π Topic Summary
Elaborating on evidence means explaining why your evidence supports your claim. It's not enough to just drop a quote or fact. You need to connect the dots for your reader, showing them exactly how the evidence proves your point. This involves providing detailed explanations, making inferences, and analyzing the evidence in relation to your overall argument. Essentially, you're building a bridge between your evidence and your claim, making your argument stronger and more convincing.
π§βπ« Part A: Vocabulary
Match the term with its definition:
| Term |
Definition |
| 1. Inference |
A. Information used to support a claim or argument. |
| 2. Evidence |
B. The act of explaining something in greater detail. |
| 3. Elaboration |
C. A conclusion reached on the basis of evidence and reasoning. |
| 4. Analysis |
D. Examining something methodically and in detail, typically for purposes of explanation and interpretation. |
| 5. Claim |
E. A statement or assertion, typically one that is disputed or in need of justification. |
Answer Key
| Term |
Definition |
| 1. Inference |
C |
| 2. Evidence |
A |
| 3. Elaboration |
B |
| 4. Analysis |
D |
| 5. Claim |
E |
βοΈ Part B: Fill in the Blanks
Complete the paragraph using the words: evidence, claim, reasoning, analysis, elaborate.
To make a strong __________, you need to provide __________. But simply providing facts isn't enough. You must __________ on the evidence, offering a detailed __________ of what it means and how it supports your point. This involves clear __________, connecting the dots for your audience.
Answer Key
To make a strong claim, you need to provide evidence. But simply providing facts isn't enough. You must elaborate on the evidence, offering a detailed analysis of what it means and how it supports your point. This involves clear reasoning, connecting the dots for your audience.
π€ Part C: Critical Thinking
Imagine you are writing an essay about the importance of recycling. You have the following evidence: "Recycling one aluminum can saves enough energy to run a TV for three hours." How would you elaborate on this evidence to make your argument more convincing?