Choose the analysis that logically connects the evidence to the claim
Key notes :
1. Understanding Claims and Evidence
- Claim: A statement or assertion that expresses a position, argument, or belief.
- Evidence: Facts, examples, quotations, or data used to support the claim.
- The relationship between the claim and the evidence is essential for constructing strong arguments.
2. Role of Analysis
- Analysis is the explanation of how evidence supports or proves the claim.
- It explains the why and how the evidence is relevant and strengthens the argument.
- Without analysis, the evidence is just a collection of facts, but with analysis, it becomes meaningful and persuasive.
3. Identifying Logical Connections
- Logical connection: It is the reasoning that shows how evidence directly supports the claim.
- A strong analysis should be:
- Clear: Directly link the evidence to the claim.
- Relevant: Focus on the most important evidence that clearly supports the argument.
- Coherent: Ensure that the evidence flows logically to back the claim.
4. Examples of Connecting Evidence to Claims
- Example 1 (Claim): “Social media has a negative impact on teenagers.”
- Evidence: Research shows that increased use of social media leads to higher rates of depression in teens.
- Analysis: This evidence supports the claim because it directly links the use of social media to a mental health issue in teenagers, showing that social media’s influence can be harmful.
- Example 2 (Claim): “Recycling is crucial for environmental conservation.”
- Evidence: Studies indicate that recycling can significantly reduce landfill waste and save energy.
- Analysis: This evidence supports the claim by demonstrating that recycling reduces environmental strain, providing a concrete example of its positive impact.
5. Techniques for Effective Analysis
- Restate the Claim: Start by restating your claim to remind the reader of the argument.
- Explain the Evidence: Break down the evidence and describe how it relates to the claim.
- Use Transition Words: Words like “therefore,” “as a result,” or “because” can help clarify the connection between evidence and the claim.
- Make It Specific: Avoid generalizations and be specific about how the evidence proves the claim.
6. Common Pitfalls to Avoid
- Irrelevant Evidence: Avoid using evidence that doesn’t directly support the claim.
- Weak Analysis: Don’t just present the evidence—always explain how it proves the point.
- Circular Reasoning: Avoid arguing in a circle where the evidence only repeats the claim without adding new information.
Learn with an example
➡️ Read the claim and the supporting evidence.
Claim: Finley should not have been made team captain.
Evidence: Half the players on the team are more talented than Finley is.
Why does the evidence support the claim?
Choose the analysis that better explains the connection.
- Only a top player should be team captain.
- We should let the coach know that this was not a fair decision.
Taken together, the evidence and analysis support the claim:
Evidence: Half the players on the team are more talented than Finley is.
and
Analysis: Only a top player should be team captain.
so
Claim: Finley should not have been made team captain.
The analysis provides a general interpretive rule that connects the evidence to the claim.
The other answer choice jumps to a conclusion about what should be done instead of connecting the evidence to the claim.
➡️ Read the claim and the supporting evidence.
Claim: Parents should limit the sugar-sweetened beverages their children drink.
Evidence: Sugar-sweetened beverages can contribute to health problems such as heart disease and diabetes.
Why does the evidence support the claim?
Choose the analysis that better explains the connection.
- Parents are obliged to take steps to protect the health of their children.
- Sugar-sweetened beverages are often marketed to children through television and print advertisements.
Taken together, the evidence and analysis support the claim:
Evidence: Sugar-sweetened beverages can contribute to health problems such as heart disease and diabetes.
and
Analysis: Parents are obliged to take steps to protect the health of their children.
so
Claim: Parents should limit the sugar-sweetened beverages their children drink.
The analysis provides an underlying principle that connects the evidence to the claim.
The other answer choice fails to address the claim.
➡️ Read the claim and the supporting evidence.
Claim: Peter is remarkably virtuous.
Evidence: Peter is generous with his time.
Why does the evidence support the claim?
Choose the analysis that better explains the connection.
- Peter believes generosity need not involve money.
- Generosity is a key virtue.
Taken together, the evidence and analysis support the claim:
Evidence: Peter is generous with his time.
and
Analysis: Generosity is a key virtue.
so
Claim: Peter is remarkably virtuous.
The analysis provides a larger value that connects the evidence to the claim.
The other answer choice fails to address the claim.
let’s practice!
Read the claim and the supporting evidence.
Claim: The eight-hundred-year-old Magna Carta is one of the most significant historical documents.
Evidence: It established key principles reflected in many modern constitutions.