This TABE Reading practice test covers Level M. These questions are medium difficulty, so you should find them to be a little bit harder than the ones you answered for Level E. Read each passage and then answer the questions that follow. Detailed explanations are provided for each of the answers.
Congratulations - you have completed .
You scored %%SCORE%% out of %%TOTAL%%.
Your performance has been rated as %%RATING%%
Your answers are highlighted below.
Question 1 |
Daylight Saving Time: What Are We Saving?
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
Why might it be incorrect for someone to say that Ben Franklin invented Daylight Saving Time?
Ben Franklin may have been the first to suggest Daylight Saving Time, but America adopted it over 100 years later and modeled it after a European practice. | |
Daylight Saving Time started in America 100 years before Ben Franklin was born. | |
When America wanted to adopt Daylight Saving Time, Ben Franklin was actually against the idea. | |
No history books have any record of Ben Franklin suggesting Daylight Saving Time. |
Question 1 Explanation:
Answer choice (A) is correct because the author clearly mentions that Ben Franklin may have been the first to suggest the practice, but that America’s version of Daylight Saving Time did not come from Franklin’s proposal. The other answer choices are directly refuted by the article.
Question 2 |
Daylight Saving Time: What Are We Saving?
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
Which of the following best explains how Paragraph 1 fits within the structure of the article?
Paragraph 1 presents a problem that the author hopes to solve by the need of the article. | |
Paragraph 1 compares and contrast two opposing ideas that she will continue to explore throughout the rest of the article. | |
Paragraph 1 identifies an odd practice, which the rest of the article will explore in more detail. | |
Paragraph 1 uses a personal anecdote to show how a problem affects regular people in order to set up the argument in the rest of the article. |
Question 2 Explanation:
The author uses the first paragraph to point out how weird the practice of Daylight Savings Time is, so answer choice (C) is correct. Answer choice (A) might be tempting, but the author doesn’t ever identify this practice as a “problem,” nor does she attempt to offer a “solution.”
Question 3 |
Daylight Saving Time: What Are We Saving?
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
Read this sentence from the article.
Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits.
Which word means the same as inception as it is used in the sentence?
Thoughtful | |
Ending | |
Beginning | |
Revision |
Question 3 Explanation:
Answer choice (C) is correct because inception means “where something first began.” In the article, the author is noting that America began using Daylight Saving Time 100 years ago. Answer choice (D) might be tempting, but there’s no indication that Daylight Saving Time was revised in 1918, rather that America began following it.
Question 4 |
Daylight Saving Time: What Are We Saving?
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
Which of the following timelines shows the correct history of Daylight Saving Time based on the article?
 | |
 | |
 | |
 |
Question 4 Explanation:
Answer choice (A) is correct because it follows the timeline discussed in Paragraph 2. While Ben Franklin first suggested the idea, it was only adopted by Europe in the early 20th Century, then America adopted it in 1918, and have now observed Daylight Saving Time for 100 years.
Question 5 |
Daylight Saving Time: What Are We Saving?
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
Which of these is the best summary of the article?
Daylight Saving Time is an outdated practice that needs to end because it doesn’t make sense anymore. | |
Even if people don’t understand Daylight Saving Time, it’s extremely important for farmers who needs as much light as they can get to make a living. | |
Daylight Saving Time is a complicated is designed to honor everything that Ben Franklin has done for America. | |
Most people don’t know why they observe Daylight Saving Time, but they love having an extra hour of sunlight on summer nights. |
Question 5 Explanation:
Answer choice (D) is correct because the author helps readers understand Daylight Saving Time better, and ultimately posits that it won’t change anytime soon because people like it. There is no indication in the text that the writer wants to end it (A) or that farmers need it (B). While some people might view Daylight Saving Time as a way to honor Ben Franklin, the author doesn’t suggest it (C).
Question 6 |
Daylight Saving Time: What Are We Saving?
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
Part A
Which of these is the main idea of the article?
Daylight Savings Time is specifically designed to help people get more work done and be more profitable. | |
Daylight Saving Time may not serve a logical purpose, but it’s nice to have longer days in the summer. | |
Daylight Saving Time was not originally an American practice. | |
Since there’s no real purpose for Daylight Saving Time, it’s time that we re-evaluate the practice. |
Question 6 Explanation:
Only answer choice (B) captures the spirit of the article, that we have Daylight Saving Time because we like having more sunlight in the summer. Answer choice (C) might be correct, but it’s not the main idea of the article.
Question 7 |
Daylight Saving Time: What Are We Saving?
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
Part B
Which sentence from the article best supports the answer to Part A?
“While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend.” | |
“The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.” | |
“The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it.” | |
“Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%).” |
Question 7 Explanation:
The only quote that portrays the author’s belief that Daylight Savings Time will continue is answer choice (C). None of the other options support the answer to Part A.
Question 8 |
Daylight Saving Time: What Are We Saving?
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
(1) Each year, western nations like the United States of America and countries in the European Union participate in Daylight Saving Time. While different countries treat Daylight Saving Time differently, they generally all follow the same idea. During the summer season, everyone adjusts their clocks so that there is an extra hour of sunlight in the evening that normally would have occurred in the morning. As strange as this practice is, what’s even stranger is that most people have no idea why Daylight Saving Time exists. Every March, people set their clocks forward an hour, only to set them back again in November for potentially no reason at all.
(2) The most that the average citizens know about Daylight Savings Time’s history is that it was first proposed by Benjamin Franklin. While he did propose the idea in 1784, Daylight Saving Time wasn’t adopted by America until 1918 (over 100 years after Franklin’s death), after several European countries had already started the trend. Many Europeans had like Franklin’s idea, but no one seriously considered it until an English builder named William Willet proposed it in a pamphlet in 1907. The other thing that people seem to “know” about Daylight Saving Time is that it was created to help farmers. How that exactly works no one seems to know. The real truth of how Daylight Saving Time is much simpler than that, and really quite innocent.
(3) The real reason that Daylight Saving Time was adopted was so that people would have more time in the evening to spend outside in the sunlight. Why waste that beautiful sunlight on the mornings when people are asleep? Since the inception of Daylight Saving Time in America 100 years ago, experts have tried to justify its merits. Many experts assert that it saves the country on energy costs. This is true, though the amount of energy that we save during this time is fairly minimal (maybe 1%). Others posit that more daylight during the evening makes us safer and less likely to suffer in accidents. Studies have shown, however, that the adjustment of our internal clocks is not a smooth one, and leads to a spike each March in incidents like heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. So, why do we still do it every year?
(4) The answer to this question is once again a fairly simple, and rather endearing, one: We like it. Daylight Saving Time was originally created to give people an extra hour of daylight in the evening, and that’s exactly why it’s still done today. As long as people enjoy that extra hour in the evening, Daylight Saving Time isn’t going anywhere.
Which of the following best describes the organizational structure of the article?
Chronological | |
Exploration/Conclusion | |
Compare/Contrast | |
Cause/Effect |
Question 8 Explanation:
Answer choice (B) is correct because the author introduces Daylight Savings Time in the beginning of the article, explores its origins, and draws a conclusion about it at the end. Answer choice (A) might be tempting because the author does explain the chronological history of the practice, but this is just a small part of the article and not reflective of the overall structure.
Question 9 |
Who Deserves Immortality?
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
Which of the following best describes the organizational structure of the article?
Chronological | |
Problem/Solution | |
Compare/Contrast | |
Cause/Effect |
Question 9 Explanation:
Answer choice (B) is correct because the author begins the article with an introduction of the problem, and slowly works towards her conclusion that America needs to tear down certain monuments that honor villains.
Question 10 |
Who Deserves Immortality?
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
According to the article, why are monuments dedicated to Confederate soldiers inappropriate?
If we tear down monuments, we are erasing part of our history. | |
The Confederate Army lost the Civil War, and we shouldn’t honor losers. | |
Confederate soldiers were fighting for slavery to continue, which is not a position America should celebrate. | |
Taking down these monuments is incredibly expensive and our money would be better spent on programs that actually help people. |
Question 10 Explanation:
Answer choice (C) is correct because it reflects the author’s opinion on why these monuments should be taken down. Answer choices (B) and (D) are not reflected in the article, and answer choice (A) represents the opinion that the author disagrees with.
Question 11 |
Who Deserves Immortality?
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
Which of these is the best summary of the article?
The more that Americans discuss the purpose of monuments, the more that they realize that none of our heroes deserve monuments because they are all flawed in some way. | |
Some vandals want to tear down monuments that memorialize American heroes just because those heroes happen to fight for the South during the Civil War. | |
There is a big debate in America over who deserves to be memorialized by a monument, but Americans need to stop idolizing monsters and tear down the monuments to anyone who was not a good role model. | |
There is no real solution to America’s monument problem; each individual needs to search within themselves for their answer, and then America should hold a vote. |
Question 11 Explanation:
Answer choice (C) is correct because the author clearly takes a stance on the issue, advocating for removing monuments to people who were not on the right side of history. Answer choice (A) might be tempting, but the author never suggests that all, or even most, monuments need to be torn down. Similarly, answer choice (B) might be tempting because it expresses the author’s opinion, but the word “vandal” shows that this answer choice is critical of the author’s opinion, and therefore must be wrong.
Question 12 |
Who Deserves Immortality?
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
Read the sentence from the article.
However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
Which word means the same as advocating in the sentence?
Supporting | |
Opposing | |
Caring | |
Speaking |
Question 12 Explanation:
Answer choice (A) is correct because an advocate is someone who supports a cause and fights for it. While advocating could sometimes nearly mean “caring” (C), caring doesn’t really work in the sentence provided because the author is not writing about people who clean and maintain the monuments.
Question 13 |
Who Deserves Immortality?
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
Which of the following statements would best support the author’s opinion in the article?
Violence in Charlottesville, VA proved that removing these offensive monuments is too volatile and city governments need to stop trying. | |
After white nationalist protestors rallied against the removal of a monument in Charlottesville, VA and incited violence and killed a woman, cities all over the United States began more seriously considering the removal of offensive statues. | |
The death of a woman in Charlottesville, VA proves that America is still divided over the monument issue, so we should wait to act until the country is at more of a consensus. | |
The death of a woman in Charlottesville, VA proves that these monuments still represents sensitive issue and city governments need to think about the well-being of their citizens before they consider removing monuments. |
Question 13 Explanation:
Answer choice (B) is correct because it’s the only option that still advocates for the removal of inappropriate monuments and demonizes the people who were willing to protect these statues with violence. The author suggests in the article that it’s not right to immortalize hate and violence, and the actions of white nationalists to protect hateful statues supports the author’s worry that these monuments celebrate hate.
Question 14 |
Who Deserves Immortality?
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
According to the author, why are monuments to Christopher Columbus, the man who discovered America, problematic?
Christopher Columbus fought for the Confederate army. | |
Christopher Columbus never “discovered” America; there were already people there. | |
Christopher Columbus was an American politician who continually voted for slavery. | |
Christopher Columbus was a tyrant who caused a genocide of native people in the West Indies. |
Question 14 Explanation:
Answer choice (D) is correct because the author directly mentions Columbus’ role in a genocide as she is questioning whether he deserves a monument. Answer choice (B) is tempting because it’s true, but the author doesn’t discuss the fact that Columbus didn’t really “discover” America in her article.
Question 15 |
Who Deserves Immortality?
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
Part A
What is the main idea of the article?
Monuments were built for a reason, and America needs to honor its historical figures even if they weren’t perfect. | |
The argument over monuments is a balanced one, and it’s up to each citizen to form their own opinion. | |
Even though the Confederate Army fought for slavery, they were still Americans and we shouldn’t remove them from our history books. | |
People may think that taking down monuments is a way of erasing history, America should remove any statues that honor bad people. |
Question 15 Explanation:
Answer choice (D) is correct because even though the author seems objective at first, she provides her opinion throughout the final few paragraphs, ultimately stating that she would like offensive monuments to be torn down.
Question 16 |
Who Deserves Immortality?
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
Part B
Which statements from the article best supports the answer to Part A?
“The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models.” | |
“The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War.” | |
“America is struggling with its identity right now.” | |
“The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures.” |
Question 16 Explanation:
The only quote that supports the idea of Part A is answer choice (A).
Question 17 |
Who Deserves Immortality?
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
(1) America has always honored its heroes by erecting monuments to their greatness. You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure. In the last few years, however, people have started questioning some of the monuments we have erected. Should we tear down monuments that honor people with a controversial history?
(2) The most controversial monuments in America right now are monuments that honor leaders and soldiers from the Confederate Army during the Civil War. To what degree should America honor people who seceded from the country in an effort to protect their right to own slaves? Slavery is America’s great shame and the blame for such a travesty doesn’t fall only on the south, but the Confederate Army was so resistant to the idea of freeing slaves that they were willing to go to war over it. Opponents of these monuments argue that this is not the type of person we should be honoring, and doing so is a constant insult to people of color who now live free in our country.
(3) Defenders of these monuments argue that tearing down these monuments would be an attempt to forget our country’s history. They argue that it’s important for us to remember heroes from both sides of the Civil War. However, groups advocating for these monuments are often the ones who argue that slavery was only a minor part of the Civil War, a fact which is wholly refuted by history.
(4) The debate over Civil War statues also sheds light on the 600 or more monuments and memorials to one of America’s most important and controversial historical figures. For those who love his statues, Christopher Columbus is the man who discovered America and made this country possible. To those who oppose his memorials, Christopher Columbus invaded America and committed genocide (whether intentional or through negligence) in order to gain control of new land. Is a man who caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people worth memorializing?
(5) America is struggling with its identity right now. The country is trying to decide how best to remember our past without honoring the negative aspects of it. People who fight for these monuments argue that taking them down would be trying to forget history. The truth is, though, America should take down any monuments to people who have acted with hate and violence, like Confederate soldiers and Christopher Columbus, because monuments are meant to honor role models. These figures are important parts of American history, so we should make sure we discuss them in our history books. But our monuments should be reserved for our true American heroes.
Read the sentence from the article.
You’d be hard-pressed to find any town in America that doesn’t have at least a small statue memorializing an important figure.
In the context of the sentence, what does “memorializing” mean?
Criticizing | |
Honoring | |
Showing | |
Demonizing |
Question 17 Explanation:
Answer choice (B) is correct because monuments are statues that honor important figures. Answer choice (C) might be tempting, but “showing” is too limiting, and doesn’t carry the feeling of honor that “memorializing” does.
Question 18 |
Free Willy
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
In what year did SeaWorld first open?
1962 | |
1955 | |
1949 | |
1959 |
Question 18 Explanation:
The correct answer is answer choice (D). The answer is revealed directly in the first sentence of the passage.
Question 19 |
Free Willy
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
Read this sentence from the passage.
SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely.
Which word means the same as myopic as it is used in the sentence above?
Far-sighted | |
Blurry | |
Narrow | |
Accurate |
Question 19 Explanation:
The correct answer is answer choice (C). In the context of the passage, the writer is discussing his opinion that SeaWorld is too focused on profit. This is a very “narrow” focus considering the writer’s belief that they need to also focus on the well-being of the whales. None of the other choices express this idea.
Question 20 |
Free Willy
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
Read this paragraph from the passage.
Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
Which of these statements best describes the structure that is used in the paragraph above?
The paragraph explores the steps of a process. | |
The paragraph presents a problem and then a solution to solve it. | |
The paragraph introduces an idea and then explores it in some detail. | |
The paragraph relates events in the order in which they occur. |
Question 20 Explanation:
The correct answer is answer choice (C). The first sentence of the paragraph introduces the fact that SeaWorld has been “fraught with controversy,” and then provides more detail about that controversy throughout the paragraph. Answer choice (B) might be tempting because the writer is introducing a problem; however, the writer makes no mention of a potential solution in this paragraph.
Question 21 |
Free Willy
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
According to the passage, which of the following is not one of the reasons that activists dislike SeaWorld?
SeaWorld is breaking US law by capturing orcas the way they do. | |
The enclosures for the orcas are too small. | |
Orcas are separated from their families. | |
SeaWorld cares more about making money than treating orcas humanely. |
Question 21 Explanation:
The correct answer is answer choice (A). Make sure to notice that the question uses the word “not,” which means that you are looking for the statement that is not supported by the passage. Answer choice (B), (C), and (D) are all directly expressed in the passage.
Question 22 |
Free Willy
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
Part A
Which of these is the main idea of the passage?
SeaWorld has the right to do whatever they want with their property. | |
Animal activists are overreacting to SeaWorld and its treatment of orcas. | |
SeaWorld needs to pay more attention to caring for their orcas. | |
Orcas need very little to be happy and survive. |
Question 22 Explanation:
The correct answer is answer choice (C). It is the only statement that is supported by the passage; all the other answer choices are in direct opposition to what the writer is arguing.
Question 23 |
Free Willy
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
Part B
Which sentence from the passage best supports the answer to Part A?
“Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them.” | |
“People have always marveled at what they don’t understand.” | |
“In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them.” | |
“If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.” |
Question 23 Explanation:
The correct answer is answer choice (D). (D) is the only answer choice that addresses something that SeaWorld is doing wrong. Each of the other choices, taken out of context, seem to support SeaWorld’s actions.
Question 24 |
Free Willy
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
According to the passage, how might executives at SeaWorld support their business practices?
They are making it easier for the average person to see these majestic orcas in person. | |
Whales are animals and don’t need to be treated humanely. | |
Whales love living in small tanks; they prefer it over the ocean. | |
Visitors to their parks don’t care how the animals are treated; they just want to see them. |
Question 24 Explanation:
The correct answer is answer choice (A). In the second paragraph, the writer writes, “In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them.” This directly supports answer choice (A). Answer choice (C) is tempting because it sounds like something SeaWorld would say to defend itself, but the passage doesn’t address this idea at all.
Question 25 |
Free Willy
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
According to the activists discussed in the passage, which word best describes how orcas feel about living in captivity?
Angry | |
Depressed | |
Happy | |
Hungry |
Question 25 Explanation:
The correct answer is answer choice (B). In the third paragraph, the writer writes, “Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.” The key word to notice in this sentence is “depressing.” There is no evidence of the activists thinking the orcas are angry (A), happy (C), or even hungry (D).
Question 26 |
Free Willy
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
According to the passage, why is SeaWorld unlikely to start changing the way they treat their orcas?
They believe they are fighting for the rights of orca fishermen everywhere. | |
They don’t want to appear weak in front of the activists. | |
The changes they would need to make are too expensive and complicated. | |
They don’t care how the orcas feel at all. |
Question 26 Explanation:
The correct answer is answer choice (C). In the final paragraph, the writer writes, “These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit.” This is a part of the writer’s conclusion that SeaWorld can’t sustain itself if it is forced to change, and so the company should fail. There is no evidence to support answer choices (A) and (B), and while many activists would agree with answer choice (D), it is not explored in the passage.
Question 27 |
Free Willy
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
Which of the following best represents the opinion of the writer in this passage?
If SeaWorld cannot handle their orcas humanely, they need to close. | |
There are two sides to the debate over the proper treatment of whales, and both sides have strong arguments. | |
Activists need to leave SeaWorld alone and allow them to keep bringing joy to their guests every day. | |
Activists need to be more aggressive and forceful with their protests if they want anyone to pay attention. |
Question 27 Explanation:
The correct answer is answer choice (A). While the writer begins the passage discussing the controversy and how there are two sides to the argument, he concludes the passage clearly taking the side of the activists. That eliminates answer choices (B) and (C). There is also no evidence that the writer thinks activists need to be more aggressive, which eliminates answer choice (D).
Question 28 |
Free Willy
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
(1) Since it opened its doors in 1959, SeaWorld has been fraught with controversy. The company was founded as a new source of entertainment for theme park visitors. Patrons would have the opportunity to see something they had never seen before: a killer whale swimming around in a tank right in front of them. In many people’s eyes, however, this experience was coming at a price; a price that was being paid by the very creatures everyone was coming to see. Many have called into question how humanely these animals are being treated, both in the process of their capture and in the periods of their captivity. These beautiful creatures who were once free to roam the ocean with their families are being torn from their habitat and stuffed into tanks that don’t give them the freedom they need.
(2) People have always marveled at what they don’t understand. In the eyes of the company and its shareholders, SeaWorld is a place where people can come to safely observe these animals swimming around right in front of them. People want to be able to see these wonderful orcas, and SeaWorld is making it possible. The cost of this convenience, however, has activists from all over the world boycotting SeaWorld and trying to expose their poor treatment of whales to the viewing public.
(3) One of the biggest complaints that activists have about SeaWorld is the way orcas are treated as a commodity rather than as animals. SeaWorld is a company who is trying to make a profit, and activists believe that their myopic focus on making a profit consistently gets in the way of their need to care for the whales and treat them humanely. Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals. Once in captivity, activists argue, these whales live a depressing life that consists mainly of eating and performing in an environment that constantly stunts their growth.
(4) While it is a great novelty to be able to go to a theme park and see a beautiful killer whale in person, the struggle that these whales have to go through just to entertain us is inhumane. For SeaWorld to treat these orcas fairly, they would have to spend a lot of money to improve their capturing methods and to improve the conditions in which the orcas live when they are in captivity. These kinds of changes are expensive, complicated, and would seriously reduce the company’s ability to make a profit. If SeaWorld can’t survive in a marketplace where they are forced to treat their animals humanely, however, then they deserve to fail and need to be shut down.
Read this sentence from the passage.
Orcas are ripped from their homes, separated from their families, sold off to parks around the world (some of which are only loosely regulated), and shoved into tanks that are way too small and contain few if any stimuli for the animals.
Which word in the sentence above best hints at the author’s position on SeaWorld’s treatment of orcas?
Ripped | |
Stimuli | |
World | |
Families |
Question 28 Explanation:
The correct answer is answer choice (A). By using the word “ripped,” the writer creates a negative image in the readers mind. The writer specifically uses words like “ripped” and “shoved” to lead the audience to believe that these orcas are being mistreated. The other choices don’t convey the same negativity as “ripped,” so none of them makes sense as the correct answer.
Once you are finished, click the button below. Any items you have not completed will be marked incorrect.
There are 28 questions to complete.
|
List |