Argument Analysis - Practice

Grade 8 Reading | FL B.E.S.T. Standard: ELA.8.R.2.4
Name:
Date:
Directions: Read each argument carefully. Identify claims, evaluate evidence quality, spot logical fallacies, and suggest improvements. Focus on analyzing the reasoning, not whether you personally agree with the claim.
Argument 1: "Ban Single-Use Plastics Now"

Our city council should immediately ban all single-use plastics in restaurants and stores. The evidence is overwhelming: plastic pollution is destroying our environment. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, Americans generate over 35 million tons of plastic waste annually, with only 8.7% being recycled. The rest ends up in landfills or, worse, our oceans.

Marine biologists have documented plastic in the stomachs of sea turtles, whales, and seabirds. A study published in the journal Science estimated that 8 million metric tons of plastic enter the oceans each year. This isn't just an environmental problem - it's becoming a human health concern as microplastics enter our food chain.

Some business owners argue that banning plastics will increase costs. But paper and plant-based alternatives are increasingly affordable, and many consumers prefer to support eco-friendly businesses. Seattle and San Francisco have already implemented plastic bans with minimal economic disruption.

Every day we delay, more plastic accumulates. The time for half-measures has passed. We must act now.

Questions About Argument 1

1. What is the CLAIM of this argument?
2. Evaluate the EVIDENCE in this argument. Identify TWO strong pieces of evidence and explain why they are effective.
3. The author addresses a COUNTERARGUMENT (business owners' concerns about costs). How effectively does the author respond to this counterargument?
4. What additional evidence or reasoning would make this argument STRONGER?
Argument 2: "Why Video Games Are Actually Good for Kids"

Parents worry too much about video games. The truth is, gaming is actually beneficial for kids, and anyone who says otherwise is just old-fashioned and doesn't understand technology.

Think about it - millions of kids play video games every day, and they're turning out fine. My nephew plays games for hours and he's one of the smartest kids in his class. Plus, lots of successful people like Elon Musk say they played video games growing up, so games obviously lead to success.

Games improve hand-eye coordination and teach problem-solving. You have to think strategically to win, which is basically the same as learning math or planning. And multiplayer games help kids learn to work in teams.

The choice is clear: either you let your kids play games and prepare them for the digital future, or you keep them away from technology and watch them fall behind. There's really no middle ground here.

Questions About Argument 2

5. This argument contains several logical fallacies. Identify the fallacy in the statement "anyone who says otherwise is just old-fashioned."
6. The argument states "millions of kids play video games every day, and they're turning out fine." Which fallacy does this represent, and why is it weak reasoning?
7. The author mentions "My nephew plays games for hours and he's one of the smartest kids in his class." What makes this evidence WEAK?
8. Identify the FALSE DILEMMA in the final paragraph and explain why it's problematic.
9. If you were to REWRITE this argument to make it more effective, what THREE changes would you make?
Argument 3: "Later School Start Times"

Middle and high schools should start no earlier than 8:30 AM. This isn't just an opinion - it's supported by scientific research on adolescent sleep patterns.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, representing 67,000 pediatricians, recommends that secondary schools start at 8:30 AM or later. Their position is based on extensive research showing that adolescents experience a biological shift in their sleep cycles during puberty. Teenagers' bodies naturally want to fall asleep later and wake up later - this isn't laziness, it's biology.

A study of over 9,000 students in Minnesota found that when schools moved start times from 7:30 to 8:00 or later, students reported better mood, decreased depression symptoms, and improved academic performance. Crash rates for teen drivers also dropped significantly.

Critics argue that later start times create childcare problems for families and conflict with after-school activities. These are legitimate concerns that require creative solutions - perhaps adjusted bus schedules or community partnerships. But these logistical challenges don't change the fundamental science: we're forcing teenagers to learn during hours when their brains are biologically not ready.

We don't ask adults to perform their most demanding work at 3 AM. Why do we ask teenagers to absorb complex information during their equivalent of the middle of the night?

Questions About Argument 3

10. This argument uses several types of evidence. Match each evidence type to an example from the text:

A. Expert authority _____ Statistics on crash rates

B. Research study _____ American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation

C. Scientific explanation _____ Minnesota study results

D. Statistical data _____ Biological shift during puberty

11. How does the author handle the COUNTERARGUMENT about childcare and activities? Is this response effective? Explain.
12. The final paragraph uses an ANALOGY (comparing teenagers learning early to adults working at 3 AM). Is this analogy effective reasoning? Why or why not?
13. Compare the evidence quality in Argument 2 (video games) to Argument 3 (school start times). Which uses stronger evidence, and what specific differences do you notice?
14. Even though Argument 3 is well-constructed, suggest ONE way it could be further improved.