ACT English · Rhetorical Skills

Adding, Deleting, and Relevance Questions on the ACT: A Complete Strategy Guide

The add/delete question type features in about 7% of ACT English sections. Unlike strict grammar questions with clear rules (e.g., punctuation), the add/delete question tests inference. (But make no mistake: the right answer will be objective.)

Start by asking yourself the question, “Does this belong here?” The ACT not only expects you to answer yes or no, but it also expects you to know why. Bear in mind that the ACT isn’t asking whether something is “on-topic” or not; many potential answers certainly will be, including the wrong ones. What the exam wants you to demonstrate is the ability to know if information is necessary or not. On-topic information that doesn’t advance the overall argument or point to be communicated should be deleted. Many students stumble here because they see “relevant” information and decide to keep it.

Remember: “relevance” isn’t the right metric. Instead, it’s “logical necessity.”

Strategies covered in this guide

Strategy	Named Method	Frequency
How to make the add or delete decision on the ACT	The Necessary-or-Not Test	Very High
How to choose the right reason after you decide yes or no	The Reason Elimination Method	Very High
How to determine whether relevance is judged against the paragraph or the whole passage	The Scope Check	High
How to identify the “plausible but irrelevant” trap	The Necessary-vs.-Related Distinction	High
The necessary vs. merely related standard — why the ACT’s bar is stricter than you think	The Deletion Test	Very High
How to distinguish between reason types: transition, supporting detail, specific example, and background	The Reason Taxonomy	Medium

Strategy 1

How to Make the Add or Delete Decision on the ACT

Very High Frequency

The first step in every add/delete question is making the yes/no decision before reading any answer choice. Read the passage context, identify the main point of the paragraph, and ask whether the sentence in question is necessary for the paragraph to make its point clearly and completely. If deleting the sentence would leave the paragraph incomplete, unclear, or logically broken, keep it. If deleting it leaves the paragraph intact and focused, delete it.

Named Method

The Necessary-or-Not Test

Cover the sentence in question with your finger and read the paragraph without it. Ask two questions in order. First: does the paragraph still make complete sense? Second: is anything the other sentences depend on now missing? If the paragraph reads smoothly and completely without the sentence, the correct answer is No, delete it. If the paragraph now has a logical gap, a missing connection, or an unclear reference, the correct answer is Yes, add or keep it.

Do not ask whether the sentence is related to the topic — ask whether the paragraph needs it. The ACT’s standard is necessity, not relatedness. A sentence can be entirely on-topic and still be the wrong answer to keep if the paragraph functions just as well without it.

✓ Keep it — paragraph needs this

A paragraph about a scientist’s methodology needs a sentence explaining her experimental controls. Without it, the next sentence’s reference to “controlled variables” is unclear.

✗ Delete it — paragraph does not need this

A paragraph about a scientist’s methodology includes a sentence about the university where she earned her degree. The paragraph reads completely without it.

ACT-style practice question

Passage context The urban farming movement has transformed abandoned lots across the city into productive green spaces. Community gardens now supply fresh vegetables to local food banks and provide educational programming for neighborhood schools. Participation has grown steadily over the past five years, with over two thousand registered volunteers contributing to more than forty active sites.

The writer is considering adding the following sentence after the second sentence: “Tomatoes, which belong to the nightshade family, were once considered poisonous in parts of Europe.”

Should the writer add this sentence?

A. Yes, because it provides an interesting historical fact that enriches the reader’s understanding of urban farming.

B. Yes, because it offers specific botanical context for the vegetables mentioned in the paragraph.

C. No, because it introduces a historical digression that distracts from the paragraph’s focus on the urban farming movement’s community impact.

D. No, because the paragraph has already provided sufficient detail about the types of produce grown in community gardens.

Classic Test Prep

Take a mini-diagnostic

Get your projected ACT score in just 15 minutes

Strategy 2

How to Choose the Right Reason After You Decide Yes or No

Very High Frequency

After making the yes/no decision, half the answer choices are eliminated. The remaining two choices both agree with your decision but offer different reasons — and only one reason accurately describes what the sentence actually does in the passage. Wrong reasons on the ACT are wrong in specific, testable ways: they describe something the sentence does not do, they describe effects on the wrong part of the passage, or they use accurate-sounding language to describe inaccurate content.

Named Method

The Reason Elimination Method

After eliminating the two choices that contradict your yes/no decision, evaluate each remaining reason against the actual text. For each reason, ask: does the sentence literally do what this reason claims? If the reason says the sentence “provides a specific example,” does the sentence actually contain a specific example — a name, a number, a concrete instance? If the reason says the sentence “introduces necessary background,” is there actually background information present that the reader needs?

Wrong reasons on the ACT typically fail in one of three ways: they describe an effect that is true of the passage in general but not specifically true of this sentence, they accurately describe what the sentence contains but misidentify why that matters, or they reference a purpose the sentence does not serve at all. Check every claim in the reason against the actual sentence before selecting.

✓ Accurate reason — matches what the sentence does

A sentence that names a specific year and location provides concrete evidence. The reason “it provides a specific example supporting the paragraph’s claim” is accurate.

✗ Inaccurate reason — does not match the sentence

The same sentence named above, with the reason “it introduces the reader to the passage’s main argument.” That sentence is not introducing anything — it is supporting a claim already made.

ACT-style practice question

Passage context Marine biologists have long studied the communication patterns of bottlenose dolphins, which use a complex system of clicks, whistles, and body movements to coordinate behavior within their pods. Recent research has focused on signature whistles — unique sounds that individual dolphins use to identify themselves to others.

The writer is considering adding the following sentence after the second sentence: “In a 2013 study, researchers at the University of St Andrews demonstrated that dolphins can remember and respond to the signature whistles of former companions after separations of more than twenty years.”

Should the writer add this sentence?

A. Yes, because it introduces the main topic of dolphin communication for readers who may be unfamiliar with the subject.

B. Yes, because it provides a specific research example that illustrates the significance of signature whistles described in the preceding sentence.

C. No, because the paragraph has already established that dolphins communicate using signature whistles, making this detail redundant.

D. No, because the study described is too recent to be relevant to a discussion of long-standing research into dolphin communication.

Strategy 3

How to Determine Whether Relevance Is Judged Against the Paragraph or the Whole Passage

High Frequency

Add/delete questions anchor relevance at a specific level — either the paragraph or the passage — and the question stem tells you which level applies. When the question asks about the effect on “the paragraph,” evaluate the sentence only against the paragraph’s main point. When the question refers to “the passage” or “the essay,” evaluate the sentence against the passage’s overall focus. A sentence can be relevant to the passage but irrelevant to the specific paragraph, and vice versa.

Named Method

The Scope Check

Before applying the Necessary-or-Not Test, read the question stem carefully and identify its scope word: “paragraph” or “passage” (or “essay”). This word tells you what to treat as the main point you are evaluating the sentence against.

If the scope is the paragraph: identify the paragraph’s single main point and ask whether the sentence is necessary for that point. Ignore whether the sentence connects to other paragraphs. If the scope is the passage: identify the passage’s overall argument or subject and ask whether the sentence serves that broader purpose. A sentence that fits the paragraph but not the passage, or fits the passage but not the paragraph, can be the wrong answer depending on which scope the question names.

✓ Relevant to paragraph scope

A paragraph about water filtration methods. A sentence describing how activated carbon removes chlorine. Directly relevant to the paragraph’s specific focus.

✗ Relevant to passage but not paragraph

Same paragraph. A sentence about global freshwater scarcity. Related to the passage’s water theme but not to this paragraph’s specific focus on filtration techniques.

ACT-style practice question

Passage context — this paragraph appears in an essay about the history of jazz music in New Orleans The second line parade tradition became one of the most distinctive expressions of New Orleans culture. These brass band processions, originally held to honor the deceased, evolved into celebratory community events. Neighborhood social clubs organized the parades, and musicians developed an improvisational style that reflected the city’s uniquely layered cultural influences.

The writer is considering adding the following sentence at the end of this paragraph: “New Orleans also became an important port city in the nineteenth century, serving as a major hub for cotton and sugar trade between the American South and international markets.”

Should the writer add this sentence to this paragraph?

A. Yes, because it provides historical context for the city of New Orleans that helps readers understand the setting of the passage.

B. Yes, because the economic history of New Orleans is directly connected to the cultural forces that shaped its jazz tradition.

C. No, because it repeats economic information that was already established earlier in the passage.

D. No, because it introduces economic history that is not relevant to this paragraph’s focus on the second line parade tradition and its musical development.

Classic Test Prep

Take a mini-diagnostic

Get your projected ACT score in just 15 minutes

Strategy 4

How to Identify the “Plausible but Irrelevant” Trap

High Frequency

The ACT’s hardest add/delete questions present sentences that are topically related to the paragraph but still wrong to keep. These “plausible but irrelevant” sentences share a subject matter with the paragraph but do not advance the paragraph’s specific argument or serve any function the other sentences depend on. Students who stop at “is it related?” will keep these sentences and get the question wrong.

Named Method

The Necessary-vs.-Related Distinction

When a sentence seems topically related but the answer choices suggest deletion, apply a stricter test: does this sentence advance the paragraph’s specific argument, or does it merely share its subject matter? A sentence about climate science in a paragraph about climate science is related — but if the paragraph argues that solar investment reduces emissions, and the sentence is about the history of climate research, it is related but not necessary. It does not push the argument forward.

Ask: if a reader skipped this sentence, would they miss any step in the paragraph’s reasoning? Would they be confused by anything that follows? If the answer is no, the sentence is plausible but irrelevant and should be deleted, regardless of its topic.

✗ Plausible but irrelevant — same topic, wrong function

A paragraph arguing that renewable energy creates jobs includes a sentence about the history of coal mining in Appalachia. Related to energy, but does not advance the jobs argument.

✓ Related and necessary — advances the argument

Same paragraph. A sentence citing the number of solar installation jobs created per megawatt. Directly advances the jobs argument with evidence.

ACT-style practice question

Passage context — paragraph arguing that structured recess improves academic focus in elementary students Research consistently shows that children who receive regular, structured outdoor breaks demonstrate higher sustained attention during classroom instruction. Schools that have implemented daily forty-five-minute recess periods report measurable improvements in reading comprehension scores and mathematical problem-solving performance.

The writer is considering adding the following sentence between the two existing sentences: “Physical education has been a component of American schooling since the late nineteenth century, when concerns about urban children’s health led reformers to advocate for exercise programs in public schools.”

Should the writer add this sentence?

A. Yes, because it provides historical background that explains why structured recess became a standard part of the school day.

B. Yes, because it connects the contemporary research cited in the first sentence to a longer tradition of recognizing physical activity’s benefits for children.

C. No, because it introduces historical information about physical education that does not advance the paragraph’s argument about recess improving academic focus.

D. No, because the paragraph has already established the effectiveness of structured recess, making additional context unnecessary.

Correct answer: C — No, because it introduces historical information about physical education that does not advance the paragraph’s argument about recess improving academic focus.

Apply the Necessary-vs.-Related Distinction: the proposed sentence is about physical education — clearly related to the paragraph’s topic. But apply the stricter test: does it advance the specific argument that structured recess improves academic focus? No. The paragraph argues a causal relationship between recess and academic performance. The sentence introduces a historical digression about nineteenth-century health reformers that does not contribute evidence, reasoning, or logic to that argument. A reader who skips this sentence loses nothing in following the paragraph’s argument. This is the plausible-but-irrelevant trap.

A is wrong because the yes/no decision is No, and the reason misidentifies the sentence’s function. The sentence does not actually explain “why structured recess became standard” in the context of the paragraph’s argument — it describes a separate historical development in physical education broadly, which is not the same thing.
B is wrong because the yes/no decision is No, and the reason overstates what the sentence accomplishes. Connecting contemporary research to a “longer tradition” requires the sentence to actually bridge those two things — this sentence does not reference the research or explain any connection to academic outcomes. It simply states a historical fact.
D is wrong because the yes/no decision is correct (No), but the reason is inaccurate. The paragraph has not “already established the effectiveness of structured recess” in a way that makes the proposed sentence redundant — the proposed sentence is about a different topic (history of physical education), not about recess effectiveness. Choosing the right yes/no with the wrong reason is still a wrong answer.

Strategy 5

The Necessary vs. Merely Related Standard — Why the ACT’s Bar Is Stricter Than You Think

Very High Frequency

The ACT does not reward completeness for its own sake. A sentence that adds interesting, topically relevant, factually accurate information is still wrong to keep if the paragraph does not need it to make its point. The ACT’s standard for keeping a sentence is necessity — not relatedness, not interest, not accuracy. The most reliable delete trigger is: the paragraph works without it.

Named Method

The Deletion Test

Delete the sentence mentally and read what remains. Evaluate three things in order. One: does the paragraph still make its argument completely? Two: does anything that follows become unclear or logically broken? Three: does the paragraph now read more tightly focused and effective?

If the answer to one is yes, two is no, and three is yes — the sentence should be deleted. If the answer to two is yes (something breaks or becomes unclear without it) — the sentence should be kept, regardless of whether it also seems extraneous. This sequence prevents the most common error: deleting sentences that are genuinely load-bearing because they seem like extra detail.

✓ Necessary — pass the Deletion Test

A paragraph introduces “the process” in sentence one. Sentence two defines what the process is. Without sentence two, “the process” in sentence three is undefined. Keep it.

✗ Merely related — fails the Deletion Test

A paragraph about the process mentions that the inventor was born in Ohio. The next sentence refers to the process, not the inventor. Deleting the Ohio sentence changes nothing. Delete it.

ACT-style practice question

Passage context — paragraph about the role of mycorrhizal fungi in forest ecosystems

The writer is considering whether to keep or delete the following underlined sentence from the paragraph: “Mycorrhizal fungi form symbiotic relationships with the roots of most plant species, exchanging mineral nutrients for carbon sugars produced by the plants through photosynthesis.”

This nutrient exchange allows trees to access phosphorus and nitrogen far beyond what their root systems could reach independently. In dense forests, mycorrhizal networks connect the root systems of multiple trees, enabling the transfer of resources between plants of different species and different ages.

Should the writer keep or delete the underlined sentence?

A. Yes, keep it, because it defines the mycorrhizal relationship that the rest of the paragraph depends on to explain nutrient exchange and network connections.

B. Yes, keep it, because it introduces the concept of photosynthesis, which is essential background for understanding how forests function.

C. No, delete it, because the paragraph already explains how mycorrhizal fungi transfer nutrients, making the opening definition redundant.

D. No, delete it, because scientific definitions interrupt the flow of the paragraph and are better suited to a glossary or footnote.

Correct answer: A — Yes, keep it, because it defines the mycorrhizal relationship that the rest of the paragraph depends on to explain nutrient exchange and network connections.

Apply the Deletion Test: delete the sentence and read what remains. “This nutrient exchange allows trees to access phosphorus and nitrogen far beyond what their root systems could reach independently.” The phrase “this nutrient exchange” now refers to nothing — the exchange was defined in the deleted sentence. The paragraph is logically broken without the opening sentence. Step two of the Deletion Test confirms: something that follows becomes unclear. Keep it. A correctly identifies that the sentence is load-bearing: the rest of the paragraph depends on the definition it provides.

B is wrong because the yes/no decision is correct (keep it), but the reason is inaccurate. The sentence does mention photosynthesis, but photosynthesis is not “essential background” for the paragraph’s argument about nutrient exchange between trees. The real reason to keep it is that it defines the mycorrhizal relationship that “this nutrient exchange” in the next sentence refers back to.
C is wrong because the yes/no decision is No, but the Deletion Test shows the sentence is not redundant — it is definitional. The rest of the paragraph describes mechanisms of nutrient transfer, but it does not explain what mycorrhizal fungi are or how the symbiotic relationship works. The opening sentence is not repeating information; it is providing the foundation for everything that follows.
D is wrong because the yes/no decision is No, and the reason applies a stylistic preference that is not a valid ACT criterion. The ACT never judges sentences on whether they “interrupt flow” in isolation — it judges whether they serve the paragraph’s purpose. A definition that is necessary for the paragraph to make sense is always correct to include.

Classic Test Prep

Take a mini-diagnostic

Get your projected ACT score in just 15 minutes

Strategy 6

How to Distinguish Between Reason Types: Transition, Supporting Detail, Specific Example, and Background

Medium Frequency

When two Yes answers or two No answers disagree only on the reason, the difference between them is almost always about what type of function the sentence serves. The four most common reason types on the ACT are: providing a transition (connecting two ideas), adding supporting detail (general information that strengthens a claim), providing a specific example (a concrete, named, or numbered instance), and introducing background (foundational context the reader needs). Choosing the wrong type — even when the yes/no is correct — is wrong.

Named Method

The Reason Taxonomy

Match the sentence’s actual content to the correct function type. A transition sentence explicitly links the end of one idea to the beginning of another — it contains language that bridges two sections. A supporting detail adds information that strengthens a claim but stays at the same level of generality as the surrounding sentences. A specific example provides a concrete, verifiable, named or numbered instance (“In 2018, Company X reported…”). Background information establishes context or definitions that the reader needs before the paragraph’s main argument can be understood.

Wrong reason types on the ACT usually fail because they describe a function the sentence does not perform: calling a transition a “specific example” when it contains no concrete data, or calling supporting detail “background information” when the reader already has the context they need. Check the actual content of the sentence against each reason type before choosing.

✓ Specific example — contains concrete named data

“The 2019 Stanford study followed 1,400 participants over ten years and found a 34% reduction in cardiovascular events.” A specific example: named institution, year, sample size, quantified result.

✗ Called “background” but is actually a specific example

The same sentence above described as “background information about cardiovascular research.” Wrong type — background establishes context; this provides evidence. The function label is incorrect.

ACT-style practice question

Passage context — an essay structured in two sections: the first describes the decline of monarch butterfly populations; the second proposes conservation solutions [End of first section] The combination of habitat loss, pesticide use, and climate disruption has reduced the monarch population by more than eighty percent over the past two decades.

The writer is considering adding the following sentence as the opening of the second section: “Despite this troubling decline, researchers and conservation organizations have identified several promising strategies that may help reverse the monarch’s population collapse.”

[Beginning of second section content] Milkweed restoration programs have shown particular promise in regions where agricultural expansion eliminated the plant nearly entirely.

Should the writer add this sentence at the beginning of the second section?

A. Yes, because it provides specific data about the number of conservation organizations currently working to protect monarch butterflies.

B. Yes, because it provides a transition from the essay’s first section on population decline to its second section on conservation strategies.

C. No, because the information about population decline was already addressed in the preceding section, making this sentence redundant.

D. No, because introducing conservation strategies at the start of the second section interrupts the essay’s focus on documenting the monarch’s decline.

Correct answer: B — Yes, because it provides a transition from the essay’s first section on population decline to its second section on conservation strategies.

Apply the Necessary-or-Not Test at passage scope: the essay shifts from documenting decline to proposing solutions. Without this sentence, the second section opens abruptly on milkweed restoration with no signal that the essay has changed direction. The transition is necessary. The yes/no decision is Yes. Apply the Reason Taxonomy: does the sentence contain specific data? No — it contains no named organizations, numbers, or concrete instances. Does it bridge the two sections? Yes — it references “despite this troubling decline” (section one) and “promising strategies” (section two). It is a transition. B is correct.

A is wrong because the yes/no decision is correct (keep it), but the reason applies the wrong type. The sentence does not provide “specific data about the number of conservation organizations.” It makes no reference to a count or a named organization. Calling a transition a “specific example” when it contains no concrete data is the Reason Taxonomy error this question tests.
C is wrong because the yes/no decision is No, and the reason misidentifies the sentence as redundant. The sentence is not repeating the population decline data — it is pivoting away from it toward solutions. Referencing the preceding section’s content to bridge to the next section is the definition of a transition, not redundancy.
D is wrong because the yes/no decision is No, and the reason misunderstands the essay’s structure. The essay explicitly has a second section about conservation strategies — introducing those strategies at the start of that section is exactly what a well-structured essay does. The sentence does not interrupt the essay’s focus; it announces the shift in focus that the second section was designed to make.

Quick-Reference Summary: All 6 ACT Add/Delete and Relevance Strategies

Strategy	Named Method	Frequency
How to make the add or delete decision on the ACT	The Necessary-or-Not Test	Very High
How to choose the right reason after you decide yes or no	The Reason Elimination Method	Very High
How to determine whether relevance is judged against the paragraph or the whole passage	The Scope Check	High
How to identify the “plausible but irrelevant” trap	The Necessary-vs.-Related Distinction	High
The necessary vs. merely related standard — why the ACT’s bar is stricter than you think	The Deletion Test	Very High
How to distinguish between reason types: transition, supporting detail, specific example, and background	The Reason Taxonomy	Medium

How to Approach Add/Delete and Relevance Questions on Test Day

Tip 1

Make the yes/no decision before you read the answer choices. Reading the answer choices first is the fastest way to get confused on add/delete questions, because plausible-sounding reasons can pull your yes/no decision in the wrong direction. Cover the choices, read the passage context, apply the Necessary-or-Not Test, and commit to Yes or No. Then open the choices and eliminate the two that contradict your decision immediately.

Tip 2

Read the question stem word for word before anything else. The scope word — “paragraph” or “passage” — changes everything. A sentence can be the wrong answer to keep for the paragraph and the right answer to keep for the passage, or vice versa. Identify the scope before applying any test. This habit alone eliminates a consistent category of errors on this question type.

Tip 3

The NO CHANGE instinct will hurt you on these questions. On grammar questions, your instinct to keep the original is sometimes right. On add/delete questions, the ACT specifically designs the “add” sentences to feel like they belong — they are on-topic, well-written, and factually accurate. The question is never whether the sentence is good writing. It is whether the paragraph needs it. Default to deletion when in doubt and the paragraph passes the Deletion Test without it.

Common Questions About ACT Add/Delete and Relevance Questions

How do I know if I’m supposed to judge relevance against the paragraph or the whole passage? Does it matter where the question number is? +

The question stem itself tells you. Read it carefully and find the scope word: “paragraph” means evaluate only against the paragraph’s main point; “passage” or “essay” means evaluate against the overall argument. The position of the question number in the passage does not determine the scope — the wording of the question does.

When the question does not specify a scope explicitly, default to paragraph scope. Most add/delete questions are anchored to a specific paragraph, and the relevant context is the sentences immediately surrounding the one being tested. Only treat the scope as passage-level when the question explicitly says “the essay” or “the passage as a whole.”

The sentence I’m deciding on has a fact that connects to something mentioned earlier in the passage — does that automatically make it relevant enough to keep? +

No. Connecting to something mentioned earlier makes a sentence topically related, but not necessarily necessary. The ACT’s standard is whether the paragraph needs the sentence to make its point — not whether the sentence has any connection to anything in the passage.

Apply the Deletion Test: cover the sentence and read the paragraph without it. If the paragraph still makes its argument completely and clearly, the connection to earlier content is not sufficient justification for keeping it. The ACT is testing whether you understand that related information is not the same as necessary information. A sentence can have a genuine topical connection to earlier content and still be the wrong choice to keep if the paragraph functions equally well without it.

If deleting a sentence makes the paragraph flow more smoothly but the sentence is technically on-topic, should I delete it or keep it? +

Delete it. Improved flow after deletion is a strong signal that the sentence is not necessary. The ACT values focused, purposeful writing over comprehensive writing. A sentence that is on-topic but interrupts the paragraph’s logical progression — making it flow better without it — is a sentence that does not belong there.

The key question is always necessity, not topic. “On-topic” is not a sufficient reason to keep a sentence if the paragraph is tighter and clearer without it. When the Deletion Test reveals that the paragraph flows more smoothly without the sentence and no logical gap appears, the correct answer is to delete it. Smoother flow after deletion is one of the most reliable indicators that the ACT wants you to remove it.