In SOL practice, citing textual evidence demonstrates what about a reader's comprehension?

• A. That the reader can paraphrase the entire passage
• B. That the reader understands the central idea
• C. That the reader can identify vocabulary words used in the passage
• D. That the reader can locate and connect evidence to reasoning

Answer: (D)

Citing textual evidence shows that you can locate a specific part of the text and explain how it supports your reasoning or claim. This means you don’t just know what happened or what a word means; you can point to exact sentences or phrases and show how they back up your interpretation or answer. It demonstrates both finding the right evidence in the reading and connecting it to your conclusion.

Think of it this way: if a question asks why a character acted a certain way, you would reference a line where the character explains their motive and then explain how that motive leads to the action. That ties together what the text says with what you infer, showing true comprehension through evidence-based reasoning.

Why the other ideas aren’t the best fit: paraphrasing the entire passage isn’t what evidence-citing requires; the goal is linking specific evidence to your reasoning, not repeating the whole text. Simply understanding the central idea shows you grasp the main point but doesn’t necessarily demonstrate how you would defend an answer with precise text. And identifying vocabulary words focuses on word knowledge, not on using text to support conclusions.