Claim Lab

What your child will figure out

• Connect relevant evidence to a focused claim through an explicit warrant rather than repeating the claim.
• Distinguish missing warrants, irrelevant evidence, and over-broad claims as different weaknesses in an argument.
• Use a valid counterexample or changed condition to refine the exact claim or warrant that no longer holds.
• Transfer claim–evidence–reasoning to a recommendation with a real stakeholder tradeoff.

The levels

1. Shade-sail warm-up

   Drag relevant evidence and a causal warrant onto the bench, stress-test the connection, and explain what the result means.

2. Library link

   Repair a missing warrant between unfinished research sessions and a later-closing recommendation.

3. Music claim clamp

   Use a valid reading counterexample to narrow an over-broad music claim.

4. Rain switch

   Change the field-day condition and identify the exact accessibility warrant that no longer holds.

5. Market pilot

   Transfer the model to a town-square recommendation with footfall evidence and a stallholder loading tradeoff.