• Quick retrieval from earlier learning (Is the evidence relevant and sufficient?). Students answer on mini whiteboards.
• Show answers together and note who needs support in the main task.

1. Judge the evidence for this claim. Claim: The beach needs more bins. Evidence: The beach is popular. (relevant and sufficient / relevant but not sufficient / not relevant) → relevant but not sufficientPrompt: Relevant: is the evidence actually about the claim?
2. Which claim and evidence pair matches this judgement: relevant and sufficient? (Claim: The new reading app improves reading scores. Evidence: In a term-long trial across 12 classes, pupils using the app improved more than similar pupils who did not. / Claim: Our school should switch to LED lights. Evidence: My uncle has LED lights at home. / Claim: The new reading app improves reading scores. Evidence: The app has a colourful design that children like.) → Claim: The new reading app improves reading scores. Evidence: In a term-long trial across 12 classes, pupils using the app improved more than similar pupils who did not.Prompt: Relevant: is the evidence actually about the claim?
3. Judge the evidence for this claim. Claim: The beach needs more bins. Evidence: Weekly litter counts over the summer found that bags of rubbish left on the sand tripled whenever the bins were full. (relevant and sufficient / relevant but not sufficient / not relevant) → relevant and sufficientPrompt: Relevant: is the evidence actually about the claim?

• Read the first lines of a short text aloud and ask what students predict will happen and why.
• Share the objective: Spotting faulty reasoning: bandwagon, slippery slope, ad hominem…. Read the success criteria together.

• Work through the example out loud, saying why you do each step, not just what you do.
• Example: Which fallacy matches this description? Presenting only two options when more exist.
• Step 1: A fallacy is a flaw in reasoning that can make a weak argument sound convincing.
• Step 2: false dilemma: Presenting only two options when more exist.
• Step 3: So the answer is: false dilemma
• Answer: false dilemma
• Pause after each step and ask a student to say what comes next.

• Do these together. Students try each step on whiteboards before you reveal it.
• Use the hints as prompts rather than giving the answer.

1. Which fallacy matches this description? Attacking the person making an argument instead of the argument itself. (slippery slope / bandwagon / false dilemma / ad hominem) → ad hominemPrompt: Think about what each kind of faulty argument does wrong.
2. Which fallacy is used here? If we allow one food stall in the park, the whole park will become a car park. (hasty generalisation / false dilemma / ad hominem / slippery slope) → slippery slopePrompt: Does it attack a person, follow the crowd, offer only two options, generalise from a few cases, or predict a chain of disasters?

• Students work on the student sheet. Circulate and check the first two answers of every student early.
• Students who finish: write a question of their own for a partner, with the answer.

The 6 questions are on the student sheet below, with answers in the key.

• Two questions on their own. Sort answers into got it / nearly / not yet to plan the next lesson.

1. Type the fallacy (in English) that matches this description. Presenting only two options when more exist. → false dilemmaPrompt: Think about what each kind of faulty argument does wrong.
2. Which fallacy is used here? Why listen to Sam's ideas about the budget? He can't even keep his bedroom tidy. (slippery slope / false dilemma / ad hominem / hasty generalisation) → ad hominemPrompt: Does it attack a person, follow the crowd, offer only two options, generalise from a few cases, or predict a chain of disasters?

Free online practice with hints and printable worksheets for this skill: eurekami.com/english/grade-8.