8.4 Argument, Evidence & Rhetoric in Informational Texts

What Argumentative Informational Texts Look Like on the HiSET

The HiSET TAAG names editorials as an explicit informational genre on the HiSET, and argumentative nonfiction — editorials, opinion columns, and persuasive essays — tests a distinct set of skills. Where a science passage asks you to follow an explanation, an argument asks you to evaluate a case: identify the claim, weigh the evidence, and judge whether the reasoning holds. The CCRS standards behind this include RI.9-10.8 and RH.9-10.8, which ask you to evaluate claims and reasoning in informational texts. On a 50-question, 65-minute test, argument items are among the most rewarding, because the structure of an argument is learnable and the traps are predictable.

The parts of an argument

Every argument has the same anatomy, and your first read should tag each part:

• Claim — the proposition the author wants you to accept. Usually one sentence, often at the start or end.
• Reasons — the supporting propositions that, if true, make the claim more plausible.
• Evidence — the facts, statistics, examples, expert testimony, or anecdotes that back the reasons.
• Counterargument — the opposing view the author acknowledges, often to rebut it.
• Tone — the author's attitude toward the subject or opponent, revealed through diction.

Evidence Types

Arguments on the HiSET use five main evidence types. Knowing them lets you answer "what kind of evidence does the author use" instantly and lets you judge whether that evidence is sufficient.

Rhetorical Appeals

Authors also deploy three classical appeals, and HiSET questions ask you to name them:

Evaluating the Argument

The hardest argument questions ask whether the evidence sufficiently supports the claim. The test is not whether the evidence is true, but whether, if true, it would justify the conclusion. A single anecdote about one successful charter school does not support the claim that charter schools outperform public schools nationally — the evidence is too narrow. Ask: if I accept every piece of evidence as true, does the conclusion follow? If not, the argument is under-supported.

The Two Big Traps

Trap 1: Treating a reason as the claim. An author writes "The city should fund early childhood education because every dollar spent on pre-K returns seven dollars in reduced social costs." The claim is "the city should fund early childhood education." The reason is the return-on-investment sentence. A distractor will present the reason as the claim. Read the whole argument and ask: what does the author want me to do or believe? That is the claim.

Trap 2: Accepting a vivid anecdote as representative evidence. An argument opens with a heartbreaking story of one family. That story is evidence, but it is one data point. A question may ask whether the evidence supports a broad claim; if the only evidence is the anecdote, the answer is usually no — the evidence is moving but not representative.

A Worked Example

Here is an original short editorial in the style of a HiSET argumentative informational text:

The town council should reject the proposal to close the Branch library on Sundays. As a librarian who has worked at Branch for twelve years, I have watched Sunday become the branch's busiest day. Last March, we logged over 400 visits on a single Sunday, most from students who have nowhere else to study. A 2023 statewide survey found that 68% of regular library users say Sunday hours are "essential." Closing Sundays would save roughly $18,000 a year — a fraction of the council's discretionary budget — and would deny the community its most-used service day.

Question: Which of the following best evaluates the evidence the author provides?

• A. The evidence is insufficient because the author's personal experience as a librarian makes the argument biased.
• B. The evidence is sufficient because the author combines a personal credential, a concrete usage figure, a survey, and a cost comparison to support the claim.
• C. The evidence is sufficient because the 400-visit figure alone proves the council should keep Sunday hours.
• D. The evidence is insufficient because the statewide survey does not include only Branch library users.

The correct answer is B. The author marshals ethos ("as a librarian...twelve years"), a concrete statistic (400 visits on one Sunday), broader evidence (the 68% survey), and a cost-benefit comparison. Together, these support the claim that Sunday closure would harm the most-used service day. Option A mistakes a perspective for bias — the credential is evidence, not a disqualifier. Option C over-relies on one figure; the strength of the argument is the combination, not any single piece. Option D over-narrows the standard; a statewide survey is relevant evidence even if it is not Branch-specific, and the author also provides Branch-specific data.

Checklist for Argument Questions

• Tag the claim, reasons, and evidence as you read.
• Identify the evidence types (fact, statistic, example, expert testimony, anecdote).
• Name any rhetorical appeals (ethos, pathos, logos) the author uses.
• For evaluation questions, ask: if all the evidence is true, does the conclusion follow?
• Reject any answer that presents a reason as the claim or treats a single anecdote as representative.