INVESTIGATION 3 OF 6

Make evidence do a job

Integrate an accurately attributed quotation or number and explain the inference it supports.

Why learn this? A quotation is not self-explanatory. Readers need to know what it shows and what it cannot show.

Loading saved English work…

Quick recap: A claim states a position. Evidence is material offered in support. Reasoning explains the connection.

Choose your task depth

Choose either at any time. Your drafts stay with you.

1. Try — read before judging

Original fictional source packet. The log and interview are different kinds of evidence. They cannot establish the experiences of all library visitors.

SOURCE A: Hall observation log, volunteer N. Park, Tuesday, 3–4 p.m.
Twenty people entered. Six left within one minute. The observer did not ask why.
Eight seats were available to general visitors because a class had reserved four.
SOURCE B: Interview note, visitor Sam, same Tuesday, after leaving.
“I wanted to work with three friends. When I saw the individual desks, I decided to try somewhere else.”
SOURCE C: Library service notice, Monday.
The temporary hall contains individual study seats; no bookable group rooms are available.
DRAFT CLAIM: Most visitors reject the hall because it has too few chairs.

Go directly to the workbench

2. Predict — make a provisional choice

Which part of the draft claim goes beyond the source packet? 0 / 16,000 characters · length is a storage limit, not a quality score

3. Experiment — test your reading

Annotate a detail that challenges “most visitors” and one that challenges the proposed cause.
Write a paragraph that introduces a source, quotes or paraphrases it, and explains exactly which claim it supports.
Add a limitation that changes the strength of your conclusion, rather than a vague sentence saying more research is needed.

Your evidence board

Select a line, name its role and explain your reasoning. Labels record your interpretation; the site does not decide whether it is convincing.

Passage lineRole

SOURCE A: Hall observation log, volunteer N. Park, Tuesday, 3–4 p.m.

Annotation explanation

Working draft / artifact 0 / 16,000 characters · length is a storage limit, not a quality score

Comparison draft

Save your first version here before revising. It will remain unchanged while you edit the working draft.

Revision commentary: what changed, why, and what remains uncertain? 0 / 16,000 characters · length is a storage limit, not a quality score

4. Understand — connect choice and effect

The log records six quick departures out of twenty arrivals. That is six divided by twenty, or 30% of the arrivals during this one observed hour. It is not most of those arrivals, and it says nothing by itself about why anyone left. A precise number can still support an imprecise argument if its scope is ignored.

The interview contributes a different kind of evidence. Sam explains a need for group space. That gives us a reported reason for one visitor’s choice. It does not turn the other five quick departures into identical cases. The service notice establishes what the hall is described as providing; it does not establish every visitor’s experience of it.

Integrate evidence in three moves. First introduce its source and relevant setting. Next quote a short exact phrase or paraphrase the information faithfully. Finally explain the connection to your claim. For example: Sam’s phrase “work with three friends” identifies a group task that individual seating may not meet. The explanation gives the quotation a job.

A useful limitation changes your conclusion. “More research is needed” tells the reader little. “The observer did not collect reasons, so the log cannot identify seating as the cause of departures” identifies a specific missing connection. Your next step could be to ask departing visitors an optional question, while considering whose responses might be missing. In this writing course, you are designing that inquiry; you have not conducted it or proved the proposed explanation.

Integration: Introducing evidence and explaining its relationship to the surrounding argument.
Scope: The people, situations, time period or claims that evidence can reasonably address.

Worked example — a possible revision, not the only answer

Before

Six people left, proving the hall does not have enough chairs.

After

Park’s one-hour log records six quick departures among twenty arrivals, but not their reasons. Sam’s interview identifies one need the hall does not meet: group workspace. Together with the service notice, that account supports investigating group-study alternatives, not a claim about most visitors.

The revision preserves the denominator, separates observation from explanation, and uses an interview as evidence of one experience. It does not treat one person as a representative sample.

Return to your workbench and reconsider a choice

5. Apply — make something and try a new case

Your main artifact

Write a 180–250-word paragraph with one quoted phrase, one numerical observation, and an explicit limit.

Keep your artifact in the working draft above. Suggested lengths help you plan; they do not measure quality.

Unfamiliar passage

A fictional garden log records twelve visits in one afternoon. Four visitors asked for shade. One said, “I would stay longer if there were a bench near the trees.” No visit lengths were recorded.

Write a supported claim, integrate the quotation, and explain why the packet cannot establish that benches would increase average visit length. 0 / 16,000 characters · length is a storage limit, not a quality score

0 saved attempt(s).

6. Continue — record work without claiming mastery

Completion means you worked through this investigation. Your interpretation and writing still need judgment using the project rubric; no automatic proficiency score is awarded.

Continue: Change the sentence, change the emphasis

Choose another lesson · Saved English work and export