From Real Exams Quiz
A Level H1 General Paper Argument Evaluation Quiz
Free A Level H1 GP Argument Evaluation quiz, HY3 Exam version, with questions, answers, and A Level-style practice for Singapore students.
These static practice materials are generated from the site's syllabus and paper-generation workflow, with source and model context shown so students and parents can evaluate the material before use.
Questions
Free quiz and exam paper access
Enter your details to view this paper
Your access is remembered on this device.
Answers
A-Level General Paper H1 Quiz - Argument Evaluation: Answer Key
Total Marks: 40 (20 questions × 2 marks)
Section A: Identifying Argument Components
Q1 [2 marks]
- Conclusion: The government should subsidise all EV purchases. (1 mark)
- Premise: Electric vehicles reduce emissions. (1 mark)
Teaching note: The conclusion is the claim the writer wants you to accept; the premise is the supporting reason. Mark separately.
Q2 [2 marks]
Sample: A counter-argument acknowledges opposing views to strengthen credibility and show balance. (2 marks for clear function)
Common mistake: Saying it "weakens your essay" – incorrect; it shows critical thinking.
Q3 [2 marks]
Flaw: Unsupported causal leap / assumption. (1 mark) Connectivity does not necessarily benefit mental health; could harm it. (1 mark)
Teaching note: Identify the gap between premise and conclusion.
Q4 [2 marks]
Example: "however" / "although" (1 mark). Effect: signals concession, qualifies claim, shows awareness of limits. (1 mark)
Q5 [2 marks]
Assessing credibility means judging if the source is trustworthy, expert, unbiased, and evidence-based. (2 marks)
Marking: 1 mark for "trustworthy", 1 for method (expertise/evidence).
Section B: Evaluating Reasoning
Q6 [2 marks]
Fallacy: Hasty generalisation / ad hominem (1 mark). Weakness: Absence alone does not prove unfit; needs context of reasons. (1 mark)
Q7 [2 marks]
Yes (1 mark). It is valid deductively if premise "all teenagers use TikTok" is accepted; conclusion follows logically. (1 mark)
Note: Validity ≠ truth of premise.
Q8 [2 marks]
Alternative: Other factors (e.g., more police, economic growth) could explain crime drop. (2 marks)
Teaching: Correlation not causation.
Q9 [2 marks]
Correlation: two things occur together (1 mark). Causation: one directly produces the other (1 mark). Critical readers require evidence for causation.
Q10 [2 marks]
Effect: Presumes agreement, shuts down dissent, makes claim seem obvious without proof. (2 marks)
Section C: Applied Argument Analysis
Q11 [2 marks]
Assumed link: Uniforms → discipline → no anarchy (1 mark). Not justified: exaggeration; lacks evidence for "anarchy". (1 mark)
Q12 [2 marks]
Analogy: Historical cost decline of solar to predict renewables (1 mark). Weakness: different tech, subsidies, markets may differ. (1 mark)
Q13 [2 marks]
Strength depends: if experts are relevant and named, moderate; vague "experts" is weak appeal. (2 marks for evaluation)
Q14 [2 marks]
False dilemma: only two extremes given (1 mark). Middle: regulated AI use with training. (1 mark)
Q15 [2 marks]
They act as cumulative supporting premises for volunteering's value. (2 marks)
Q16 [2 marks]
Mistaken: GDP causes pollution (1 mark). Evaluate: correlation only; need proof of causal link, maybe both from growth. (1 mark)
Image note: Graph shows two rising lines, not causation.
Q17 [2 marks]
Generalisation flawed: size does not determine trade influence (e.g., Singapore is trade hub). (2 marks)
Q18 [2 marks]
"Even" emphasises surprise that young children are affected, strengthening urgency. (2 marks)
Q19 [2 marks]
Oversimplification: ignores structural issues like inequality, jobs. (2 marks)
Q20 [2 marks]
Age alone insufficient: need historical, cultural, or social value. (2 marks)
