Self-study
Some ornithologists believe that many species of songbirds are threatened by deforestation. ███ ████ ████ █████ █████ ███████ ██████ ██████████████ ███████ ████████ ██ ███████ █████ ██ ██ █████████████ ██ ██████ ██████ ████ █████████ ██ ██████ ████ ████ █████████ ████████ ████████ ███ ████████████ ██ ████ ██████ ███ █████████ ██ ███████ ███████ ███ ████████ ██ ████████ █████ ████ ██████████ █████ ███ ████ ███████ ███ ██████████ ███████ ██████ ████ ██████████
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
Ornithologists conclude that, despite recent reforestation efforts, the songbird situation is still getting worse. This is because songbirds are affected by forest fragmentation rather than a net reduction in size. Open spaces and wide corridors in forests make songbirds less shielded from their natural predators.
Identify Argument Part
The referenced text presents the ornithologists' concession. They acknowledge that there has been recent reforestation, which one might think should help the songbirds become less threatened. But the ornithologists show that songbirds are still becoming even more threatened despite the reforestation.
13.
The claim that there has ████████ ████ █████████████ █████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ █████ ██ ███ ███████████████ █████████
a
It is used ██ ████████ ████ ███████ ███████ ██ █████████ ████ ████████ ██ ██ ██████████ ████ ███████████
The referenced text isn’t evidence. It isn't offered to help show that the threat to songbirds is continuing to worsen.
b
It is presented ██ █ █████ ████ ██ ████████ ██ ██████████████ ███ ███████ █████████ ████████ ███████████ ██ ████████ ██ ██████████████
The ornithologists do not reject the claim that reforestation is happening. In fact, it’s something the ornithologists acknowledge is true.
c
It is presented ██ █ ██████████ ████ ██ ██████████ ████ ███ ███████████████ █████ ████ ███ ██████ ██ █████████ █████████ ██ ███████
The referenced text is "compatible" with the ornithologists' conclusion because it doesn't undermine the conclusion. The ornithologists concede that there is reforestation. Still, they show that the threat to songbirds is getting worse. So there can be reforestation and a worsening threat to songbirds; the ideas are compatible.
d
It is used ██ ████████ ████ ██████████ █████████ ████ ████████ ██ ████ █ ███████ ███ ██ ████ ████████ ██ ████ █ ██████ ██ ██████████
The argument isn’t that reforestation gives songbirds’ predators a home. It’s that forest fragmentation leaves songbirds vulnerable to predators.
e
It is presented ██ ████████ ███ ███ █████ ████ ██████████ █████████ ███ ██████████ ██ ██████████ ██████ ████ ████ ████ ██████ ███ █████████ ████ ████ ████ ██████ ██ █████ █████
The referenced text isn’t evidence. Also, it doesn't support the idea that songbirds’ predators are threatened with extinction, since that claim never appears in the argument.