• Quick retrieval from earlier learning (More faulty reasoning: straw man, circular reasoning, red herring…). Students answer on mini whiteboards.
• Show answers together and note who needs support in the main task.

1. Which fallacy matches this description? Bringing in an irrelevant point to distract from the real issue. (post hoc (false cause) / straw man / red herring / appeal to false authority) → red herringPrompt: Think about what each faulty move does: twist, repeat, borrow fame, distract, confuse order with cause, or play on feelings.
2. Which fallacy is used here? Mia: "We should have fewer car-parking spaces in the town centre." Leo: "So you want to ban everyone from driving? That's ridiculous." (circular reasoning / appeal to pity / straw man / red herring) → straw manPrompt: What is wrong with the reasoning, exactly?
3. Type the fallacy (in English) that matches this description. Using the conclusion as its own evidence. → circular reasoningPrompt: Think about what each faulty move does: twist, repeat, borrow fame, distract, confuse order with cause, or play on feelings.

• Read the first lines of a short text aloud and ask what students predict will happen and why.
• Share the objective: Advanced fallacies: tu quoque, equivocation, false analogy, sunk cost…. 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? A question that contains an unproven assumption, so any direct answer seems to accept it.
• Step 1: Identifying fallacies precisely lets you evaluate arguments and avoid weak reasoning in your own writing.
• Step 2: loaded question: A question that contains an unproven assumption, so any direct answer seems to accept it.
• Step 3: So the answer is: loaded question
• Answer: loaded question
• 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? Assuming that something is good because it is natural, or bad because it is not. (moving the goalposts / equivocation / sunk cost fallacy / appeal to nature) → appeal to naturePrompt: Focus on what the reasoning does wrong: deflect, shift meaning, compare unfairly, rely on habit or nature, shift the target, assume, or throw good after bad.
2. Which fallacy is used here? We've always held the prize-giving on a Friday, so we shouldn't change it now. (sunk cost fallacy / appeal to tradition / loaded question / moving the goalposts) → appeal to traditionPrompt: What exactly is wrong with the reasoning?

• 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 8 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. Which fallacy matches this description? Claiming something is right because it has always been done that way. (moving the goalposts / false analogy / equivocation / appeal to tradition) → appeal to traditionPrompt: Focus on what the reasoning does wrong: deflect, shift meaning, compare unfairly, rely on habit or nature, shift the target, assume, or throw good after bad.
2. Which fallacy is used here? Fine, the new bus route is faster — but is it faster on Sundays? And in snow? (appeal to tradition / appeal to nature / equivocation / moving the goalposts) → moving the goalpostsPrompt: What exactly is wrong with the reasoning?

Free online practice with hints and printable worksheets for this skill: eurekami.com/english/grade-12.