Evidence selection Notes

What Are The Main Types of Evidence?

1. In three main types of evidence you'll be dealing with are:
   1. Textual evidence (quotations, key moments, patterns in language or structure)
   2. Contextual evidence (relevant information about author, audience, purpose, or historical/cultural setting)
   3. Research evidence (information from primary and secondary sources that supports an interpretation)

What Are Primary and Secondary Sources?

1. Evidence selection is closely tied to source choice.
2. In research, you usually draw evidence from primary and secondary sources, and you should be able to identify which is which.
3. Primary sources are often powerful because they are close to the event or text, but they can still be biased or incomplete.
4. Secondary sources can offer expertise and interpretation, but may introduce their own assumptions or agendas.

What's The Role of Credibility and Bias?

1. In an age of mass information, selecting evidence is not only about finding something that supports your point; it is also about deciding whether it is credible.
2. A practical credibility check (especially useful for digital and media texts) asks:
   1. Who created this information, and what are their qualifications or role?
   2. Why was it created (to inform, persuade, sell, entertain, attack, defend)?
   3. What evidence is shown, and what is missing?
   4. When was it created (is it current and relevant)?
   5. How does it compare with other independent sources (corroboration)?

How Is Relevance A Filter?

1. After credibility, the next test is relevance: does the evidence directly support the specific claim you are making?
2. A piece of evidence can be true but irrelevant. For example:
   1. A quotation can be beautifully written but not connected to your argument.quotation can be beautifully written but not connected to your argument.
   2. A contextual fact can be interesting but not explain the author's choices.contextual fact can be interesting but not explain the author's choices.
   3. A statistic can be accurate but not measure what your claim is about.statistic can be accurate but not measure what your claim is about.

What's The Difference Between Representative vs. Cherry-Picked Evidence?

1. Even credible, relevant evidence can be weak if it is unrepresentative.
2. This happens when you choose only the details that suit your viewpoint and ignore the rest.
3. In English, cherry-picking often looks like:
   1. Selecting one extreme quote that is not typical of the textone extreme quote that is not typical of the text
   2. Ignoring later moments that complicate your claimthat complicate your claim
   3. Using a single source that agrees with you, without checking alternatives that agrees with you, without checking alternatives
4. Instead, aim for evidence that is:
   1. Representative (fits broader patterns in the text or across sources)
   2. Sufficient (enough to justify the claim, not just one thin example)
   3. Balanced (acknowledges complexity, especially for debatable claims)

How Can You Integrate Evidence?

1. Evidence does not "speak for itself." In analysis, your job is to show how the evidence proves the claim.
2. A reliable integration pattern is:
   1. Point (claim) → Evidence (quote/detail) → Method (technique or feature) → Meaning (what it suggests) → Effect (on audience/purpose)
3. Also remember:
   1. Use quotation for precise language analysis.
   2. Use paraphrase for plot moments or broader ideas.
   3. Use summary sparingly, only to set up analysis.