6.3Prerequisite
Delineate a speaker's argument and tell supported claims from unsupported ones
