Is the evidence good enough?
Grade 7 Reading Worksheet
Circle the best answer.
Read this first
Do Dogs Make Families Active? (article)
[1] Owning a dog makes a family more active than it would be without one. [2] My neighbors walked three times a week before they got a dog, and now they walk every day, even when the weather is cold. [3] A survey of six families on my street found that five of them walk more since adopting a dog. [4] Dogs also need regular baths, and many families find that this is a messy chore that takes up part of the weekend.
[5] Everyone I know says that dog owners are the healthiest people in town, and nobody I have asked disagrees. [6] Dogs have been loyal companions to people for thousands of years, long before cities and cars. [7] Walking is good exercise for people of every age, from young children to grandparents.
[8] With so many examples around me, it is clear that dogs make every family healthier. [9] Any family that wants to be more active should adopt one this year.
Kira fills the 'relevant?' and 'enough?' columns for sentence [3]. Which row is right?
- Relevant, and it is a small survey, so it is not enough to show what most families do.
- Relevant, and five of six families is enough to support the claim for families everywhere.
- Relevant, because it shows that families enjoy having a dog.
- Not relevant, because it counts families and not the dogs themselves.
Luz asks whether the writer's evidence is enough. Which statement is fair?
- Yes: the writer's friends say dog owners are the healthiest people in town.
- No: two homes and six families do not show what most families do.
- Yes: sentence [8] shows that dogs make a whole town healthier.
- Yes: sentences [4] and [6] add even more facts about dogs.
Milo looks at sentence [8]. What is wrong with its reasoning?
- It repeats the claim from sentence [1] and gives no new reason.
- It treats what people say as if it had been measured.
- It switches to a fact about dogs that has nothing to do with activity.
- It stretches a few cases into a rule about every family.
Lights on Cedar Road (article)
[1] New streetlights make Cedar Road safer for the families who live along it, and for the people who walk home after dark. [2] In the year before the lights went up, there were 12 break-ins on Cedar Road, according to the police report. [3] In the year after, there were only 4. [4] That is a drop of two thirds in a single year.
[5] The lights are bright white, and they can be seen from the highway a mile away across the open fields. [6] During the same year, the police also began driving down Cedar Road every night, after neighbors asked for patrols. [7] Neighbors say they feel safer walking at night, and several now use the road for evening walks with their families.
[8] The town should put the same lights on every road in town. [9] The results on Cedar Road show what lights can do, and the town should act on them without waiting for another year of reports.
Noah fills the 'relevant?' and 'enough?' columns for sentence [3]. Which row is right?
- Relevant, because neighbors feel safer, as sentence [7] says.
- Relevant, and the drop may have another cause, so it needs more support.
- Not relevant, because break-ins are not the same thing as a safe road.
- Relevant, and the drop shows that the lights caused the change.
Pia asks whether the evidence shows the lights caused the drop. Which statement is fair?
- Yes: neighbors feel safer, so the lights must be working.
- Yes: break-ins fell from 12 to 4 after the lights went up.
- Yes: sentence [5] says the lights are bright and can be seen from the highway.
- Not yet: sentence [6] shows a second change that could explain the drop.
Ren looks at sentence [8]. What is wrong with its reasoning?
- It switches to how bright the lights are, which is not about safety.
- It repeats the claim from sentence [1] and gives no new reason.
- It moves from the results on one road to a plan for every road.
- It depends on how neighbors feel instead of on counts.
The New Lunch Menu (article)
[1] Students prefer the new lunch menu to the old one. [2] To find out, the cafeteria staff asked students who were standing at the salad bar what they thought, because that line was short and easy to reach during the busy lunch period. [3] Twelve of the fifteen students asked said they liked the new menu. [4] The new menu includes a pasta bar and a fruit cup, and it replaced the old menu at the start of the month.
[5] The old menu had pizza on Fridays and a hot dog on Mondays. [6] Students at the salad bar are the ones who choose the new foods, and most of them go there every day. [7] Last week, the cafeteria sold more fruit cups than in any week of the old menu.
[8] The principal should keep the new menu for the rest of the year, and the cafeteria should add a second pasta bar. [9] The school has about four hundred students, and most of them eat lunch in the cafeteria.
Tala fills the 'relevant?' and 'enough?' columns for sentence [3]. Which row is right?
- Relevant, and twelve of fifteen students is enough to speak for the whole school this year.
- Relevant, and fifteen students at the salad bar are too few and too alike to be enough.
- Relevant, because it shows the cafeteria staff liked the new menu.
- Not relevant, because it counts students and not meals.
Ari looks at sentence [7]. Why is it weak evidence that students prefer the new menu?
- It repeats that students prefer the new menu and adds no new fact to the argument itself.
- It reports what students say about lunch instead of what they actually bought.
- It talks about the old menu, which has nothing to do with the claim.
- It counts sales of one item, which does not show that students prefer the whole menu.
The Quiet Hour (article)
[1] The library should keep its quiet hour from four to five each afternoon, as it has done for years. [2] A quiet hour is the right idea because quiet is better than noise. [3] A petition signed by 300 residents asks the library to keep the quiet hour. [4] Most of the people who signed it already use the library every week and have used it for a long time, so they already know what a quiet hour feels like.
[5] The library has a new carpet that muffles sound and is a pale gray color. [6] A teacher who uses the library says the quiet hour helps her students finish their homework before dinner. [7] Other libraries in the region have quiet hours, and they have not lost visitors.
[8] Some visitors need silence to read or to study. [9] The library board will vote on the question next month, at its regular meeting.
Bo fills the 'relevant?' and 'enough?' columns for sentence [3]. Which row is right?
- Not relevant, because signatures are not words said inside the library.
- Relevant, and 300 signatures are enough to show a quiet hour helps readers.
- Relevant, and it shows what residents want, but not that a quiet hour helps.
- Relevant, because so many people agree that the crowd cannot be mistaken.
Jun looks at sentence [2]. What is wrong with its reasoning?
- It repeats the claim as if it were a reason, instead of giving evidence.
- It depends on how many people agree instead of on any checked facts.
- It brings in a fact about the library's new carpet and its color.
- It uses a single example to support the claim, and the example is weak.