A qualified conclusion answers the question, gives the main reason, answers the other side fairly and states the limit, in a few clear sentences. This lesson gives you a short, non-assessed exercise to practise that using invented material.
It joins the three earlier skills of the reasoned explanation module: tying to the question, fair counterarguments and limits.
What are the four moves?
Answer: reply to the stated question directly, using its key terms.
Reason: give the strongest reason, with the evidence it rests on.
Other side: acknowledge the strongest counterargument and say how you weigh it.
Limit: say how far the evidence reaches and what is still unknown.
The exercise
This is invented material for practice only. The question: “Should the canteen at Sekolah Contoh switch from disposable to reusable trays?”
- Source A (invented Eco Club Survey): 28 of 40 Year 10 students said they would use reusable trays. One week in March, one year group.
- Source B (invented canteen committee note): the trays cost RM1,200 and need washing, which could raise costs.
- Source C (invented canteen record): disposables cost RM400 a month.
Worked example
Step 1, answer. “On the evidence provided, a trial switch for the canteen looks reasonable.”
Step 2, reason. “In Source A, 70% of 40 Year 10 students (28 ÷ 40) said they would use the trays, so willingness does not look like the main barrier.”
Step 3, other side. “Source B raises a fair concern about cost. Using Source C, the RM1,200 purchase equals three months of disposables (1,200 ÷ 400 = 3), so the concern may be limited to the first term, although washing costs are not stated.”
Step 4, limit. “The survey covers one year group in one week, and the committee note gives no washing figure, so the evidence supports a trial, not a permanent decision.”
Full conclusion: “On the evidence provided, a trial switch for the canteen looks reasonable. In Source A, 70% of 40 Year 10 students said they would use the trays, so willingness does not look like the main barrier. Source B raises a fair cost concern, but if disposables cost RM400 a month, the RM1,200 purchase equals three months of spending, although washing costs are not stated. Because the survey covers one year group in one week, the evidence supports a trial, not a permanent decision.”
The mistake to watch for
Mistaken conclusion: “Reusable trays are obviously the right choice and anyone against them is wrong.”
It claims certainty, ignores the cost concern and describes the other side as simply wrong.
Correction: keep the direction if the evidence supports it, but add the fair response and the limit, as above. The facts of Sources A, B and C are given and not claimed beyond what they say.
Self-check
Use the same sources for these.
1. Which of the four moves is missing from: “Reusable trays are better because 70% of students like them”?
Show answer
The other side and the limit. It also reports "70% of students" instead of 70% of 40 Year 10 students.2. Source C shows disposables cost RM400 a month. How many months of disposables does RM1,200 equal?
Show answer
1,200 ÷ 400 = 3 months.3. Write a one-sentence limit for this conclusion that is specific, not vague.
Show answer
For example: "The survey covers only 40 Year 10 students over one week, so it does not show whether other year groups would use the trays or whether use would last." Any sentence naming a concrete boundary is fine.Where does this lead next?
Now test all four skills together in the integrated practice for reasoned explanation. For wider route planning, see the Global Perspectives study route.
A teacher in online one-to-one Global Perspectives tuition can read your practice conclusions and check that each of the four moves is there.