• 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? Trying to win an argument by making people feel sorry rather than giving reasons. (straw man / appeal to pity / red herring / circular reasoning) → appeal to pityPrompt: 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? The new head teacher arrived in September and exam results rose, so she must have caused it. (post hoc (false cause) / appeal to false authority / appeal to pity / straw man) → post hoc (false cause)Prompt: 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? Arguing that because two things are alike in one way, they must be alike in another important way. (sunk cost fallacy / moving the goalposts / equivocation / false analogy) → false analogyPrompt: 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? Why is the council ignoring residents again? (appeal to nature / loaded question / sunk cost fallacy / appeal to tradition) → loaded questionPrompt: 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? Switching between two meanings of the same word within an argument. (appeal to nature / equivocation / false analogy / loaded question) → equivocationPrompt: 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. Type the fallacy (in English) that matches this description. Changing the standard of proof whenever the original one is met. → moving the goalpostsPrompt: 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.

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