Reading: Distinguishing Main Claim from Supporting Example
A reading passage of about 400 words argues that volunteer programmes should be compulsory for high-school students. The writer states the thesis in paragraph one: 'התנדבות חייבת להיות חלק מתוכנית הלימודים'. Paragraph two gives a statistic: 'בשנה שעברה השתתפו 300 תלמידים'. Paragraph three describes one student, Noa, who says volunteering 'שינתה את החיים שלי'. Paragraph four concedes that some students are already busy, then argues that schools can schedule volunteering during school hours. A question asks: 'What is the main purpose of paragraph three?' A student answers 'to prove that volunteering is popular'. Another answers 'to show that volunteering is compulsory'. The rubric rewards identifying the function of a paragraph within the argument.
1. Explain the function of paragraph three in the passage's argument and why the two student answers are wrong.
Read the worked answer
Paragraph three is an anecdotal illustration of the thesis, not proof of popularity or compulsion. Noa's testimony shows the personal benefit of volunteering, which supports the claim that it should be part of the curriculum. 'Popular' is wrong because one student's experience says nothing about how many students participate; the statistic in paragraph two handles scale. 'Compulsory' is wrong because the passage argues that volunteering should become compulsory, so it cannot yet be describing an existing requirement. The correct function is to humanise the argument and provide experiential support before the concession in paragraph four. Recognising this requires tracking the argument's structure, not just translating sentences.
2. How does paragraph four strengthen rather than weaken the writer's case, and what should a strong answer say about it?
Read the worked answer
Paragraph four anticipates an objection: students are already busy. By conceding this and then offering a solution, scheduling volunteering during school hours, the writer shows awareness of counter-arguments and neutralises them. This is a concession-plus-rebuttal move, which typically strengthens a persuasive text because it makes the writer appear reasonable. A strong answer should name the move ('הוויתור וההפרכה') and explain its effect: it pre-empts reader resistance and makes the proposal seem practical. Students should avoid saying the paragraph weakens the argument just because it mentions a problem; the problem is immediately answered. Identifying rhetorical structure is the skill being tested, not vocabulary recall.