Recognise and map arguments
Distinguish an argument from an explanation and map how reasons support intermediate and main conclusions.
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
- Recognise reasoning intended to support a claim
- Identify argument elements and explain their functions
Ask what the author wants accepted
An argument gives reasons for accepting a conclusion. An explanation accounts for an event treated as given. ‘The floor is wet because a pipe burst’ normally explains a known wet floor; ‘There is water under the pipe, so it probably burst’ argues for a disputed cause. Context and function matter more than the word ‘because’ alone.
Fictional passage: ‘Late buses are often full. Extra services would therefore reduce overcrowding. Some say the cost rules out expansion, but a funded pilot can test demand. We should run the pilot.’ The final recommendation is the main conclusion; the overcrowding claim is an intermediate conclusion supported by the first observation.
Trace support, not sentence order
Reasons may support a conclusion jointly or independently. An intermediate conclusion receives support and then supports a further conclusion. An example illustrates a claim. A counter-assertion voices an opposing claim to be answered; a counter-argument adds reasons for the opposing conclusion. Neither is automatically the author’s own conclusion.
In an argument-structure task, identify what the passage treats as evidence or a reason; do not substitute an external fact-check for the requested map. Real-world evaluation still requires authentic evidence. Explain the relationship between elements, rather than listing labels without their roles.
Sources for this lesson
Pause and explain
What makes a conclusion intermediate?
Worked example
Identify the main and intermediate conclusions in the bus passage.
Show the worked solution
- Find the overall recommendation: run the pilot.
- Find the claim supported by full buses: extra services reduce overcrowding.
- Show how that benefit supports the pilot recommendation.
Answer ‘We should run the pilot’ is the main conclusion. ‘Extra services would reduce overcrowding’ is an intermediate conclusion, receiving support from full buses and contributing a reason for the pilot. The cost objection is raised for response, not endorsed as the final position.
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 cost objection’s role in the bus passage.
Give me a hint
Read the author’s response too.
Compare my reasoning
- The objection opposes expansion.
- The author answers it with a funded pilot.
- It is not the main recommendation.
The cost statement is a counter-assertion raised to be answered by the funded-pilot proposal. Its function is to acknowledge and respond to opposition, rather than supply the author’s final conclusion.
Look for these in your work
- Identifies the opposing role
- Uses the response
- Distinguishes the main conclusion
Independent: ‘The room is near the bus stop, so travel is easier. Easier travel improves access. Therefore choose this room.’ Map the reasoning.
Give me a hint
Trace each support link.
Compare my reasoning
- Nearness is a reason for easier travel.
- Easier travel is an intermediate conclusion.
- The access link supports choosing the room.
The main conclusion is to choose the room. Nearness supports easier travel; that intermediate conclusion combines with the access principle to support the recommendation. The sequence is a strand of reasoning rather than three unrelated statements.
Look for these in your work
- Identifies the main conclusion
- Identifies an intermediate conclusion
- Explains support links
Application: Contrast ‘The alarm sounded because smoke reached the sensor’ with ‘The alarm sounded, so smoke may have reached the sensor’. Explain the different functions.
Give me a hint
Ask which event is being established.
Compare my reasoning
- The first accounts for a given alarm.
- The second infers a possible cause from the alarm.
- Other alarm causes could weaken the second inference.
The first normally explains the alarm using a cause treated as given. The second argues for a possible cause and requires evaluation of alternative causes, such as a test or fault. The distinction depends on the role of the claims in context.
Look for these in your work
- Distinguishes explanation
- Identifies the inference
- Uses context and alternatives
Common mistakes
- Treating the last sentence as the conclusion without checking function
- Calling every because-sentence an argument
- Confusing an objection with the author’s position
What can you explain now?
What makes a conclusion intermediate?
Compare with the explanation
It is supported by reasons and then supports a further conclusion
The role in the support structure determines the label.
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 conclusion intermediate?
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.