Cause or Coincidence? Choosing the Right Evidence in a Comprehension Item
During a Class 10 mock examination, 32 students read this original 70-word passage: «افتتحت قريةُ النور مكتبةً عامةً في سنة 2023. تضم المكتبة 1200 كتاب، وتفتح أبوابها من الرابعة إلى الثامنة مساءً. في البداية كان الإقبال ضعيفًا. ثم بدأ عشرة متطوعين يقرؤون للأطفال كل يوم جمعة، فارتفع عدد المستعيرين في الشهرين التاليين إلى الضعف.» The question asks: «لماذا ارتفع عدد المستعيرين؟» Three answers appear on the board: (A) «لأن المكتبة تضم 1200 كتاب» (B) «لأن المتطوعين بدأوا يقرؤون للأطفال يوم الجمعة» (C) «لأن القرية افتتحت مكتبة في 2023». A student argues that A must be correct because it contains a number from the passage and B is longer than necessary. The passage is projected; no dictionaries are allowed. The teacher has ten minutes to correct this before the bell.
1. Which answer should the teacher mark correct, and what reasoning should be modelled on the board?
Read the worked answer
Correct answer: B.
The question word is «لماذا», so the answer must identify a cause, not merely repeat a fact from the passage. The passage marks the cause with «ثم … فارتفع»: after the volunteers began reading to children on Fridays, borrowing rose. B states that link directly.
- A is true but non-causal. The number 1200 describes the library’s size; the passage never says it caused the rise. A tests whether students confuse a striking detail with an explanation.
- C is background. The opening date explains when the library began, not why borrowing later doubled.
- B’s length is irrelevant. A longer option is not weaker if it carries the causal relation the question demands.
Board reasoning: underline «لماذا», circle «فارتفع», then ask of each option: “Does this sentence answer why, or only what/when?”
2. What misconception does the student’s preference for A reveal, and what short board exercise would address it?
Read the worked answer
The student is using surface matching: a number from the passage feels “more textual” than a full clause, so it is treated as safer. This is number-matching, not comprehension.
A quick exercise:
- Write two columns: «حقيقة» and «سبب».
- Put A under «حقيقة» and ask: «هل رقم 1200 يشرح الارتفاع؟» Answer: no; it describes the collection.
- Rewrite A as a true but non-causal sentence, e.g. «المكتبة تضم 1200 كتاب، لكن هذا لا يفسر زيادة المستعيرين».
- Ask students to find the connector that carries the cause: «ثم … فارتفع».
This separates “present in the text” from “answers the question”. The exam often rewards the latter.