How do you cite the Part 2 sources correctly by text number, and why does the citation itself affect your score?
Citing sources by text number: attributing every piece of evidence in the Part 2 argument to its source by text number (and line where helpful), why citation is a scored expectation, and how to cite smoothly without breaking the sentence.
How to cite the Regents Part 2 sources by text number: attributing every piece of evidence to its source (and line where helpful), why citation is a scored expectation under Command of Evidence, and how to cite smoothly without breaking the sentence.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this skill is asking
The Part 2 directions explicitly tell you to identify each source by text number, and the Command of Evidence criterion rewards evidence that is clearly and verifiably drawn from the provided texts. Citation is therefore not a formality you can skip; it is a scored expectation. This page covers how to cite the Part 2 sources by text number (and line where helpful), why the citation itself affects your score, and how to cite smoothly without breaking your sentences. The transferable skill is attributing evidence as a habit, so a reader can always see which source a detail came from.
Citation is a scored expectation
Many students treat citation as optional polish. On Part 2 it is part of the task.
This is different from the impression some students have that citation only matters in formal research writing. On the Regents argument, the simple act of writing "(Text 2)" after a detail is what tells the rater you are using the sources as required. Skipping it is leaving marks on the table.
The expected form
The Regents asks for a simple, lightweight citation, not a full style guide.
Because the citation is so light, there is no reason to omit it. A two-or-three-character tag at the end of a sentence is all that is needed, and it does the whole job the directions ask for.
Citing smoothly
Try this
Q1. What is the expected citation form on the Part 2 argument? [Recall]
- Cue. The source's text number (and line where it helps), for example "(Text 1, line 20)" or "(Text 1)." No MLA, APA, or works-cited list is required.
Q2. Why does citation affect your score even though the Regents does not require a formal style? [Short explanation]
- Cue. The directions require identifying each source, and Command of Evidence rewards evidence clearly drawn from the texts; unattributed evidence reads as possibly unsupported and caps the criterion even when accurate.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of NYSED exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
Regents ELA (Part 2, style)4 marksSource-based argument. The directions tell you to identify each source you reference by text number. Rewrite this sentence to cite correctly: 'One article says that later school start times reduced car crashes among teen drivers.' (Rescoped to a 4-mark citation task.)Show worked answer →
A correctly cited version names the source by text number: "Later school start times reduced car crashes among teen drivers (Text 1, line 20)." If the line is uncertain, "(Text 1)" alone still satisfies the directions.
Markers expect attribution by text number because the task requires it and Command of Evidence rewards evidence clearly drawn from the sources. "One article says" does not identify which of the four texts the evidence comes from, so a rater cannot verify it. The fix is to replace the vague reference with the text number, placed at the end of the sentence so it does not break the flow.
Regents ELA (Part 2, style)4 marksSource-based argument. Explain why citing by text number matters even though you are not using a formal style like MLA, and what happens to your score if you quote good evidence but never attribute it. (Rescoped to a 4-mark conceptual question.)Show worked answer →
Citing by text number matters because the Part 2 directions explicitly require identifying each source, and Command of Evidence rewards evidence that is clearly and verifiably drawn from the provided texts. The Regents does not ask for MLA or a works-cited list; a simple "(Text 2)" or "(Text 2, line 14)" is the expected form.
If you quote strong evidence but never attribute it, the rater cannot tell which source it came from, and the response reads as if it might be unsupported assertion. This caps Command of Evidence even when the evidence is accurate. Markers reward attributed evidence; the fix is the habit of adding a text number to every borrowed detail.
Related dot points
- Selecting relevant textual evidence: choosing the smallest specific detail or quotation that proves the exact point, distinguishing relevant evidence from merely true or broadly on-topic detail, across Part 1 evidence questions and both written responses.
How to select textual evidence on the Regents: choosing the smallest specific detail that proves the exact point, and distinguishing relevant evidence from detail that is merely true or broadly on-topic. The Command of Evidence criterion rewards specific, relevant evidence in both written responses.
- Embedding and quoting evidence: integrating a short quotation into the grammar of your own sentence rather than dropping it in, choosing the smallest quotation that carries the point, and following every quotation with the explanation that links it to the claim or central idea.
How to embed and quote evidence on the Regents: integrating a short quotation into your own sentence rather than dropping it in, quoting the smallest phrase that carries the point, and always following a quotation with the explanation that links it to the claim or central idea.
- Avoiding summary and plagiarism: recognizing the line between summarizing a source and analyzing it, the over-copying that the Part 2 directions warn against, and using your own words to present evidence so the response argues rather than retells.
How to avoid summary and over-copying on the Regents: the line between summarizing a source and analyzing it, why the directions warn against simply summarizing the texts, and using your own words to present evidence so the response argues rather than retells.
- Integrating evidence from multiple sources: selecting specific and relevant evidence from at least three of the four texts, weaving it across paragraphs organized by reason rather than by source, and explaining how each piece supports the claim, as the Command of Evidence criterion requires.
How to integrate evidence from at least three Regents Part 2 sources: selecting specific and relevant evidence, organizing paragraphs by reason rather than by text, and weaving evidence from several sources into one point. The Command of Evidence criterion rewards highly effective use of specific evidence from multiple texts.
- Understanding the source-based argument: the Part 2 task (four texts on one issue, take a position, use at least three sources), how it differs from a personal-opinion essay, and what each line of the task directions requires.
What Part 2 of the Regents ELA exam asks: four texts on one issue, establish a precise claim, distinguish it from opposing claims, and use specific evidence from at least three of the texts. How the source-based argument differs from a personal-opinion essay, line by line through the task directions.
Sources & how we know this
- Regents Examinations in English Language Arts — NYSED (2025)
- Educator Guide to the Regents Examination in English Language Arts — NYSED (2025)