The text explains why something happened and what happened as a result.
What type of text structure is this identified as?
Cause and Effect
Never ____________ the 4 answer choices at once. _____________ two, and the better choice stays to be _______________ with the next option.
(same word for all three blanks)
Compare(d)
Over-exaggeration
hyperbole
Used to turn legitimate concerns into panic or prejudice
scare tactic
An inference drawn from insufficient evidence; forms the basis for most stereotypes about people or institutions
hasty generalization
Information is organized step-by-step or in chronological order (first, next, later).
What type of text structure is this identified as?
Sequence/Chronology
saying the opposite of what you mean
verbal irony
portrays today’s small misstep into tomorrow’s slide into disaster; exaggerates the likely consequences of an action, which usually causes fear
Slippery Slope
Attack arguments that no one is really making or portray opponents’ positions as more extreme or less coherent than they are
The text discusses similarities and differences between two or more items, events, or ideas.
What type of text structure is this identified as?
Compare and Contrast
descriptive language that appeals to the senses
imagery
Urge people to follow the same path everyone else is taking
bandwagon
The author presents a problem and explains one or more solutions to it.
What type of text structure is this identified as?
Problem and Solution
First event: ice cream sales increase in May
Second event: shark attacks increase in June
Claim: ice cream consumption causes shark attacks
Faulty causality
a statement that appears to be contradictory but upon reflection makes sense
paradox
An assertion or assumption that a particular position is the only one that is possibly acceptable
dogmatism
An argument whose claims, reasons, or warrants don’t connect logically
non sequitur
The author describes a topic by listing characteristics, features, and examples.
What type of text structure is this identified as?
Description
Assumes the truth of the conclusion instead of supporting it
begging the question/circular argument
Showing only one side of the story; stories that are highly selective in their coverage; leave out the other sides of the argument
Stacking the Deck
Faulty causality