RI.7.8 Arguments - Bike Share Programs

Read the passage and answer the questions.

"Bike Share Programs"

​

​RI.7.8 Arguments

Multiple Choice

1. Which statement expresses the author’s claim in the selection?

• People in the city tend to be less healthy than people who live in the country.

• Local businesses will attract more customers with a bike share program.

• Bike share programs are not as expensive as they might seem.

• The city will benefit from a bike share program.

Multiple Choice

2. Which sentence from the selection supports the author’s claim that a bike sharing program will help city residents become healthier?

• “Because bike share programs have many benefits, I believe that city funds should be used to implement a bike share program in our city.”

• “As a result, traffic congestion and, therefore, air pollution will be reduced.”

• “Installing a bike share program will make our citizens healthier.”

• “Those who do not get much exercise will have an active way to move about the city for business or

  pleasure.”

Multiple Choice

3. How does the author support his claim in the selection?

• by disputing the opposite viewpoint

• by providing evidence that is logical

• by including research statistics

• by using emotional language

Multiple Choice

4. How sound is the reasoning behind the claims made by the author of the letter?

• The reasoning is weak because the author does not provide any evidence to support the benefits of a bike share program. The letter makes claims about air quality, tourism, and health but does not include facts, statistics, or expert opinions to support them.

• The reasoning is sound because the author explains that a bike share program will generate revenue for the city and create new jobs. For example, the author states that “local businesses will earn more money as bike riders stop to shop,” and that “new jobs will be created to maintain the bikes and stations.” However, these ideas are not actually mentioned in the letter, the reader must infer these ideas on their own.

• The reasoning is sound because the author presents support that explains how a bike share

  program will benefit the city. For example, the author supports his claim that a bike share program will improve the air quality with the statement that “traffic congestion and, therefore, air pollution will be reduced.”

• The reasoning is unsound because the author admits that bike share programs are only beneficial for tourists and not for local residents. The letter states, “Visitors will not be required to navigate our roads in a car or understand our bus system.” However, this ignores the fact that the author also argues that the program will benefit residents by improving air quality and health.