7th Grade Writing Quiz: Create Cohesion Among Claims And Evidence

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Create Cohesion Among Claims And Evidence, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for 7th Grade Writing.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

Question 1

1. “School should have a short daily advisory period. Meanwhile, students can get help organizing assignments; on the other hand, teachers say many students lose points because they forget due dates. In contrast, advisory gives students a chance to talk to an adult when they are stressed.”
2. “School should have a short daily advisory period. Also, students can get help organizing assignments. Plus, teachers say many students lose points because they forget due dates. And students can also talk to an adult when they are stressed.”
3. “School should have a short daily advisory period. First, students can get help organizing assignments; for example, teachers report many students lose points because they forget due dates. Additionally, advisory gives students a chance to talk to an adult when they are stressed.” (correct answer)
4. “School should have a short daily advisory period. However, students can get help organizing assignments; in conclusion, teachers say many students lose points because they forget due dates. Nevertheless, advisory gives students a chance to talk to an adult when they are stressed.”

Explanation: The winning revision uses transitions that name the true relationship between ideas. "First" introduces a reason, "for example" signals that the teacher report is evidence backing that reason, and "Additionally" adds a second reason—so the argument flows as claim → reason → evidence → reason. The version with "Meanwhile," "on the other hand," and "In contrast" uses contrast words even though every idea actually supports the same claim, so the transitions fight the meaning. The version with "Also," "Plus," and "And" only stacks ideas together; these additive words never show that the teacher report is evidence for the organizing reason, so the relationships stay unclear. The version with "However," "in conclusion," and "Nevertheless" misuses transitions completely—"However" and "Nevertheless" falsely signal disagreement, and "in conclusion" appears in the middle instead of at the end. Only the keyed choice chooses transitions that match how the ideas truly connect.

Question 2

1. It introduces a counterargument that disagrees with the claim.
2. It shows cause-and-effect, linking the problem to the conclusion/claim. (correct answer)
3. It adds another unrelated reason of equal importance.
4. It introduces a specific example that proves the claim.

Explanation: This question tests using words, phrases, and clauses to create cohesion (smooth flow, connected ideas) and clarify relationships among claim(s), reasons, and evidence in argumentative writing—employing transitions making explicit how evidence supports reasons, how reasons support claim, how ideas connect. The transition "therefore" is a cause-and-effect connector that shows the logical conclusion drawn from the presented problem. In this sentence, the student first establishes the problem (only 15 minutes to eat with long lines taking up most of that time), then uses "therefore" to introduce the logical solution or claim (extend lunch to 30 minutes). This creates cohesion by making explicit the causal relationship between the identified problem and the proposed solution. Option A is incorrect because "therefore" doesn't introduce opposition. Option C is wrong because "therefore" shows logical consequence, not addition. Option D is incorrect because "therefore" introduces conclusions, not examples. Understanding how different transitions function helps writers create clear logical connections in their arguments, with "therefore," "thus," and "consequently" showing that what follows is a logical result or conclusion based on what came before.

Question 3

1. "Our school should start 30 minutes later. Meanwhile, many students are tired in first period. A district nearby moved its start time later and reported fewer tardies. Instead, students get more sleep, and teens need about 8–10 hours of sleep each night."
2. "Our school should start 30 minutes later because many students are tired in first period. For example, a district nearby moved its start time later and reported fewer tardies. Additionally, students would get more sleep; specifically, teens need about 8–10 hours of sleep." (correct answer)
3. "Our school should start 30 minutes later however many students are tired in first period. Therefore, a district nearby moved its start time later and reported fewer tardies. On the other hand, students also get more sleep, since teens need about 8–10 hours."
4. "Our school should start 30 minutes later. Many students are tired in first period, also a district nearby moved its start time later. Plus, students get more sleep, and anyway teens need about 8–10 hours of sleep each night."

Explanation: The best revision uses transitions that match the true relationships among the ideas: "because" links the claim to a reason, "For example" introduces evidence, "Additionally" adds a second supporting point, and "specifically" ties the sleep evidence to that point. Each transition signals support, so the argument flows logically from claim to reason to evidence. The version with "Meanwhile" and "Instead" chooses transitions that signal time-shifts or contrast, so it treats supporting evidence as if it were unrelated or opposing—breaking the logical connection. The version with "however" and "On the other hand" uses contrast transitions between ideas that actually agree, making it sound like each sentence disputes the one before it instead of backing it up. The version stringing together "also," "Plus," and "and anyway" only piles ideas on top of each other; these additive words never show WHY the evidence supports the reasons or how the reasons support the claim. When you revise, pick transitions that name the real relationship: cause for reasons, example for evidence, and addition for extra support that genuinely fits.

Question 4

1. In fact, drinking water during class helps students focus, so allowing water bottles clearly benefits everyone in the room.
2. However, this concern can be addressed by requiring bottles with secure lids, so students can stay hydrated without making a mess. (correct answer)
3. Additionally, the study proved that headaches are unpleasant, which shows why students really need to bring water to class.
4. In conclusion, spills matter to teachers, so students should probably just keep their water bottles at home instead.

Explanation: The paragraph raises a counterargument in its last sentence—teachers worry about spills. The best addition names that worry and answers it, then ties back to the original claim. The sentence beginning "However" does exactly this: it acknowledges the spill concern, offers a workable fix (secure lids), and reconnects to the goal of letting students stay hydrated. That is what cohesion between claim, evidence, and counterargument looks like. The sentence starting "In fact" only restates support for the claim; it never mentions the spill worry, so it ignores the counterargument entirely. The sentence starting "Additionally" also skips the counterargument and, worse, overstates the evidence by saying the study "proved" something about headaches being unpleasant. The sentence beginning "In conclusion" does mention spills but then abandons the writer's claim, suggesting students leave bottles at home—which argues against the paragraph's own position. Only the "However" sentence both faces the objection and keeps supporting the claim, so it creates the cohesion the question asks for.

Question 5

1. For example,
2. However, (correct answer)
3. Therefore,
4. Similarly,

Explanation: This question tests using words, phrases, and clauses to create cohesion (smooth flow, connected ideas) and clarify relationships among claim(s), reasons, and evidence in argumentative writing—employing transitions making explicit how evidence supports reasons, how reasons support claim, how ideas connect. The sentence structure requires a transition that signals a shift from the claim (students should redo tests) to acknowledging an opposing viewpoint (retakes are unfair), which is a counterargument relationship. "However" correctly indicates this contrast, showing that what follows opposes or challenges the initial claim, creating cohesion by explicitly marking where the writer acknowledges opposing views. "For example" (A) would wrongly suggest the counterargument supports rather than challenges the claim, "Therefore" (C) would incorrectly imply the counterargument is a logical conclusion from the claim, and "Similarly" (D) would mistakenly suggest agreement rather than opposition. When introducing counterarguments in argumentative writing, use contrasting transitions like "however," "on the other hand," "nevertheless," or "yet" to clearly signal the shift to opposing viewpoints, maintaining cohesion while showing you've considered multiple perspectives.

Question 6

1. Nevertheless,
2. Additionally, (correct answer)
3. For instance,
4. As a result,

Explanation: This question tests using words, phrases, and clauses to create cohesion (smooth flow, connected ideas) and clarify relationships among claim(s), reasons, and evidence in argumentative writing—employing transitions making explicit how evidence supports reasons, how reasons support claim, how ideas connect. The argument structure requires a transition that signals Reason 2 is an additional benefit supporting the same claim about study halls—"Additionally" serves this purpose by indicating this is another positive reason alongside Reason 1. This additive transition creates cohesion by making clear that both reasons work together to support the claim: study halls help with teacher assistance AND with project planning, building a stronger cumulative case. Answer B correctly uses "Additionally" to show same-side support, while Answer A "Nevertheless" would signal contrast, Answer C "For instance" would introduce an example rather than a new reason, and Answer D "As a result" would indicate consequence rather than addition. When presenting multiple reasons supporting the same claim, use additive transitions like "additionally," "furthermore," "moreover," or "also" to signal that you're building your case with complementary points. This helps readers understand that each reason strengthens rather than contradicts the others, creating a unified, persuasive argument.

Question 7

1. It introduces a counterargument that disagrees with the claim.
2. It signals a cause-and-effect relationship (a result of the previous idea). (correct answer)
3. It adds an unrelated new topic.
4. It gives a specific example to illustrate a statistic.

Explanation: This question tests using words, phrases, and clauses to create cohesion (smooth flow, connected ideas) and clarify relationships among claim(s), reasons, and evidence in argumentative writing—employing transitions making explicit how evidence supports reasons, how reasons support claim, how ideas connect. The transition "As a result" signals a cause-and-effect relationship, indicating that what follows is a consequence or outcome of what came before. In this argument, the break between classes (cause) would lead to fewer late arrivals because hallways would have time to clear (effect). Choice B correctly identifies this cause-and-effect function, while A incorrectly suggests counterargument, C wrongly claims unrelatedness, and D mistakenly identifies it as exemplification. Understanding transition functions helps writers choose the right connectors: use "as a result," "consequently," or "therefore" for effects; "for example" or "for instance" for illustrations; "however" or "on the other hand" for contrasts.

Question 8

1. therefore (correct answer)
2. for instance
3. however
4. meanwhile

Explanation: This question tests using words, phrases, and clauses to create cohesion (smooth flow, connected ideas) and clarify relationships among claim(s), reasons, and evidence in argumentative writing—employing transitions making explicit how evidence supports reasons, how reasons support claim, how ideas connect. The sentence structure presents evidence (students have severe allergies causing dangerous reactions) followed by a conclusion that supports the claim (labels can prevent exposure), requiring a cause-and-effect transition. "Therefore" correctly signals that the need for clear labels is a logical consequence of the allergy danger described in the evidence—because allergic reactions are dangerous, therefore labels are necessary. "For instance" (B) would wrongly suggest an example rather than a conclusion, "however" (C) would incorrectly signal contrast when the ideas support each other, and "meanwhile" (D) would inappropriately suggest simultaneous but unrelated events. When evidence leads to a logical conclusion that supports your claim, use cause-and-effect transitions like "therefore," "thus," "consequently," or "as a result" to make the reasoning explicit and strengthen the argument's cohesion.

Question 9

1. "School uniforms can reduce bullying, because students are less likely to be judged for expensive brands." (correct answer)
2. "School uniforms can reduce bullying, for example students are less likely to be judged for expensive brands."
3. "School uniforms can reduce bullying; however, students are less likely to be judged for expensive brands."
4. "School uniforms can reduce bullying; in conclusion, students are less likely to be judged for expensive brands."

Explanation: This question tests using words, phrases, and clauses to create cohesion (smooth flow, connected ideas) and clarify relationships among claim(s), reasons, and evidence in argumentative writing—employing transitions making explicit how evidence supports reasons, how reasons support claim, how ideas connect. Option A correctly uses "because" to show a causal relationship—the second part of the sentence explains why uniforms can reduce bullying, creating clear cohesion between the claim and its supporting explanation. The transition makes explicit that being less likely to be judged for brands is the mechanism through which uniforms reduce bullying. Option B incorrectly uses "for example," which would suggest the second part is just one instance rather than an explanation of how uniforms work. Option C uses "however," which wrongly suggests contrast or opposition between the ideas. Option D inappropriately uses "in conclusion" mid-argument for what should be explanatory content. When connecting claims to their explanations or mechanisms, use causal transitions like "because," "since," or "as" to show how one idea explains or causes the other.

Question 10

1. In contrast,
2. For example, (correct answer)
3. As a result,
4. In other words,

Explanation: The reason makes a general point—composting cuts the trash we send to landfills. The blank should introduce the waste-report statistic as specific proof of that point. "For example" does exactly this: it signals that a concrete detail is about to illustrate the general reason, so the evidence clearly supports the reason. "In contrast" is wrong because the statistic does not oppose or disagree with the reason; it backs it up, so signaling contrast would confuse the relationship. "As a result" is wrong because it claims the statistic is a consequence of composting reducing waste, but the 30% figure is proof of the problem, not an effect that composting causes. "In other words" is wrong because it promises a restatement of the same idea in different words, yet the sentence adds new, specific information rather than rephrasing the reason. Only "For example" correctly shows that concrete evidence is illustrating the general reason, which is the connection the paragraph needs.

Question 11

1. Version 1, because its short, separate sentences give each idea equal weight and let readers connect the reasons on their own.
2. Version 2, because its transitions clarify how the reasons and evidence connect to the claim. (correct answer)
3. Version 1, because it states each reason directly without transitions that could slow a reader's understanding.
4. Version 2, because its extra length and detailed phrasing make an argument automatically more convincing.

Explanation: Cohesion means showing how ideas connect, not just listing them. Version 2 is stronger because its transitions signal the logical relationships in the argument: "because" links the claim to a reason, "In addition" adds a second reason, "as a result" shows a consequence, and "Therefore" points to the final benefit. Readers can follow exactly how the evidence supports the claim. The choice praising Version 1's short, separate sentences is wrong because listing ideas side by side actually forces readers to guess the connections—the sentences do not show how they relate. The choice claiming transitions would slow understanding is also wrong: well-chosen transitions guide readers rather than delay them, so removing them weakens cohesion. The choice pointing to Version 2's extra length and detail is wrong because length alone does not create cohesion; it is the varied, purposeful transitions—not the number of words—that connect the ideas. Only the answer about transitions clarifying how reasons and evidence connect to the claim identifies what truly builds cohesion.

Question 12

1. Additionally, (correct answer)
2. Nevertheless,
3. For example,
4. Therefore,

Explanation: This question tests using words, phrases, and clauses to create cohesion (smooth flow, connected ideas) and clarify relationships among claim(s), reasons, and evidence in argumentative writing—employing transitions making explicit how evidence supports reasons, how reasons support claim, how ideas connect. Additive transitions like "additionally," "furthermore," and "moreover" signal that the writer is adding another point that supports the same claim, building a stronger argument through multiple reasons. The paragraph presents one benefit of arts classes (expressing ideas differently), and "Additionally" appropriately introduces a second benefit (building teamwork), both supporting the claim for more arts classes. Choice A correctly uses this additive transition, while "Nevertheless" (B) wrongly signals contrast, "For example" (C) incorrectly suggests exemplification rather than addition, and "Therefore" (D) mistakenly indicates conclusion. When presenting multiple reasons supporting the same claim, use additive transitions to signal that you're building your argument with complementary points.

Question 13

1. For instance,
2. In addition,
3. Consequently, (correct answer)
4. Similarly,

Explanation: The middle sentences show that homework keeps students up late, so most get too little sleep. The final sentence names what that lack of sleep leads to: trouble paying attention and remembering. Because you are showing that one thing causes another, you need a cause-and-effect transition. "Consequently" signals that sleep loss produces those results, making the causal chain clear and connecting the evidence to the claim about limiting homework. "For instance" is wrong because the final sentence is not an example of the survey statistic—it states an effect, not an illustration. "In addition" simply adds another fact side by side, so it hides the cause-and-effect link the sentence actually expresses. "Similarly" points to a comparison between two like ideas, but sleep loss and its consequences are not being compared—one causes the other. Only "Consequently" makes the reasoning flow from evidence to result to conclusion.

Question 14

1. Add "Similarly," before "Summer temperatures are rising" and "In conclusion," before "Leaves trap some pollution particles."
2. Add "Because" before "Summer temperatures are rising" and "However," before "Leaves trap some pollution particles."
3. Add "As a result," before "Summer temperatures are rising" and "Moreover," before "Leaves trap some pollution particles."
4. Add "Since" before "Summer temperatures are rising" and "For instance," before "Leaves trap some pollution particles." (correct answer)

Explanation: This question tests using words, phrases, and clauses to create cohesion (smooth flow, connected ideas) and clarify relationships among claim(s), reasons, and evidence in argumentative writing—employing transitions making explicit how evidence supports reasons, how reasons support claim, how ideas connect. Option D correctly uses two different types of transitions to create cohesion: "Since" establishes a causal relationship showing that rising temperatures are a reason why shade from trees is needed, and "For instance" introduces specific evidence about how leaves trap pollution particles to support the air quality claim. These transitions clarify the logical relationships between ideas and show how evidence supports reasons. Option A incorrectly uses "Similarly" for a causal relationship and "In conclusion" for evidence. Option B wrongly uses "However" to suggest contrast where support is intended. Option C misuses "As a result" to suggest rising temperatures are a consequence rather than a cause. Effective argumentative writing matches transition types to the logical relationships they represent—causal transitions for reasons, exemplification transitions for evidence, and appropriate connectors for each type of relationship in the argument.

Question 15

1. Specifically, (correct answer)
2. Nevertheless,
3. Meanwhile,
4. Similarly,

Explanation: The last sentence gives a concrete detail—water usage in meat production—that backs up the earlier reason about environmental impact. "Specifically" is correct because it signals that what follows is a precise piece of evidence that elaborates on the point just made. "Nevertheless" is wrong because it signals contrast or a change of direction, but this sentence agrees with and supports the previous idea rather than opposing it. "Meanwhile" is wrong because it signals that two things are happening at the same time, which doesn't match the relationship here—the water fact isn't a simultaneous event, it's supporting evidence. "Similarly" is wrong because it presents the water usage as a separate, parallel point, when it is actually detail that explains the environmental reason rather than a new comparison. When you want to show that a sentence offers concrete support for a broader claim, transitions like "specifically," "in particular," or "for instance" make that relationship clear.

Question 16

1. Additionally,
2. Moreover,
3. However, (correct answer)
4. In addition,

Explanation: This question tests using words, phrases, and clauses to create cohesion (smooth flow, connected ideas) and clarify relationships among claim(s), reasons, and evidence in argumentative writing—employing transitions making explicit how evidence supports reasons, how reasons support claim, how ideas connect. The question asks which transition would FAIL to create cohesion—"However" signals contrast or opposition, which is inappropriate when introducing another supporting reason for keeping the library open, as both reasons work together rather than against each other. Using "However" would confuse readers by suggesting the computer access somehow contradicts or opposes the quiet study space benefit, when actually both reasons support the same claim about extended library hours. Answer C correctly identifies "However" as the problematic choice, while Answers A, B, and D ("Additionally," "Moreover," "In addition") all appropriately signal that computer access is another benefit supporting the claim. When connecting multiple reasons that support the same claim, avoid contrastive transitions like "however," "nevertheless," or "on the other hand"—these should be reserved for introducing opposing views or counterarguments. Using the wrong transition type can undermine your argument's logic and confuse readers about how your ideas relate to each other.

Question 17

1. Version 1, because listing each reason as a separate short sentence keeps the ideas connected without needing transition words.
2. Version 2, because transitions like "First," "Additionally," and "As a result" clarify the relationships among the reasons and effects. (correct answer)
3. Version 1, because leaving out transitions lets readers decide the connections themselves, which makes the argument sound stronger.
4. Version 2, because adding any transition words at the start of a sentence always makes writing flow more smoothly.

Explanation: Version 2 is the stronger choice because its transitions each signal a specific relationship: "First" introduces the opening reason, "Additionally" adds a second reason on the same side, and "As a result" shows the effect those reasons lead to. Together they guide the reader from the claim, through the supporting reasons, to the consequence for learning, so the ideas clearly connect. The option praising Version 1's short, separate sentences is wrong because simply placing ideas next to each other does not show how they relate; readers are left to guess the connections. The option saying Version 1 sounds stronger by leaving out transitions is also wrong—removing the connecting words makes the reasoning less clear, not more convincing. The remaining option about Version 2 is wrong because transitions do not help "automatically"; smooth flow comes from choosing a transition that matches the actual relationship (adding, ordering, or showing cause), not from adding any transition anywhere. When you write arguments, match each transition to the job it does so your reasons and evidence link clearly to your claim.

Question 18

1. On the other hand,
2. For instance, (correct answer)
3. As a result,
4. In the same way,

Explanation: The first sentence makes a general point: staying hydrated improves attention. The second sentence gives a specific study that backs up that point. You need a transition that signals "here is a concrete case that supports what I just said." "For instance" does exactly this, connecting the general reason to the evidence proving it. "On the other hand" signals a contrast, but the study agrees with the reason rather than opposing it, so it breaks the flow. "As a result" signals cause and effect, as if the study happened because of the first sentence, but the study is offered as proof, not a consequence. "In the same way" signals that two similar ideas are being compared side by side, but the second sentence is not a parallel example—it is direct support for the single claim already made. Only "For instance" correctly shows that the evidence illustrates and strengthens the reason.

Question 19

1. It introduces a counterargument that disagrees with the claim.
2. It emphasizes that the next reason is the key support for the claim. (correct answer)
3. It shows that the next sentence is an example that proves the previous sentence.
4. It signals the conclusion of the entire argument.

Explanation: This question tests using words, phrases, and clauses to create cohesion (smooth flow, connected ideas) and clarify relationships among claim(s), reasons, and evidence in argumentative writing—employing transitions making explicit how evidence supports reasons, how reasons support claim, how ideas connect. "Most importantly" is an emphasizing transition that signals hierarchy among reasons—it tells readers that the following reason (students' after-school responsibilities) is the strongest or most significant support for the claim about reducing homework. This transition creates cohesion by explicitly ranking the importance of different reasons rather than simply listing them. Choice B correctly identifies this emphasizing function, while Choice A wrongly suggests it introduces disagreement, Choice C incorrectly claims it signals an example relationship, and Choice D mistakenly identifies it as a conclusion marker. Transitions like "most importantly," "above all," or "primarily" help writers create cohesion by showing readers which reasons carry the most weight in supporting a claim, guiding them through the argument's logical priorities rather than presenting all reasons as equally significant.

Question 20

1. However,
2. For example, (correct answer)
3. As a result,
4. On the other hand,

Explanation: The sentence after the blank gives a specific piece of proof—a real district where middle schoolers slept about 40 more minutes—that backs up the reason that students would get more sleep. "For example" is the best choice because it signals that a concrete instance is coming to illustrate that reason. "However" signals a contrast, but the district data doesn't disagree with the reason—it supports it. "On the other hand" also sets up an opposing idea, so it wrongly suggests the evidence pushes back against the claim instead of proving it. "As a result" signals cause and effect, treating the sleep data as a consequence of the reason rather than an example that demonstrates it. When you are introducing evidence that shows an instance of your reason, use transitions like "for example," "for instance," or "specifically."