Construct persuasive arguments
Build a clear case with connected strands, intermediate conclusions and a reasoned response to significant objections.
Section 28-6.3.3 · 2028–2030 · 6.3.3 · Develop connected reasoning strands
Original StudyForA scenarios and formative model answers; no Cambridge marks, predicted grades or certified mastery. Alternative reasoned answers may be valid. Full-length unseen papers, a wider mixed-problem bank and calibrated specialist teacher marking remain outstanding.
Before you begin
- Read an English passage closely
- Distinguish a statement from its supporting reason
Work on paper. Try each question before revealing help, and explain why your method works.
Quick readiness check
Before evaluating support, what should you identify?
What you will learn
- Articulate a conclusion and develop supporting strands
- Strengthen a case through examples, appropriate analogy, hypothetical reasoning and responses to objections
Build a support structure before writing
State what the reader should believe or do. Develop reasons that connect to that conclusion rather than collecting topic facts. Link related reasons through intermediate conclusions: a short trial can measure demand and costs; those measurements reduce uncertainty; therefore a limited trial is preferable to an immediate permanent decision.
Use sources critically when supplied. Explain credibility and relevance instead of attaching quotations as decoration. An example can clarify a claim; it does not prove a general rule by itself. A useful analogy preserves the decisive features of the comparison.
Address the strongest relevant objection
State an opposing claim fairly and answer its actual reason. For a cost objection, a capped budget and a decision rule can be relevant; merely calling the critic pessimistic is not. Hypothetical reasoning traces what would follow if a proposed action or counterfactual condition held, and needs a credible connection between the condition and consequence.
The goal is a justified persuasive conclusion, not compulsory equal support for both sides. Qualify recommendations where evidence is incomplete. A fluent response with weak inference is still weak reasoning; assess structure and support rather than tone alone.
Sources for this lesson
Pause and explain
What makes a counter-position strengthen your argument when included?
Worked example
Construct a short case for a monitored evening-library trial rather than immediate permanent expansion.
Show the worked solution
- Observed use suggests a possible access benefit.
- A capped trial can measure continuing demand and actual cost.
- Answer the cost objection with a budget cap and stop rule.
Answer Run a limited evening trial. The observed usage suggests a worthwhile access benefit, while continued measurement will show whether it persists. A fixed staffing budget and noise monitoring can address the strongest practical objections. If costs or disturbance exceed agreed limits, revise or stop the trial before making a permanent commitment.
Try a topic test
Choose Easy, Normal or Difficult. Save your answers and open worked review after finishing.
Test this topic →From guided practice to a new situation
Write your answer and reasoning first. Use a hint only if you are stuck. The model solution is for self-checking; your written work is not automatically marked.
Guided: Identify the conclusion, one intermediate conclusion and the objection response in the model case.
Give me a hint
Trace how measurement supports caution.
Compare my reasoning
- The recommendation is a limited trial.
- Measurement reduces uncertainty before permanence.
- A budget cap addresses the cost objection.
The main conclusion is to run a limited trial. A supporting intermediate conclusion is that continuing measurements reduce uncertainty about lasting demand and cost. The fixed budget and stop rule answer the practical cost objection with a relevant safeguard.
Look for these in your work
- Identifies the conclusion
- Explains an intermediate link
- Identifies the response
Independent: Build a short argument for captioning a school’s recorded lessons, using access and reuse as connected strands and addressing workload.
Give me a hint
Do not invent measured benefits; state mechanisms and conditions.
Compare my reasoning
- Captions can provide a text route to spoken content.
- Reusable captions can support review across repeated viewings.
- A phased plan with accuracy checks can address workload.
The school should phase in accurate captions for recorded lessons. A text route can improve access for learners who cannot rely on audio and can also aid later review. Reusing checked captions across repeated viewings makes the work more sustainable. Begin with widely used recordings and review accuracy and staff capacity before expanding; automatic captions alone do not guarantee access.
Look for these in your work
- Makes a clear recommendation
- Develops connected reasons
- Addresses workload and accuracy
Application: Using the four-source library scenario—60 users per trial evening,120-credit staffing cost, an app-only 80% poll and unmeasured noise concerns—argue for or against expansion with a significant counter-position.
Give me a hint
Evaluate the sources before using them.
Compare my reasoning
- Use measured demand and cost with their short-term limits.
- Qualify the selective poll and unmeasured disturbance.
- Make a conclusion with a response to the strongest objection.
A capped trial extension is preferable to immediate permanence: recorded use suggests demand, but four evenings cannot establish sustained need. Staffing costs must fit the budget, and the app-only poll cannot represent every user. The objection that late opening causes disturbance merits noise monitoring and enforceable limits. If longer-term demand stays strong and those limits are met, expansion can then be justified. A reasoned opposing case is also valid if it evaluates the same evidence fairly.
Look for these in your work
- Evaluates multiple sources
- Connects strands to a conclusion
- Answers a significant counter-position
Common mistakes
- Writing an opinion without supporting links
- Caricaturing the counter-position
- Using a hypothetical consequence without a mechanism
What can you explain now?
What makes a counter-position strengthen your argument when included?
Compare with the explanation
A fair statement followed by a relevant supported response
An unanswered decisive objection can weaken the case instead.
After trying it yourself, choose your next review. This is your self-assessment.
Your review choice appears on Today. Sign in to sync it across devices.
Make it stick
What makes a counter-position strengthen your argument when included?
If you needed the solution, close it and solve the problem again from a blank page. A correct answer is stronger when you can explain the reason for each step.