Command of Evidence at the 700-800 Level

Hard evidence items are not reading tests; they are logic-matching tests. The claim has a precise logical shape, and exactly one choice has the same shape. Everything else is on-topic, accurate — and shaped wrong.

The four archetypes:

• Two-part conclusions need two-part evidence. "Sped the step it targeted without improving outcomes," "concentrated among teens" — if the conclusion compares, contrasts, or says "only," one choice must carry every comparison. A single true row can never show a contrast.
• The headline number that argues for the other side. On skeptical conclusions ("the data give little reason to credit..."), the table's flashiest figure is what a believer would cite. Identify the student's side first, then ask of each choice: whose lawyer would quote this?
• The quotation with the right topic and the wrong mechanism. Literary claims carry a restrictive phrase — "never publicly," "without confrontation," "rather than explanation." The trap quote trips it on one detail: "at the podium," "to his face."
• Discriminating evidence between rival hypotheses. Support must be something the favored account predicts and the rival doesn't. The strongest form is the dissociation: the effect appears where only the favored cause is present and fails where only the rival is.

The named traps — the Half-Supporter, the Wrong-Team Citation, the One-Word Kill, the Consistent-With-Both Finding — all exploit the same habit: verifying that a choice is true and on-topic, then stopping before the shape check.