Claim
The conclusion or position you want the audience to accept.
Ex: The city should add protected bike lanes downtown.
A visual, dark‑mode overview of the six parts: Claim, Data (Grounds), Warrant, Backing, Qualifier, and Rebuttal.
The conclusion or position you want the audience to accept.
Ex: The city should add protected bike lanes downtown.
Evidence supporting the claim: facts, statistics, examples, expert testimony.
Ex: Streets with protected lanes see 40–60% fewer accidents.
The underlying principle that connects data to claim—often implicit.
Ex: Policies that reduce accidents improve public safety.
Additional support that validates the warrant (methods, theories, authoritative sources).
Ex: Traffic-safety research shows separated lanes lower crash rates.
Indicates the strength or scope of the claim (e.g., “probably,” “in most cases”).
Ex: Likely to reduce accidents in dense downtown corridors.
Recognizes exceptions or conditions where the claim may not hold.
Ex: Winter maintenance costs may offset some safety gains.
Claim: Schools should start later.
Data: Districts that shifted to 8:45–9:00 a.m. saw higher attendance and grades.
Warrant: Better sleep and attendance lead to improved academic outcomes.
Backing: Medical associations recommend later start times for adolescents.
Qualifier: In most districts with adequate bus capacity…
Rebuttal: Rural routes or after‑school jobs may require different schedules.