Which statement about text evidence and drawing conclusions?

• A. Conclusions can be drawn without any text evidence.
• B. Text evidence is optional.
• C. Conclusions must be supported by text evidence.
• D. Text evidence is irrelevant to reasoning.

Answer: (C)

When you analyze a text, your conclusions about what it means should be rooted in clues the author provides. Conclusions are claims about meaning that go beyond the exact words, and they must be supported by text evidence. That means you point to specific details, quotes, or descriptions in the text and show how they justify your interpretation. This makes your thinking transparent and defendable, not just a guess.

For example, if a passage describes a character slamming a door, crossing arms, and muttering under their breath, you can conclude the character is upset or angry. You would reference those actions as the basis for that conclusion. Without that textual support, the idea would be just your opinion rather than a reading supported by the text.

Statements that say you can conclude without evidence, or that text evidence isn’t needed, run counter to careful reading, because they permit unfounded interpretations. And stating that evidence is irrelevant ignores the very process of connecting claims to what the text actually shows. The core practice is: form ideas about meaning, then prove them with the text.