text
stringlengths 3.37k
5.63k
| answer
stringclasses 4
values | requires_line
bool 2
classes | id
stringlengths 25
26
|
|---|---|---|---|
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Taras Grescoe, Straphanger:
Saving Our Cities and Ourselves from the Automobile. ©2012
by Taras Grescoe.
Though there are 600 million cars on the planet,
and counting, there are also seven billion people,
which means that for the vast majority of us getting
around involves taking buses, ferryboats, commuter
trains, streetcars, and subways. In other words,
traveling to work, school, or the market means being
a straphanger: somebody who, by choice or necessity,
relies on public transport, rather than a privately
owned automobile.
Half the population of New York, Toronto, and
London do not own cars. Public transport is how
most of the people of Asia and Africa, the world’s
most populous continents, travel. Every day, subway
systems carry 155 million passengers, thirty-four
times the number carried by all the world’s airplanes,
and the global public transport market is now valued
at $428 billion annually. A century and a half after
the invention of the internal combustion engine,
private car ownership is still an anomaly.
And yet public transportation, in many minds, is
the opposite of glamour—a squalid last resort for
those with one too many impaired driving charges,
too poor to afford insurance, or too decrepit to get
behind the wheel of a car. In much of North
America, they are right: taking transit is a depressing
experience. Anybody who has waited far too long on
a street corner for the privilege of boarding a
lurching, overcrowded bus, or wrestled luggage onto
subways and shuttles to get to a big city airport,
knows that transit on this continent tends to be
underfunded, ill-maintained, and ill-planned. Given
the opportunity, who wouldn’t drive? Hopping in a
car almost always gets you to your destination more
quickly.
It doesn’t have to be like this. Done right, public
transport can be faster, more comfortable, and
cheaper than the private automobile. In Shanghai,
German-made magnetic levitation trains skim over
elevated tracks at 266 miles an hour, whisking people
to the airport at a third of the speed of sound. In
provincial French towns, electric-powered streetcars
run silently on rubber tires, sliding through narrow
streets along a single guide rail set into cobblestones.
From Spain to Sweden, Wi-Fi equipped high-speed
trains seamlessly connect with highly ramified metro
networks, allowing commuters to work on laptops as
they prepare for same-day meetings in once distant
capital cities. In Latin America, China, and India,
working people board fast-loading buses that move
like subway trains along dedicated busways, leaving
the sedans and SUVs of the rich mired in
dawn-to-dusk traffic jams. And some cities have
transformed their streets into cycle-path freeways,
making giant strides in public health and safety and
the sheer livability of their neighborhoods—in the
process turning the workaday bicycle into a viable
form of mass transit.
If you credit the demographers, this transit trend
has legs. The “Millenials,” who reached adulthood
around the turn of the century and now outnumber
baby boomers, tend to favor cities over suburbs, and
are far more willing than their parents to ride buses
and subways. Part of the reason is their ease with
iPads, MP3 players, Kindles, and smartphones: you
can get some serious texting done when you’re not
driving, and earbuds offer effective insulation from
all but the most extreme commuting annoyances.
Even though there are more teenagers in the country
than ever, only ten million have a driver’s license
(versus twelve million a generation ago). Baby
boomers may have been raised in Leave It to Beaver
suburbs, but as they retire, a significant contingent is
favoring older cities and compact towns where they
have the option of walking and riding bikes. Seniors,
too, are more likely to use transit, and by 2025, there
will be 64 million Americans over the age of
sixty-five. Already, dwellings in older neighborhoods
in Washington, D.C., Atlanta, and Denver, especially
those near light-rail or subway stations, are
commanding enormous price premiums over
suburban homes. The experience of European and
Asian cities shows that if you make buses, subways,
and trains convenient, comfortable, fast, and safe, a
surprisingly large percentage of citizens will opt to
ride rather than drive.
Question 17:
As used in line 61, “favor” most nearly means
A) indulge.
B) prefer.
C) resemble.
D) serve.
Answer: | B | true | sat-practice_3-question_17 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Thor Hanson, Feathers.
©2011 by Thor Hanson. Scientists have long debated how
the ancestors of birds evolved the ability to fly. The
ground-up theory assumes they were fleet-footed ground
dwellers that captured prey by leaping and flapping their
upper limbs. The tree-down theory assumes they were tree
climbers that leapt and glided among branches.
At field sites around the world, Ken Dial saw a
pattern in how young pheasants, quail, tinamous,
and other ground birds ran along behind their
parents. “They jumped up like popcorn,” he said,
describing how they would flap their half-formed
wings and take short hops into the air. So when a
group of graduate students challenged him
to come up with new data on the age-old
ground-up-tree-down debate, he designed a project
to see what clues might lie in how baby game birds
learned to fly.
Ken settled on the Chukar Partridge as a
model species, but he might not have made his
discovery without a key piece of advice from the local
rancher in Montana who was supplying him with
birds. When the cowboy stopped by to see how
things were going, Ken showed him his nice, tidy
laboratory setup and explained how the birds’ first
hops and flights would be measured. The rancher
was incredulous. “He took one look and said, in
pretty colorful language, ‘What are those birds doing
on the ground? They hate to be on the ground! Give
them something to climb on!’ ” At first it seemed
unnatural—ground birds don’t like the ground? But
as he thought about it Ken realized that all the
species he’d watched in the wild preferred to rest on
ledges, low branches, or other elevated perches where
they were safe from predators. They really only used
the ground for feeding and traveling. So he brought
in some hay bales for the Chukars to perch on and
then left his son in charge of feeding and data
collection while he went away on a short work trip.
Barely a teenager at the time, young Terry Dial
was visibly upset when his father got back. “I asked
him how it went,” Ken recalled, “and he said,
‘Terrible! The birds are cheating!’ ” Instead of flying
up to their perches, the baby Chukars were using
their legs. Time and again Terry had watched them
run right up the side of a hay bale, flapping all the
while. Ken dashed out to see for himself, and that
was the “aha” moment. “The birds were using their
wings and legs cooperatively,” he told me, and that
single observation opened up a world of possibilities.
Working together with Terry (who has since gone
on to study animal locomotion), Ken came up with a
series of ingenious experiments, filming the birds as
they raced up textured ramps tilted at increasing
angles. As the incline increased, the partridges began
to flap, but they angled their wings differently from
birds in flight. They aimed their flapping down and
backward, using the force not for lift but to keep
their feet firmly pressed against the ramp. “It’s like
the spoiler on the back of a race car,” he explained,
which is a very apt analogy. In Formula One racing,
spoilers are the big aerodynamic fins that push the
cars downward as they speed along, increasing
traction and handling. The birds were doing the very
same thing with their wings to help them scramble
up otherwise impossible slopes.
Ken called the technique WAIR, for wing-assisted
incline running, and went on to document it in a
wide range of species. It not only allowed young
birds to climb vertical surfaces within the first few
weeks of life but also gave adults an energy-efficient
alternative to flying. In the Chukar experiments,
adults regularly used WAIR to ascend ramps steeper
than 90 degrees, essentially running up the wall and
onto the ceiling.
In an evolutionary context, WAIR takes on
surprising explanatory powers. With one fell swoop,
the Dials came up with a viable origin for the
flapping flight stroke of birds (something gliding
animals don’t do and thus a shortcoming of the
tree-down theory) and an aerodynamic function for
half-formed wings (one of the main drawbacks to the
ground-up hypothesis).
Question 22:
As used in line 7, “challenged” most nearly means
A) dared.
B) required.
C) disputed with.
D) competed with.
Answer: | A | true | sat-practice_3-question_22 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Thor Hanson, Feathers.
©2011 by Thor Hanson. Scientists have long debated how
the ancestors of birds evolved the ability to fly. The
ground-up theory assumes they were fleet-footed ground
dwellers that captured prey by leaping and flapping their
upper limbs. The tree-down theory assumes they were tree
climbers that leapt and glided among branches.
At field sites around the world, Ken Dial saw a
pattern in how young pheasants, quail, tinamous,
and other ground birds ran along behind their
parents. “They jumped up like popcorn,” he said,
describing how they would flap their half-formed
wings and take short hops into the air. So when a
group of graduate students challenged him
to come up with new data on the age-old
ground-up-tree-down debate, he designed a project
to see what clues might lie in how baby game birds
learned to fly.
Ken settled on the Chukar Partridge as a
model species, but he might not have made his
discovery without a key piece of advice from the local
rancher in Montana who was supplying him with
birds. When the cowboy stopped by to see how
things were going, Ken showed him his nice, tidy
laboratory setup and explained how the birds’ first
hops and flights would be measured. The rancher
was incredulous. “He took one look and said, in
pretty colorful language, ‘What are those birds doing
on the ground? They hate to be on the ground! Give
them something to climb on!’ ” At first it seemed
unnatural—ground birds don’t like the ground? But
as he thought about it Ken realized that all the
species he’d watched in the wild preferred to rest on
ledges, low branches, or other elevated perches where
they were safe from predators. They really only used
the ground for feeding and traveling. So he brought
in some hay bales for the Chukars to perch on and
then left his son in charge of feeding and data
collection while he went away on a short work trip.
Barely a teenager at the time, young Terry Dial
was visibly upset when his father got back. “I asked
him how it went,” Ken recalled, “and he said,
‘Terrible! The birds are cheating!’ ” Instead of flying
up to their perches, the baby Chukars were using
their legs. Time and again Terry had watched them
run right up the side of a hay bale, flapping all the
while. Ken dashed out to see for himself, and that
was the “aha” moment. “The birds were using their
wings and legs cooperatively,” he told me, and that
single observation opened up a world of possibilities.
Working together with Terry (who has since gone
on to study animal locomotion), Ken came up with a
series of ingenious experiments, filming the birds as
they raced up textured ramps tilted at increasing
angles. As the incline increased, the partridges began
to flap, but they angled their wings differently from
birds in flight. They aimed their flapping down and
backward, using the force not for lift but to keep
their feet firmly pressed against the ramp. “It’s like
the spoiler on the back of a race car,” he explained,
which is a very apt analogy. In Formula One racing,
spoilers are the big aerodynamic fins that push the
cars downward as they speed along, increasing
traction and handling. The birds were doing the very
same thing with their wings to help them scramble
up otherwise impossible slopes.
Ken called the technique WAIR, for wing-assisted
incline running, and went on to document it in a
wide range of species. It not only allowed young
birds to climb vertical surfaces within the first few
weeks of life but also gave adults an energy-efficient
alternative to flying. In the Chukar experiments,
adults regularly used WAIR to ascend ramps steeper
than 90 degrees, essentially running up the wall and
onto the ceiling.
In an evolutionary context, WAIR takes on
surprising explanatory powers. With one fell swoop,
the Dials came up with a viable origin for the
flapping flight stroke of birds (something gliding
animals don’t do and thus a shortcoming of the
tree-down theory) and an aerodynamic function for
half-formed wings (one of the main drawbacks to the
ground-up hypothesis).
Question 23:
Which statement best captures Ken Dial’s central assumption in setting up his research?
A) The acquisition of flight in young birds sheds light on the acquisition of flight in their evolutionary ancestors.
B) The tendency of certain young birds to jump erratically is a somewhat recent evolved behavior.
C) Young birds in a controlled research setting are less likely than birds in the wild to require perches when at rest.
D) Ground-dwelling and tree-climbing predecessors to birds evolved in parallel.
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_3-question_23 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Thor Hanson, Feathers.
©2011 by Thor Hanson. Scientists have long debated how
the ancestors of birds evolved the ability to fly. The
ground-up theory assumes they were fleet-footed ground
dwellers that captured prey by leaping and flapping their
upper limbs. The tree-down theory assumes they were tree
climbers that leapt and glided among branches.
At field sites around the world, Ken Dial saw a
pattern in how young pheasants, quail, tinamous,
and other ground birds ran along behind their
parents. “They jumped up like popcorn,” he said,
describing how they would flap their half-formed
wings and take short hops into the air. So when a
group of graduate students challenged him
to come up with new data on the age-old
ground-up-tree-down debate, he designed a project
to see what clues might lie in how baby game birds
learned to fly.
Ken settled on the Chukar Partridge as a
model species, but he might not have made his
discovery without a key piece of advice from the local
rancher in Montana who was supplying him with
birds. When the cowboy stopped by to see how
things were going, Ken showed him his nice, tidy
laboratory setup and explained how the birds’ first
hops and flights would be measured. The rancher
was incredulous. “He took one look and said, in
pretty colorful language, ‘What are those birds doing
on the ground? They hate to be on the ground! Give
them something to climb on!’ ” At first it seemed
unnatural—ground birds don’t like the ground? But
as he thought about it Ken realized that all the
species he’d watched in the wild preferred to rest on
ledges, low branches, or other elevated perches where
they were safe from predators. They really only used
the ground for feeding and traveling. So he brought
in some hay bales for the Chukars to perch on and
then left his son in charge of feeding and data
collection while he went away on a short work trip.
Barely a teenager at the time, young Terry Dial
was visibly upset when his father got back. “I asked
him how it went,” Ken recalled, “and he said,
‘Terrible! The birds are cheating!’ ” Instead of flying
up to their perches, the baby Chukars were using
their legs. Time and again Terry had watched them
run right up the side of a hay bale, flapping all the
while. Ken dashed out to see for himself, and that
was the “aha” moment. “The birds were using their
wings and legs cooperatively,” he told me, and that
single observation opened up a world of possibilities.
Working together with Terry (who has since gone
on to study animal locomotion), Ken came up with a
series of ingenious experiments, filming the birds as
they raced up textured ramps tilted at increasing
angles. As the incline increased, the partridges began
to flap, but they angled their wings differently from
birds in flight. They aimed their flapping down and
backward, using the force not for lift but to keep
their feet firmly pressed against the ramp. “It’s like
the spoiler on the back of a race car,” he explained,
which is a very apt analogy. In Formula One racing,
spoilers are the big aerodynamic fins that push the
cars downward as they speed along, increasing
traction and handling. The birds were doing the very
same thing with their wings to help them scramble
up otherwise impossible slopes.
Ken called the technique WAIR, for wing-assisted
incline running, and went on to document it in a
wide range of species. It not only allowed young
birds to climb vertical surfaces within the first few
weeks of life but also gave adults an energy-efficient
alternative to flying. In the Chukar experiments,
adults regularly used WAIR to ascend ramps steeper
than 90 degrees, essentially running up the wall and
onto the ceiling.
In an evolutionary context, WAIR takes on
surprising explanatory powers. With one fell swoop,
the Dials came up with a viable origin for the
flapping flight stroke of birds (something gliding
animals don’t do and thus a shortcoming of the
tree-down theory) and an aerodynamic function for
half-formed wings (one of the main drawbacks to the
ground-up hypothesis).
Question 27:
The passage identifies which of the following as a factor that facilitated the baby Chukars’ traction on steep ramps?
A) The speed with which they climbed
B) The position of their flapping wings
C) The alternation of wing and foot movement
D) Their continual hopping motions
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_3-question_27 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Thor Hanson, Feathers.
©2011 by Thor Hanson. Scientists have long debated how
the ancestors of birds evolved the ability to fly. The
ground-up theory assumes they were fleet-footed ground
dwellers that captured prey by leaping and flapping their
upper limbs. The tree-down theory assumes they were tree
climbers that leapt and glided among branches.
At field sites around the world, Ken Dial saw a
pattern in how young pheasants, quail, tinamous,
and other ground birds ran along behind their
parents. “They jumped up like popcorn,” he said,
describing how they would flap their half-formed
wings and take short hops into the air. So when a
group of graduate students challenged him
to come up with new data on the age-old
ground-up-tree-down debate, he designed a project
to see what clues might lie in how baby game birds
learned to fly.
Ken settled on the Chukar Partridge as a
model species, but he might not have made his
discovery without a key piece of advice from the local
rancher in Montana who was supplying him with
birds. When the cowboy stopped by to see how
things were going, Ken showed him his nice, tidy
laboratory setup and explained how the birds’ first
hops and flights would be measured. The rancher
was incredulous. “He took one look and said, in
pretty colorful language, ‘What are those birds doing
on the ground? They hate to be on the ground! Give
them something to climb on!’ ” At first it seemed
unnatural—ground birds don’t like the ground? But
as he thought about it Ken realized that all the
species he’d watched in the wild preferred to rest on
ledges, low branches, or other elevated perches where
they were safe from predators. They really only used
the ground for feeding and traveling. So he brought
in some hay bales for the Chukars to perch on and
then left his son in charge of feeding and data
collection while he went away on a short work trip.
Barely a teenager at the time, young Terry Dial
was visibly upset when his father got back. “I asked
him how it went,” Ken recalled, “and he said,
‘Terrible! The birds are cheating!’ ” Instead of flying
up to their perches, the baby Chukars were using
their legs. Time and again Terry had watched them
run right up the side of a hay bale, flapping all the
while. Ken dashed out to see for himself, and that
was the “aha” moment. “The birds were using their
wings and legs cooperatively,” he told me, and that
single observation opened up a world of possibilities.
Working together with Terry (who has since gone
on to study animal locomotion), Ken came up with a
series of ingenious experiments, filming the birds as
they raced up textured ramps tilted at increasing
angles. As the incline increased, the partridges began
to flap, but they angled their wings differently from
birds in flight. They aimed their flapping down and
backward, using the force not for lift but to keep
their feet firmly pressed against the ramp. “It’s like
the spoiler on the back of a race car,” he explained,
which is a very apt analogy. In Formula One racing,
spoilers are the big aerodynamic fins that push the
cars downward as they speed along, increasing
traction and handling. The birds were doing the very
same thing with their wings to help them scramble
up otherwise impossible slopes.
Ken called the technique WAIR, for wing-assisted
incline running, and went on to document it in a
wide range of species. It not only allowed young
birds to climb vertical surfaces within the first few
weeks of life but also gave adults an energy-efficient
alternative to flying. In the Chukar experiments,
adults regularly used WAIR to ascend ramps steeper
than 90 degrees, essentially running up the wall and
onto the ceiling.
In an evolutionary context, WAIR takes on
surprising explanatory powers. With one fell swoop,
the Dials came up with a viable origin for the
flapping flight stroke of birds (something gliding
animals don’t do and thus a shortcoming of the
tree-down theory) and an aerodynamic function for
half-formed wings (one of the main drawbacks to the
ground-up hypothesis).
Question 25:
In the second paragraph (lines 12-32), the incident involving the local rancher mainly serves to
A) reveal Ken Dial’s motivation for undertaking his project.
B) underscore certain differences between laboratory and field research.
C) show how an unanticipated piece of information influenced Ken Dial’s research.
D) introduce a key contributor to the tree-down theory
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_3-question_25 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Thor Hanson, Feathers.
©2011 by Thor Hanson. Scientists have long debated how
the ancestors of birds evolved the ability to fly. The
ground-up theory assumes they were fleet-footed ground
dwellers that captured prey by leaping and flapping their
upper limbs. The tree-down theory assumes they were tree
climbers that leapt and glided among branches.
At field sites around the world, Ken Dial saw a
pattern in how young pheasants, quail, tinamous,
and other ground birds ran along behind their
parents. “They jumped up like popcorn,” he said,
describing how they would flap their half-formed
wings and take short hops into the air. So when a
group of graduate students challenged him
to come up with new data on the age-old
ground-up-tree-down debate, he designed a project
to see what clues might lie in how baby game birds
learned to fly.
Ken settled on the Chukar Partridge as a
model species, but he might not have made his
discovery without a key piece of advice from the local
rancher in Montana who was supplying him with
birds. When the cowboy stopped by to see how
things were going, Ken showed him his nice, tidy
laboratory setup and explained how the birds’ first
hops and flights would be measured. The rancher
was incredulous. “He took one look and said, in
pretty colorful language, ‘What are those birds doing
on the ground? They hate to be on the ground! Give
them something to climb on!’ ” At first it seemed
unnatural—ground birds don’t like the ground? But
as he thought about it Ken realized that all the
species he’d watched in the wild preferred to rest on
ledges, low branches, or other elevated perches where
they were safe from predators. They really only used
the ground for feeding and traveling. So he brought
in some hay bales for the Chukars to perch on and
then left his son in charge of feeding and data
collection while he went away on a short work trip.
Barely a teenager at the time, young Terry Dial
was visibly upset when his father got back. “I asked
him how it went,” Ken recalled, “and he said,
‘Terrible! The birds are cheating!’ ” Instead of flying
up to their perches, the baby Chukars were using
their legs. Time and again Terry had watched them
run right up the side of a hay bale, flapping all the
while. Ken dashed out to see for himself, and that
was the “aha” moment. “The birds were using their
wings and legs cooperatively,” he told me, and that
single observation opened up a world of possibilities.
Working together with Terry (who has since gone
on to study animal locomotion), Ken came up with a
series of ingenious experiments, filming the birds as
they raced up textured ramps tilted at increasing
angles. As the incline increased, the partridges began
to flap, but they angled their wings differently from
birds in flight. They aimed their flapping down and
backward, using the force not for lift but to keep
their feet firmly pressed against the ramp. “It’s like
the spoiler on the back of a race car,” he explained,
which is a very apt analogy. In Formula One racing,
spoilers are the big aerodynamic fins that push the
cars downward as they speed along, increasing
traction and handling. The birds were doing the very
same thing with their wings to help them scramble
up otherwise impossible slopes.
Ken called the technique WAIR, for wing-assisted
incline running, and went on to document it in a
wide range of species. It not only allowed young
birds to climb vertical surfaces within the first few
weeks of life but also gave adults an energy-efficient
alternative to flying. In the Chukar experiments,
adults regularly used WAIR to ascend ramps steeper
than 90 degrees, essentially running up the wall and
onto the ceiling.
In an evolutionary context, WAIR takes on
surprising explanatory powers. With one fell swoop,
the Dials came up with a viable origin for the
flapping flight stroke of birds (something gliding
animals don’t do and thus a shortcoming of the
tree-down theory) and an aerodynamic function for
half-formed wings (one of the main drawbacks to the
ground-up hypothesis).
Question 21:
Which choice best reflects the overall sequence of events in the passage?
A) An experiment is proposed but proves unworkable; a less ambitious experiment is attempted, and it yields data that give rise to a new set of questions.
B) A new discovery leads to reconsideration of a theory; a classic study is adapted, and the results are summarized.
C) An anomaly is observed and simulated experimentally; the results are compared with previous findings, and a novel hypothesis is proposed.
D) An unexpected finding arises during the early phase of a study; the study is modified in response to this finding, and the results are interpreted and evaluated.
Answer: | D | false | sat-practice_3-question_21 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Thor Hanson, Feathers.
©2011 by Thor Hanson. Scientists have long debated how
the ancestors of birds evolved the ability to fly. The
ground-up theory assumes they were fleet-footed ground
dwellers that captured prey by leaping and flapping their
upper limbs. The tree-down theory assumes they were tree
climbers that leapt and glided among branches.
At field sites around the world, Ken Dial saw a
pattern in how young pheasants, quail, tinamous,
and other ground birds ran along behind their
parents. “They jumped up like popcorn,” he said,
describing how they would flap their half-formed
wings and take short hops into the air. So when a
group of graduate students challenged him
to come up with new data on the age-old
ground-up-tree-down debate, he designed a project
to see what clues might lie in how baby game birds
learned to fly.
Ken settled on the Chukar Partridge as a
model species, but he might not have made his
discovery without a key piece of advice from the local
rancher in Montana who was supplying him with
birds. When the cowboy stopped by to see how
things were going, Ken showed him his nice, tidy
laboratory setup and explained how the birds’ first
hops and flights would be measured. The rancher
was incredulous. “He took one look and said, in
pretty colorful language, ‘What are those birds doing
on the ground? They hate to be on the ground! Give
them something to climb on!’ ” At first it seemed
unnatural—ground birds don’t like the ground? But
as he thought about it Ken realized that all the
species he’d watched in the wild preferred to rest on
ledges, low branches, or other elevated perches where
they were safe from predators. They really only used
the ground for feeding and traveling. So he brought
in some hay bales for the Chukars to perch on and
then left his son in charge of feeding and data
collection while he went away on a short work trip.
Barely a teenager at the time, young Terry Dial
was visibly upset when his father got back. “I asked
him how it went,” Ken recalled, “and he said,
‘Terrible! The birds are cheating!’ ” Instead of flying
up to their perches, the baby Chukars were using
their legs. Time and again Terry had watched them
run right up the side of a hay bale, flapping all the
while. Ken dashed out to see for himself, and that
was the “aha” moment. “The birds were using their
wings and legs cooperatively,” he told me, and that
single observation opened up a world of possibilities.
Working together with Terry (who has since gone
on to study animal locomotion), Ken came up with a
series of ingenious experiments, filming the birds as
they raced up textured ramps tilted at increasing
angles. As the incline increased, the partridges began
to flap, but they angled their wings differently from
birds in flight. They aimed their flapping down and
backward, using the force not for lift but to keep
their feet firmly pressed against the ramp. “It’s like
the spoiler on the back of a race car,” he explained,
which is a very apt analogy. In Formula One racing,
spoilers are the big aerodynamic fins that push the
cars downward as they speed along, increasing
traction and handling. The birds were doing the very
same thing with their wings to help them scramble
up otherwise impossible slopes.
Ken called the technique WAIR, for wing-assisted
incline running, and went on to document it in a
wide range of species. It not only allowed young
birds to climb vertical surfaces within the first few
weeks of life but also gave adults an energy-efficient
alternative to flying. In the Chukar experiments,
adults regularly used WAIR to ascend ramps steeper
than 90 degrees, essentially running up the wall and
onto the ceiling.
In an evolutionary context, WAIR takes on
surprising explanatory powers. With one fell swoop,
the Dials came up with a viable origin for the
flapping flight stroke of birds (something gliding
animals don’t do and thus a shortcoming of the
tree-down theory) and an aerodynamic function for
half-formed wings (one of the main drawbacks to the
ground-up hypothesis).
Question 26:
After Ken Dial had his “‘aha’ moment” (line 41), he
A) tried to train the birds to fly to their perches.
B) studied videos to determine why the birds no longer hopped.
C) observed how the birds dealt with gradually steeper inclines.
D) consulted with other researchers who had studied Chukar Partridges.
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_3-question_26 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Thor Hanson, Feathers.
©2011 by Thor Hanson. Scientists have long debated how
the ancestors of birds evolved the ability to fly. The
ground-up theory assumes they were fleet-footed ground
dwellers that captured prey by leaping and flapping their
upper limbs. The tree-down theory assumes they were tree
climbers that leapt and glided among branches.
At field sites around the world, Ken Dial saw a
pattern in how young pheasants, quail, tinamous,
and other ground birds ran along behind their
parents. “They jumped up like popcorn,” he said,
describing how they would flap their half-formed
wings and take short hops into the air. So when a
group of graduate students challenged him
to come up with new data on the age-old
ground-up-tree-down debate, he designed a project
to see what clues might lie in how baby game birds
learned to fly.
Ken settled on the Chukar Partridge as a
model species, but he might not have made his
discovery without a key piece of advice from the local
rancher in Montana who was supplying him with
birds. When the cowboy stopped by to see how
things were going, Ken showed him his nice, tidy
laboratory setup and explained how the birds’ first
hops and flights would be measured. The rancher
was incredulous. “He took one look and said, in
pretty colorful language, ‘What are those birds doing
on the ground? They hate to be on the ground! Give
them something to climb on!’ ” At first it seemed
unnatural—ground birds don’t like the ground? But
as he thought about it Ken realized that all the
species he’d watched in the wild preferred to rest on
ledges, low branches, or other elevated perches where
they were safe from predators. They really only used
the ground for feeding and traveling. So he brought
in some hay bales for the Chukars to perch on and
then left his son in charge of feeding and data
collection while he went away on a short work trip.
Barely a teenager at the time, young Terry Dial
was visibly upset when his father got back. “I asked
him how it went,” Ken recalled, “and he said,
‘Terrible! The birds are cheating!’ ” Instead of flying
up to their perches, the baby Chukars were using
their legs. Time and again Terry had watched them
run right up the side of a hay bale, flapping all the
while. Ken dashed out to see for himself, and that
was the “aha” moment. “The birds were using their
wings and legs cooperatively,” he told me, and that
single observation opened up a world of possibilities.
Working together with Terry (who has since gone
on to study animal locomotion), Ken came up with a
series of ingenious experiments, filming the birds as
they raced up textured ramps tilted at increasing
angles. As the incline increased, the partridges began
to flap, but they angled their wings differently from
birds in flight. They aimed their flapping down and
backward, using the force not for lift but to keep
their feet firmly pressed against the ramp. “It’s like
the spoiler on the back of a race car,” he explained,
which is a very apt analogy. In Formula One racing,
spoilers are the big aerodynamic fins that push the
cars downward as they speed along, increasing
traction and handling. The birds were doing the very
same thing with their wings to help them scramble
up otherwise impossible slopes.
Ken called the technique WAIR, for wing-assisted
incline running, and went on to document it in a
wide range of species. It not only allowed young
birds to climb vertical surfaces within the first few
weeks of life but also gave adults an energy-efficient
alternative to flying. In the Chukar experiments,
adults regularly used WAIR to ascend ramps steeper
than 90 degrees, essentially running up the wall and
onto the ceiling.
In an evolutionary context, WAIR takes on
surprising explanatory powers. With one fell swoop,
the Dials came up with a viable origin for the
flapping flight stroke of birds (something gliding
animals don’t do and thus a shortcoming of the
tree-down theory) and an aerodynamic function for
half-formed wings (one of the main drawbacks to the
ground-up hypothesis).
Question 28:
As used in line 61, “document” most nearly means
A) portray.
B) record.
C) publish.
D) process.
Answer: | B | true | sat-practice_3-question_28 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Thor Hanson, Feathers.
©2011 by Thor Hanson. Scientists have long debated how
the ancestors of birds evolved the ability to fly. The
ground-up theory assumes they were fleet-footed ground
dwellers that captured prey by leaping and flapping their
upper limbs. The tree-down theory assumes they were tree
climbers that leapt and glided among branches.
At field sites around the world, Ken Dial saw a
pattern in how young pheasants, quail, tinamous,
and other ground birds ran along behind their
parents. “They jumped up like popcorn,” he said,
describing how they would flap their half-formed
wings and take short hops into the air. So when a
group of graduate students challenged him
to come up with new data on the age-old
ground-up-tree-down debate, he designed a project
to see what clues might lie in how baby game birds
learned to fly.
Ken settled on the Chukar Partridge as a
model species, but he might not have made his
discovery without a key piece of advice from the local
rancher in Montana who was supplying him with
birds. When the cowboy stopped by to see how
things were going, Ken showed him his nice, tidy
laboratory setup and explained how the birds’ first
hops and flights would be measured. The rancher
was incredulous. “He took one look and said, in
pretty colorful language, ‘What are those birds doing
on the ground? They hate to be on the ground! Give
them something to climb on!’ ” At first it seemed
unnatural—ground birds don’t like the ground? But
as he thought about it Ken realized that all the
species he’d watched in the wild preferred to rest on
ledges, low branches, or other elevated perches where
they were safe from predators. They really only used
the ground for feeding and traveling. So he brought
in some hay bales for the Chukars to perch on and
then left his son in charge of feeding and data
collection while he went away on a short work trip.
Barely a teenager at the time, young Terry Dial
was visibly upset when his father got back. “I asked
him how it went,” Ken recalled, “and he said,
‘Terrible! The birds are cheating!’ ” Instead of flying
up to their perches, the baby Chukars were using
their legs. Time and again Terry had watched them
run right up the side of a hay bale, flapping all the
while. Ken dashed out to see for himself, and that
was the “aha” moment. “The birds were using their
wings and legs cooperatively,” he told me, and that
single observation opened up a world of possibilities.
Working together with Terry (who has since gone
on to study animal locomotion), Ken came up with a
series of ingenious experiments, filming the birds as
they raced up textured ramps tilted at increasing
angles. As the incline increased, the partridges began
to flap, but they angled their wings differently from
birds in flight. They aimed their flapping down and
backward, using the force not for lift but to keep
their feet firmly pressed against the ramp. “It’s like
the spoiler on the back of a race car,” he explained,
which is a very apt analogy. In Formula One racing,
spoilers are the big aerodynamic fins that push the
cars downward as they speed along, increasing
traction and handling. The birds were doing the very
same thing with their wings to help them scramble
up otherwise impossible slopes.
Ken called the technique WAIR, for wing-assisted
incline running, and went on to document it in a
wide range of species. It not only allowed young
birds to climb vertical surfaces within the first few
weeks of life but also gave adults an energy-efficient
alternative to flying. In the Chukar experiments,
adults regularly used WAIR to ascend ramps steeper
than 90 degrees, essentially running up the wall and
onto the ceiling.
In an evolutionary context, WAIR takes on
surprising explanatory powers. With one fell swoop,
the Dials came up with a viable origin for the
flapping flight stroke of birds (something gliding
animals don’t do and thus a shortcoming of the
tree-down theory) and an aerodynamic function for
half-formed wings (one of the main drawbacks to the
ground-up hypothesis).
Question 29:
What can reasonably be inferred about gliding animals from the passage?
A) Their young tend to hop along beside their parents instead of flying beside them.
B) Their method of locomotion is similar to that of ground birds.
C) They use the ground for feeding more often than for perching.
D) They do not use a flapping stroke to aid in climbing slopes.
Answer: | D | false | sat-practice_3-question_29 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Talleyrand et al., Report on Public
Instruction. Originally published in 1791. Passage 2 is
adapted from Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the
Rights of Woman. Originally published in 1792. Talleyrand
was a French diplomat; the Report was a plan for national
education. Wollstonecraft, a British novelist and political
writer, wrote Vindication in response to Talleyrand.
Passage 1
That half the human race is excluded by the other
half from any participation in government; that they
are native by birth but foreign by law in the very land
where they were born; and that they are
property-owners yet have no direct influence or
representation: are all political phenomena
apparently impossible to explain on abstract
principle. But on another level of ideas, the question
changes and may be easily resolved. The purpose of
all these institutions must be the happiness of the
greatest number. Everything that leads us farther
from this purpose is in error; everything that brings
us closer is truth. If the exclusion from public
employments decreed against women leads to a
greater sum of mutual happiness for the two sexes,
then this becomes a law that all Societies have been
compelled to acknowledge and sanction.
Any other ambition would be a reversal of our
primary destinies; and it will never be in women’s
interest to change the assignment they have received.
It seems to us incontestable that our common
happiness, above all that of women, requires that
they never aspire to the exercise of political rights
and functions. Here we must seek their interests in
the wishes of nature. Is it not apparent, that their
delicate constitutions, their peaceful inclinations, and
the many duties of motherhood, set them apart from
strenuous habits and onerous duties, and summon
them to gentle occupations and the cares of the
home? And is it not evident that the great conserving
principle of Societies, which makes the division of
powers a source of harmony, has been expressed and
revealed by nature itself, when it divided the
functions of the two sexes in so obviously distinct a
manner? This is sufficient; we need not invoke
principles that are inapplicable to the question. Let us
not make rivals of life’s companions. You must, you
truly must allow the persistence of a union that no
interest, no rivalry, can possibly undo. Understand
that the good of all demands this of you.
Passage 2
Contending for the rights of woman, my main
argument is built on this simple principle, that if she
be not prepared by education to become the
companion of man, she will stop the progress of
knowledge and virtue; for truth must be common to
all, or it will be inefficacious with respect to its
influence on general practice. And how can woman
be expected to co-operate unless she know why she
ought to be virtuous? unless freedom strengthen her
reason till she comprehend her duty, and see in what
manner it is connected with her real good? If
children are to be educated to understand the true
principle of patriotism, their mother must be a
patriot; and the love of mankind, from which an
orderly train of virtues spring, can only be produced
by considering the moral and civil interest of
mankind; but the education and situation of woman,
at present, shuts her out from such investigations....
Consider, sir, dispassionately, these
observations—for a glimpse of this truth seemed to
open before you when you observed, “that to see one
half of the human race excluded by the other from all
participation of government, was a political
phenomenon that, according to abstract principles, it
was impossible to explain.” If so, on what does your
constitution rest? If the abstract rights of man will
bear discussion and explanation, those of woman, by
a parity of reasoning, will not shrink from the same
test: though a different opinion prevails in this
country, built on the very arguments which you use
to justify the oppression of woman—prescription.
Consider—I address you as a legislator—
whether, when men contend for their freedom, and
to be allowed to judge for themselves respecting their
own happiness, it be not inconsistent and unjust to
subjugate women, even though you firmly believe
that you are acting in the manner best calculated to
promote their happiness? Who made man the
exclusive judge, if woman partake with him the gift
of reason?
In this style, argue tyrants of every
denomination, from the weak king to the weak
father of a family; they are all eager to crush reason;
yet always assert that they usurp its throne only to be
useful. Do you not act a similar part, when you force
all women, by denying them civil and political rights,
to remain immured in their families groping in
the dark?
Question 36:
In Passage 2, the author claims that freedoms granted by society’s leaders have
A) privileged one gender over the other.
B) resulted in a general reduction in individual virtue.
C) caused arguments about the nature of happiness.
D) ensured equality for all people.
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_3-question_36 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Talleyrand et al., Report on Public
Instruction. Originally published in 1791. Passage 2 is
adapted from Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the
Rights of Woman. Originally published in 1792. Talleyrand
was a French diplomat; the Report was a plan for national
education. Wollstonecraft, a British novelist and political
writer, wrote Vindication in response to Talleyrand.
Passage 1
That half the human race is excluded by the other
half from any participation in government; that they
are native by birth but foreign by law in the very land
where they were born; and that they are
property-owners yet have no direct influence or
representation: are all political phenomena
apparently impossible to explain on abstract
principle. But on another level of ideas, the question
changes and may be easily resolved. The purpose of
all these institutions must be the happiness of the
greatest number. Everything that leads us farther
from this purpose is in error; everything that brings
us closer is truth. If the exclusion from public
employments decreed against women leads to a
greater sum of mutual happiness for the two sexes,
then this becomes a law that all Societies have been
compelled to acknowledge and sanction.
Any other ambition would be a reversal of our
primary destinies; and it will never be in women’s
interest to change the assignment they have received.
It seems to us incontestable that our common
happiness, above all that of women, requires that
they never aspire to the exercise of political rights
and functions. Here we must seek their interests in
the wishes of nature. Is it not apparent, that their
delicate constitutions, their peaceful inclinations, and
the many duties of motherhood, set them apart from
strenuous habits and onerous duties, and summon
them to gentle occupations and the cares of the
home? And is it not evident that the great conserving
principle of Societies, which makes the division of
powers a source of harmony, has been expressed and
revealed by nature itself, when it divided the
functions of the two sexes in so obviously distinct a
manner? This is sufficient; we need not invoke
principles that are inapplicable to the question. Let us
not make rivals of life’s companions. You must, you
truly must allow the persistence of a union that no
interest, no rivalry, can possibly undo. Understand
that the good of all demands this of you.
Passage 2
Contending for the rights of woman, my main
argument is built on this simple principle, that if she
be not prepared by education to become the
companion of man, she will stop the progress of
knowledge and virtue; for truth must be common to
all, or it will be inefficacious with respect to its
influence on general practice. And how can woman
be expected to co-operate unless she know why she
ought to be virtuous? unless freedom strengthen her
reason till she comprehend her duty, and see in what
manner it is connected with her real good? If
children are to be educated to understand the true
principle of patriotism, their mother must be a
patriot; and the love of mankind, from which an
orderly train of virtues spring, can only be produced
by considering the moral and civil interest of
mankind; but the education and situation of woman,
at present, shuts her out from such investigations....
Consider, sir, dispassionately, these
observations—for a glimpse of this truth seemed to
open before you when you observed, “that to see one
half of the human race excluded by the other from all
participation of government, was a political
phenomenon that, according to abstract principles, it
was impossible to explain.” If so, on what does your
constitution rest? If the abstract rights of man will
bear discussion and explanation, those of woman, by
a parity of reasoning, will not shrink from the same
test: though a different opinion prevails in this
country, built on the very arguments which you use
to justify the oppression of woman—prescription.
Consider—I address you as a legislator—
whether, when men contend for their freedom, and
to be allowed to judge for themselves respecting their
own happiness, it be not inconsistent and unjust to
subjugate women, even though you firmly believe
that you are acting in the manner best calculated to
promote their happiness? Who made man the
exclusive judge, if woman partake with him the gift
of reason?
In this style, argue tyrants of every
denomination, from the weak king to the weak
father of a family; they are all eager to crush reason;
yet always assert that they usurp its throne only to be
useful. Do you not act a similar part, when you force
all women, by denying them civil and political rights,
to remain immured in their families groping in
the dark?
Question 41:
How would the authors of Passage 1 most likely respond to the points made in the final paragraph of Passage 2?
A) Women are not naturally suited for the exercise of civil and political rights.
B) Men and women possess similar degrees of reasoning ability.
C) Women do not need to remain confined to their traditional family duties.
D) The principles of natural law should not be invoked when considering gender roles.
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_3-question_41 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Talleyrand et al., Report on Public
Instruction. Originally published in 1791. Passage 2 is
adapted from Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the
Rights of Woman. Originally published in 1792. Talleyrand
was a French diplomat; the Report was a plan for national
education. Wollstonecraft, a British novelist and political
writer, wrote Vindication in response to Talleyrand.
Passage 1
That half the human race is excluded by the other
half from any participation in government; that they
are native by birth but foreign by law in the very land
where they were born; and that they are
property-owners yet have no direct influence or
representation: are all political phenomena
apparently impossible to explain on abstract
principle. But on another level of ideas, the question
changes and may be easily resolved. The purpose of
all these institutions must be the happiness of the
greatest number. Everything that leads us farther
from this purpose is in error; everything that brings
us closer is truth. If the exclusion from public
employments decreed against women leads to a
greater sum of mutual happiness for the two sexes,
then this becomes a law that all Societies have been
compelled to acknowledge and sanction.
Any other ambition would be a reversal of our
primary destinies; and it will never be in women’s
interest to change the assignment they have received.
It seems to us incontestable that our common
happiness, above all that of women, requires that
they never aspire to the exercise of political rights
and functions. Here we must seek their interests in
the wishes of nature. Is it not apparent, that their
delicate constitutions, their peaceful inclinations, and
the many duties of motherhood, set them apart from
strenuous habits and onerous duties, and summon
them to gentle occupations and the cares of the
home? And is it not evident that the great conserving
principle of Societies, which makes the division of
powers a source of harmony, has been expressed and
revealed by nature itself, when it divided the
functions of the two sexes in so obviously distinct a
manner? This is sufficient; we need not invoke
principles that are inapplicable to the question. Let us
not make rivals of life’s companions. You must, you
truly must allow the persistence of a union that no
interest, no rivalry, can possibly undo. Understand
that the good of all demands this of you.
Passage 2
Contending for the rights of woman, my main
argument is built on this simple principle, that if she
be not prepared by education to become the
companion of man, she will stop the progress of
knowledge and virtue; for truth must be common to
all, or it will be inefficacious with respect to its
influence on general practice. And how can woman
be expected to co-operate unless she know why she
ought to be virtuous? unless freedom strengthen her
reason till she comprehend her duty, and see in what
manner it is connected with her real good? If
children are to be educated to understand the true
principle of patriotism, their mother must be a
patriot; and the love of mankind, from which an
orderly train of virtues spring, can only be produced
by considering the moral and civil interest of
mankind; but the education and situation of woman,
at present, shuts her out from such investigations....
Consider, sir, dispassionately, these
observations—for a glimpse of this truth seemed to
open before you when you observed, “that to see one
half of the human race excluded by the other from all
participation of government, was a political
phenomenon that, according to abstract principles, it
was impossible to explain.” If so, on what does your
constitution rest? If the abstract rights of man will
bear discussion and explanation, those of woman, by
a parity of reasoning, will not shrink from the same
test: though a different opinion prevails in this
country, built on the very arguments which you use
to justify the oppression of woman—prescription.
Consider—I address you as a legislator—
whether, when men contend for their freedom, and
to be allowed to judge for themselves respecting their
own happiness, it be not inconsistent and unjust to
subjugate women, even though you firmly believe
that you are acting in the manner best calculated to
promote their happiness? Who made man the
exclusive judge, if woman partake with him the gift
of reason?
In this style, argue tyrants of every
denomination, from the weak king to the weak
father of a family; they are all eager to crush reason;
yet always assert that they usurp its throne only to be
useful. Do you not act a similar part, when you force
all women, by denying them civil and political rights,
to remain immured in their families groping in
the dark?
Question 35:
As used in line 50, “reason” most nearly means
A) motive.
B) sanity.
C) intellect.
D) explanation.
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_3-question_35 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Talleyrand et al., Report on Public
Instruction. Originally published in 1791. Passage 2 is
adapted from Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the
Rights of Woman. Originally published in 1792. Talleyrand
was a French diplomat; the Report was a plan for national
education. Wollstonecraft, a British novelist and political
writer, wrote Vindication in response to Talleyrand.
Passage 1
That half the human race is excluded by the other
half from any participation in government; that they
are native by birth but foreign by law in the very land
where they were born; and that they are
property-owners yet have no direct influence or
representation: are all political phenomena
apparently impossible to explain on abstract
principle. But on another level of ideas, the question
changes and may be easily resolved. The purpose of
all these institutions must be the happiness of the
greatest number. Everything that leads us farther
from this purpose is in error; everything that brings
us closer is truth. If the exclusion from public
employments decreed against women leads to a
greater sum of mutual happiness for the two sexes,
then this becomes a law that all Societies have been
compelled to acknowledge and sanction.
Any other ambition would be a reversal of our
primary destinies; and it will never be in women’s
interest to change the assignment they have received.
It seems to us incontestable that our common
happiness, above all that of women, requires that
they never aspire to the exercise of political rights
and functions. Here we must seek their interests in
the wishes of nature. Is it not apparent, that their
delicate constitutions, their peaceful inclinations, and
the many duties of motherhood, set them apart from
strenuous habits and onerous duties, and summon
them to gentle occupations and the cares of the
home? And is it not evident that the great conserving
principle of Societies, which makes the division of
powers a source of harmony, has been expressed and
revealed by nature itself, when it divided the
functions of the two sexes in so obviously distinct a
manner? This is sufficient; we need not invoke
principles that are inapplicable to the question. Let us
not make rivals of life’s companions. You must, you
truly must allow the persistence of a union that no
interest, no rivalry, can possibly undo. Understand
that the good of all demands this of you.
Passage 2
Contending for the rights of woman, my main
argument is built on this simple principle, that if she
be not prepared by education to become the
companion of man, she will stop the progress of
knowledge and virtue; for truth must be common to
all, or it will be inefficacious with respect to its
influence on general practice. And how can woman
be expected to co-operate unless she know why she
ought to be virtuous? unless freedom strengthen her
reason till she comprehend her duty, and see in what
manner it is connected with her real good? If
children are to be educated to understand the true
principle of patriotism, their mother must be a
patriot; and the love of mankind, from which an
orderly train of virtues spring, can only be produced
by considering the moral and civil interest of
mankind; but the education and situation of woman,
at present, shuts her out from such investigations....
Consider, sir, dispassionately, these
observations—for a glimpse of this truth seemed to
open before you when you observed, “that to see one
half of the human race excluded by the other from all
participation of government, was a political
phenomenon that, according to abstract principles, it
was impossible to explain.” If so, on what does your
constitution rest? If the abstract rights of man will
bear discussion and explanation, those of woman, by
a parity of reasoning, will not shrink from the same
test: though a different opinion prevails in this
country, built on the very arguments which you use
to justify the oppression of woman—prescription.
Consider—I address you as a legislator—
whether, when men contend for their freedom, and
to be allowed to judge for themselves respecting their
own happiness, it be not inconsistent and unjust to
subjugate women, even though you firmly believe
that you are acting in the manner best calculated to
promote their happiness? Who made man the
exclusive judge, if woman partake with him the gift
of reason?
In this style, argue tyrants of every
denomination, from the weak king to the weak
father of a family; they are all eager to crush reason;
yet always assert that they usurp its throne only to be
useful. Do you not act a similar part, when you force
all women, by denying them civil and political rights,
to remain immured in their families groping in
the dark?
Question 40:
The authors of both passages would most likely agree with which of the following statements about women in the eighteenth century?
A) Their natural preferences were the same as those of men.
B) They needed a good education to be successful in society.
C) They were just as happy in life as men were.
D) They generally enjoyed fewer rights than men did.
Answer: | D | false | sat-practice_3-question_40 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Talleyrand et al., Report on Public
Instruction. Originally published in 1791. Passage 2 is
adapted from Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the
Rights of Woman. Originally published in 1792. Talleyrand
was a French diplomat; the Report was a plan for national
education. Wollstonecraft, a British novelist and political
writer, wrote Vindication in response to Talleyrand.
Passage 1
That half the human race is excluded by the other
half from any participation in government; that they
are native by birth but foreign by law in the very land
where they were born; and that they are
property-owners yet have no direct influence or
representation: are all political phenomena
apparently impossible to explain on abstract
principle. But on another level of ideas, the question
changes and may be easily resolved. The purpose of
all these institutions must be the happiness of the
greatest number. Everything that leads us farther
from this purpose is in error; everything that brings
us closer is truth. If the exclusion from public
employments decreed against women leads to a
greater sum of mutual happiness for the two sexes,
then this becomes a law that all Societies have been
compelled to acknowledge and sanction.
Any other ambition would be a reversal of our
primary destinies; and it will never be in women’s
interest to change the assignment they have received.
It seems to us incontestable that our common
happiness, above all that of women, requires that
they never aspire to the exercise of political rights
and functions. Here we must seek their interests in
the wishes of nature. Is it not apparent, that their
delicate constitutions, their peaceful inclinations, and
the many duties of motherhood, set them apart from
strenuous habits and onerous duties, and summon
them to gentle occupations and the cares of the
home? And is it not evident that the great conserving
principle of Societies, which makes the division of
powers a source of harmony, has been expressed and
revealed by nature itself, when it divided the
functions of the two sexes in so obviously distinct a
manner? This is sufficient; we need not invoke
principles that are inapplicable to the question. Let us
not make rivals of life’s companions. You must, you
truly must allow the persistence of a union that no
interest, no rivalry, can possibly undo. Understand
that the good of all demands this of you.
Passage 2
Contending for the rights of woman, my main
argument is built on this simple principle, that if she
be not prepared by education to become the
companion of man, she will stop the progress of
knowledge and virtue; for truth must be common to
all, or it will be inefficacious with respect to its
influence on general practice. And how can woman
be expected to co-operate unless she know why she
ought to be virtuous? unless freedom strengthen her
reason till she comprehend her duty, and see in what
manner it is connected with her real good? If
children are to be educated to understand the true
principle of patriotism, their mother must be a
patriot; and the love of mankind, from which an
orderly train of virtues spring, can only be produced
by considering the moral and civil interest of
mankind; but the education and situation of woman,
at present, shuts her out from such investigations....
Consider, sir, dispassionately, these
observations—for a glimpse of this truth seemed to
open before you when you observed, “that to see one
half of the human race excluded by the other from all
participation of government, was a political
phenomenon that, according to abstract principles, it
was impossible to explain.” If so, on what does your
constitution rest? If the abstract rights of man will
bear discussion and explanation, those of woman, by
a parity of reasoning, will not shrink from the same
test: though a different opinion prevails in this
country, built on the very arguments which you use
to justify the oppression of woman—prescription.
Consider—I address you as a legislator—
whether, when men contend for their freedom, and
to be allowed to judge for themselves respecting their
own happiness, it be not inconsistent and unjust to
subjugate women, even though you firmly believe
that you are acting in the manner best calculated to
promote their happiness? Who made man the
exclusive judge, if woman partake with him the gift
of reason?
In this style, argue tyrants of every
denomination, from the weak king to the weak
father of a family; they are all eager to crush reason;
yet always assert that they usurp its throne only to be
useful. Do you not act a similar part, when you force
all women, by denying them civil and political rights,
to remain immured in their families groping in
the dark?
Question 39:
Which best describes the overall relationship between Passage 1 and Passage 2?
A) Passage 2 strongly challenges the point of view in Passage 1.
B) Passage 2 draws alternative conclusions from the evidence presented in Passage 1.
C) Passage 2 elaborates on the proposal presented in Passage 1.
D) Passage 2 restates in different terms the argument presented in Passage 1.
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_3-question_39 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Talleyrand et al., Report on Public
Instruction. Originally published in 1791. Passage 2 is
adapted from Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the
Rights of Woman. Originally published in 1792. Talleyrand
was a French diplomat; the Report was a plan for national
education. Wollstonecraft, a British novelist and political
writer, wrote Vindication in response to Talleyrand.
Passage 1
That half the human race is excluded by the other
half from any participation in government; that they
are native by birth but foreign by law in the very land
where they were born; and that they are
property-owners yet have no direct influence or
representation: are all political phenomena
apparently impossible to explain on abstract
principle. But on another level of ideas, the question
changes and may be easily resolved. The purpose of
all these institutions must be the happiness of the
greatest number. Everything that leads us farther
from this purpose is in error; everything that brings
us closer is truth. If the exclusion from public
employments decreed against women leads to a
greater sum of mutual happiness for the two sexes,
then this becomes a law that all Societies have been
compelled to acknowledge and sanction.
Any other ambition would be a reversal of our
primary destinies; and it will never be in women’s
interest to change the assignment they have received.
It seems to us incontestable that our common
happiness, above all that of women, requires that
they never aspire to the exercise of political rights
and functions. Here we must seek their interests in
the wishes of nature. Is it not apparent, that their
delicate constitutions, their peaceful inclinations, and
the many duties of motherhood, set them apart from
strenuous habits and onerous duties, and summon
them to gentle occupations and the cares of the
home? And is it not evident that the great conserving
principle of Societies, which makes the division of
powers a source of harmony, has been expressed and
revealed by nature itself, when it divided the
functions of the two sexes in so obviously distinct a
manner? This is sufficient; we need not invoke
principles that are inapplicable to the question. Let us
not make rivals of life’s companions. You must, you
truly must allow the persistence of a union that no
interest, no rivalry, can possibly undo. Understand
that the good of all demands this of you.
Passage 2
Contending for the rights of woman, my main
argument is built on this simple principle, that if she
be not prepared by education to become the
companion of man, she will stop the progress of
knowledge and virtue; for truth must be common to
all, or it will be inefficacious with respect to its
influence on general practice. And how can woman
be expected to co-operate unless she know why she
ought to be virtuous? unless freedom strengthen her
reason till she comprehend her duty, and see in what
manner it is connected with her real good? If
children are to be educated to understand the true
principle of patriotism, their mother must be a
patriot; and the love of mankind, from which an
orderly train of virtues spring, can only be produced
by considering the moral and civil interest of
mankind; but the education and situation of woman,
at present, shuts her out from such investigations....
Consider, sir, dispassionately, these
observations—for a glimpse of this truth seemed to
open before you when you observed, “that to see one
half of the human race excluded by the other from all
participation of government, was a political
phenomenon that, according to abstract principles, it
was impossible to explain.” If so, on what does your
constitution rest? If the abstract rights of man will
bear discussion and explanation, those of woman, by
a parity of reasoning, will not shrink from the same
test: though a different opinion prevails in this
country, built on the very arguments which you use
to justify the oppression of woman—prescription.
Consider—I address you as a legislator—
whether, when men contend for their freedom, and
to be allowed to judge for themselves respecting their
own happiness, it be not inconsistent and unjust to
subjugate women, even though you firmly believe
that you are acting in the manner best calculated to
promote their happiness? Who made man the
exclusive judge, if woman partake with him the gift
of reason?
In this style, argue tyrants of every
denomination, from the weak king to the weak
father of a family; they are all eager to crush reason;
yet always assert that they usurp its throne only to be
useful. Do you not act a similar part, when you force
all women, by denying them civil and political rights,
to remain immured in their families groping in
the dark?
Question 38:
In lines 61-65, the author of Passage 2 refers to a statement made in Passage 1 in order to
A) call into question the qualifications of the authors of Passage 1 regarding gender issues.
B) dispute the assertion made about women in the first sentence of Passage 1.
C) develop her argument by highlighting what she sees as flawed reasoning in Passage 1.
D) validate the concluding declarations made by the authors of Passage 1 about gender roles.
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_3-question_38 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Talleyrand et al., Report on Public
Instruction. Originally published in 1791. Passage 2 is
adapted from Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the
Rights of Woman. Originally published in 1792. Talleyrand
was a French diplomat; the Report was a plan for national
education. Wollstonecraft, a British novelist and political
writer, wrote Vindication in response to Talleyrand.
Passage 1
That half the human race is excluded by the other
half from any participation in government; that they
are native by birth but foreign by law in the very land
where they were born; and that they are
property-owners yet have no direct influence or
representation: are all political phenomena
apparently impossible to explain on abstract
principle. But on another level of ideas, the question
changes and may be easily resolved. The purpose of
all these institutions must be the happiness of the
greatest number. Everything that leads us farther
from this purpose is in error; everything that brings
us closer is truth. If the exclusion from public
employments decreed against women leads to a
greater sum of mutual happiness for the two sexes,
then this becomes a law that all Societies have been
compelled to acknowledge and sanction.
Any other ambition would be a reversal of our
primary destinies; and it will never be in women’s
interest to change the assignment they have received.
It seems to us incontestable that our common
happiness, above all that of women, requires that
they never aspire to the exercise of political rights
and functions. Here we must seek their interests in
the wishes of nature. Is it not apparent, that their
delicate constitutions, their peaceful inclinations, and
the many duties of motherhood, set them apart from
strenuous habits and onerous duties, and summon
them to gentle occupations and the cares of the
home? And is it not evident that the great conserving
principle of Societies, which makes the division of
powers a source of harmony, has been expressed and
revealed by nature itself, when it divided the
functions of the two sexes in so obviously distinct a
manner? This is sufficient; we need not invoke
principles that are inapplicable to the question. Let us
not make rivals of life’s companions. You must, you
truly must allow the persistence of a union that no
interest, no rivalry, can possibly undo. Understand
that the good of all demands this of you.
Passage 2
Contending for the rights of woman, my main
argument is built on this simple principle, that if she
be not prepared by education to become the
companion of man, she will stop the progress of
knowledge and virtue; for truth must be common to
all, or it will be inefficacious with respect to its
influence on general practice. And how can woman
be expected to co-operate unless she know why she
ought to be virtuous? unless freedom strengthen her
reason till she comprehend her duty, and see in what
manner it is connected with her real good? If
children are to be educated to understand the true
principle of patriotism, their mother must be a
patriot; and the love of mankind, from which an
orderly train of virtues spring, can only be produced
by considering the moral and civil interest of
mankind; but the education and situation of woman,
at present, shuts her out from such investigations....
Consider, sir, dispassionately, these
observations—for a glimpse of this truth seemed to
open before you when you observed, “that to see one
half of the human race excluded by the other from all
participation of government, was a political
phenomenon that, according to abstract principles, it
was impossible to explain.” If so, on what does your
constitution rest? If the abstract rights of man will
bear discussion and explanation, those of woman, by
a parity of reasoning, will not shrink from the same
test: though a different opinion prevails in this
country, built on the very arguments which you use
to justify the oppression of woman—prescription.
Consider—I address you as a legislator—
whether, when men contend for their freedom, and
to be allowed to judge for themselves respecting their
own happiness, it be not inconsistent and unjust to
subjugate women, even though you firmly believe
that you are acting in the manner best calculated to
promote their happiness? Who made man the
exclusive judge, if woman partake with him the gift
of reason?
In this style, argue tyrants of every
denomination, from the weak king to the weak
father of a family; they are all eager to crush reason;
yet always assert that they usurp its throne only to be
useful. Do you not act a similar part, when you force
all women, by denying them civil and political rights,
to remain immured in their families groping in
the dark?
Question 34:
According to the author of Passage 2, in order for society to progress, women must
A) enjoy personal happiness and financial security.
B) follow all currently prescribed social rules.
C) replace men as figures of power and authority.
D) receive an education comparable to that of men.
Answer: | D | false | sat-practice_3-question_34 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Talleyrand et al., Report on Public
Instruction. Originally published in 1791. Passage 2 is
adapted from Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the
Rights of Woman. Originally published in 1792. Talleyrand
was a French diplomat; the Report was a plan for national
education. Wollstonecraft, a British novelist and political
writer, wrote Vindication in response to Talleyrand.
Passage 1
That half the human race is excluded by the other
half from any participation in government; that they
are native by birth but foreign by law in the very land
where they were born; and that they are
property-owners yet have no direct influence or
representation: are all political phenomena
apparently impossible to explain on abstract
principle. But on another level of ideas, the question
changes and may be easily resolved. The purpose of
all these institutions must be the happiness of the
greatest number. Everything that leads us farther
from this purpose is in error; everything that brings
us closer is truth. If the exclusion from public
employments decreed against women leads to a
greater sum of mutual happiness for the two sexes,
then this becomes a law that all Societies have been
compelled to acknowledge and sanction.
Any other ambition would be a reversal of our
primary destinies; and it will never be in women’s
interest to change the assignment they have received.
It seems to us incontestable that our common
happiness, above all that of women, requires that
they never aspire to the exercise of political rights
and functions. Here we must seek their interests in
the wishes of nature. Is it not apparent, that their
delicate constitutions, their peaceful inclinations, and
the many duties of motherhood, set them apart from
strenuous habits and onerous duties, and summon
them to gentle occupations and the cares of the
home? And is it not evident that the great conserving
principle of Societies, which makes the division of
powers a source of harmony, has been expressed and
revealed by nature itself, when it divided the
functions of the two sexes in so obviously distinct a
manner? This is sufficient; we need not invoke
principles that are inapplicable to the question. Let us
not make rivals of life’s companions. You must, you
truly must allow the persistence of a union that no
interest, no rivalry, can possibly undo. Understand
that the good of all demands this of you.
Passage 2
Contending for the rights of woman, my main
argument is built on this simple principle, that if she
be not prepared by education to become the
companion of man, she will stop the progress of
knowledge and virtue; for truth must be common to
all, or it will be inefficacious with respect to its
influence on general practice. And how can woman
be expected to co-operate unless she know why she
ought to be virtuous? unless freedom strengthen her
reason till she comprehend her duty, and see in what
manner it is connected with her real good? If
children are to be educated to understand the true
principle of patriotism, their mother must be a
patriot; and the love of mankind, from which an
orderly train of virtues spring, can only be produced
by considering the moral and civil interest of
mankind; but the education and situation of woman,
at present, shuts her out from such investigations....
Consider, sir, dispassionately, these
observations—for a glimpse of this truth seemed to
open before you when you observed, “that to see one
half of the human race excluded by the other from all
participation of government, was a political
phenomenon that, according to abstract principles, it
was impossible to explain.” If so, on what does your
constitution rest? If the abstract rights of man will
bear discussion and explanation, those of woman, by
a parity of reasoning, will not shrink from the same
test: though a different opinion prevails in this
country, built on the very arguments which you use
to justify the oppression of woman—prescription.
Consider—I address you as a legislator—
whether, when men contend for their freedom, and
to be allowed to judge for themselves respecting their
own happiness, it be not inconsistent and unjust to
subjugate women, even though you firmly believe
that you are acting in the manner best calculated to
promote their happiness? Who made man the
exclusive judge, if woman partake with him the gift
of reason?
In this style, argue tyrants of every
denomination, from the weak king to the weak
father of a family; they are all eager to crush reason;
yet always assert that they usurp its throne only to be
useful. Do you not act a similar part, when you force
all women, by denying them civil and political rights,
to remain immured in their families groping in
the dark?
Question 31:
As used in line 21, “common” most nearly means
A) average.
B) shared.
C) coarse.
D) similar.
Answer: | B | true | sat-practice_3-question_31 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Talleyrand et al., Report on Public
Instruction. Originally published in 1791. Passage 2 is
adapted from Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the
Rights of Woman. Originally published in 1792. Talleyrand
was a French diplomat; the Report was a plan for national
education. Wollstonecraft, a British novelist and political
writer, wrote Vindication in response to Talleyrand.
Passage 1
That half the human race is excluded by the other
half from any participation in government; that they
are native by birth but foreign by law in the very land
where they were born; and that they are
property-owners yet have no direct influence or
representation: are all political phenomena
apparently impossible to explain on abstract
principle. But on another level of ideas, the question
changes and may be easily resolved. The purpose of
all these institutions must be the happiness of the
greatest number. Everything that leads us farther
from this purpose is in error; everything that brings
us closer is truth. If the exclusion from public
employments decreed against women leads to a
greater sum of mutual happiness for the two sexes,
then this becomes a law that all Societies have been
compelled to acknowledge and sanction.
Any other ambition would be a reversal of our
primary destinies; and it will never be in women’s
interest to change the assignment they have received.
It seems to us incontestable that our common
happiness, above all that of women, requires that
they never aspire to the exercise of political rights
and functions. Here we must seek their interests in
the wishes of nature. Is it not apparent, that their
delicate constitutions, their peaceful inclinations, and
the many duties of motherhood, set them apart from
strenuous habits and onerous duties, and summon
them to gentle occupations and the cares of the
home? And is it not evident that the great conserving
principle of Societies, which makes the division of
powers a source of harmony, has been expressed and
revealed by nature itself, when it divided the
functions of the two sexes in so obviously distinct a
manner? This is sufficient; we need not invoke
principles that are inapplicable to the question. Let us
not make rivals of life’s companions. You must, you
truly must allow the persistence of a union that no
interest, no rivalry, can possibly undo. Understand
that the good of all demands this of you.
Passage 2
Contending for the rights of woman, my main
argument is built on this simple principle, that if she
be not prepared by education to become the
companion of man, she will stop the progress of
knowledge and virtue; for truth must be common to
all, or it will be inefficacious with respect to its
influence on general practice. And how can woman
be expected to co-operate unless she know why she
ought to be virtuous? unless freedom strengthen her
reason till she comprehend her duty, and see in what
manner it is connected with her real good? If
children are to be educated to understand the true
principle of patriotism, their mother must be a
patriot; and the love of mankind, from which an
orderly train of virtues spring, can only be produced
by considering the moral and civil interest of
mankind; but the education and situation of woman,
at present, shuts her out from such investigations....
Consider, sir, dispassionately, these
observations—for a glimpse of this truth seemed to
open before you when you observed, “that to see one
half of the human race excluded by the other from all
participation of government, was a political
phenomenon that, according to abstract principles, it
was impossible to explain.” If so, on what does your
constitution rest? If the abstract rights of man will
bear discussion and explanation, those of woman, by
a parity of reasoning, will not shrink from the same
test: though a different opinion prevails in this
country, built on the very arguments which you use
to justify the oppression of woman—prescription.
Consider—I address you as a legislator—
whether, when men contend for their freedom, and
to be allowed to judge for themselves respecting their
own happiness, it be not inconsistent and unjust to
subjugate women, even though you firmly believe
that you are acting in the manner best calculated to
promote their happiness? Who made man the
exclusive judge, if woman partake with him the gift
of reason?
In this style, argue tyrants of every
denomination, from the weak king to the weak
father of a family; they are all eager to crush reason;
yet always assert that they usurp its throne only to be
useful. Do you not act a similar part, when you force
all women, by denying them civil and political rights,
to remain immured in their families groping in
the dark?
Question 32:
It can be inferred that the authors of Passage 1 believe that running a household and raising children
A) are rewarding for men as well as for women.
B) yield less value for society than do the roles performed by men.
C) entail very few activities that are difficult or unpleasant.
D) require skills similar to those needed to run a country or a business.
Answer: | C | false | sat-practice_3-question_32 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Richard J. Sharpe and Lisa
Heyden, “Honey Bee Colony Collapse Disorder is Possibly
Caused by a Dietary Pyrethrum Deficiency.” ©2009 by
Elsevier Ltd. Colony collapse disorder is characterized by the
disappearance of adult worker bees from hives.
Honey bees are hosts to the pathogenic large
ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor (Varroa mites).
These mites feed on bee hemolymph (blood) and can
kill bees directly or by increasing their susceptibility
to secondary infection with fungi, bacteria or viruses.
Little is known about the natural defenses that keep
the mite infections under control.
Pyrethrums are a group of flowering plants which
include Chrysanthemum coccineum, Chrysanthemum
cinerariifolium, Chrysanthemum marschalli, and
related species. These plants produce potent
insecticides with anti-mite activity. The naturally
occurring insecticides are known as pyrethrums.
A synonym for the naturally occurring pyrethrums is
pyrethrin and synthetic analogues of pyrethrums are
known as pyrethroids. In fact, the human mite
infestation known as scabies (Sarcoptes scabiei) is
treated with a topical pyrethrum cream.
We suspect that the bees of commercial bee
colonies which are fed mono-crops are nutritionally
deficient. In particular, we postulate that the problem
is a diet deficient in anti-mite toxins: pyrethrums,
and possibly other nutrients which are inherent in
such plants. Without, at least, intermittent feeding on
the pyrethrum producing plants, bee colonies are
susceptible to mite infestations which can become
fatal either directly or due to a secondary infection of
immunocompromised or nutritionally deficient bees.
This secondary infection can be viral, bacterial or
fungal and may be due to one or more pathogens.
In addition, immunocompromised or nutritionally
deficient bees may be further weakened when
commercially produced insecticides are introduced
into their hives by bee keepers in an effort to fight
mite infestation. We further postulate that the proper
dosage necessary to prevent mite infestation may be
better left to the bees, who may seek out or avoid
pyrethrum containing plants depending on the
amount necessary to defend against mites and the
amount already consumed by the bees, which in
higher doses could be potentially toxic to them.
This hypothesis can best be tested by a trial
wherein a small number of commercial honey bee
colonies are offered a number of pyrethrum
producing plants, as well as a typical bee food source
such as clover, while controls are offered only the
clover. Mites could then be introduced to each hive
with note made as to the choice of the bees, and the
effects of the mite parasites on the experimental
colonies versus control colonies.
It might be beneficial to test wild-type honey bee
colonies in this manner as well, in case there could be
some genetic difference between them that affects the
bees’ preferences for pyrethrum producing flowers.
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}
\hline & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{$\begin{gathered}\text { Percent of colonies affected by } \\
\text { pathogen }\end{gathered}$} \\
\hline \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{ Pathogen } & $\begin{gathered}\text { Colonies with } \\
\text { colony collapse } \\
\text { disorder (\%) }\end{gathered}$ & $\begin{gathered}\text { Colonies without } \\
\text { colony collapse } \\
\text { disorder (\%) }\end{gathered}$ \\
\hline Viruses \\
IAPV & 83 & 5 \\
KBV & 100 & 76 \\
\hline Fungi \\
Nosema apis & 90 & 48 \\
Nosema ceranae & 100 & 81 \\
\hline All four pathogens & 77 & 0 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
Question 45:
The passage most strongly suggests that beekeepers’ attempts to fight mite infestations with commercially produced insecticides have what unintentional effect?
A) They increase certain mite populations.
B) They kill some beneficial forms of bacteria.
C) They destroy bees’ primary food source.
D) They further harm the health of some bees.
Answer: | D | false | sat-practice_3-question_45 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Richard J. Sharpe and Lisa
Heyden, “Honey Bee Colony Collapse Disorder is Possibly
Caused by a Dietary Pyrethrum Deficiency.” ©2009 by
Elsevier Ltd. Colony collapse disorder is characterized by the
disappearance of adult worker bees from hives.
Honey bees are hosts to the pathogenic large
ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor (Varroa mites).
These mites feed on bee hemolymph (blood) and can
kill bees directly or by increasing their susceptibility
to secondary infection with fungi, bacteria or viruses.
Little is known about the natural defenses that keep
the mite infections under control.
Pyrethrums are a group of flowering plants which
include Chrysanthemum coccineum, Chrysanthemum
cinerariifolium, Chrysanthemum marschalli, and
related species. These plants produce potent
insecticides with anti-mite activity. The naturally
occurring insecticides are known as pyrethrums.
A synonym for the naturally occurring pyrethrums is
pyrethrin and synthetic analogues of pyrethrums are
known as pyrethroids. In fact, the human mite
infestation known as scabies (Sarcoptes scabiei) is
treated with a topical pyrethrum cream.
We suspect that the bees of commercial bee
colonies which are fed mono-crops are nutritionally
deficient. In particular, we postulate that the problem
is a diet deficient in anti-mite toxins: pyrethrums,
and possibly other nutrients which are inherent in
such plants. Without, at least, intermittent feeding on
the pyrethrum producing plants, bee colonies are
susceptible to mite infestations which can become
fatal either directly or due to a secondary infection of
immunocompromised or nutritionally deficient bees.
This secondary infection can be viral, bacterial or
fungal and may be due to one or more pathogens.
In addition, immunocompromised or nutritionally
deficient bees may be further weakened when
commercially produced insecticides are introduced
into their hives by bee keepers in an effort to fight
mite infestation. We further postulate that the proper
dosage necessary to prevent mite infestation may be
better left to the bees, who may seek out or avoid
pyrethrum containing plants depending on the
amount necessary to defend against mites and the
amount already consumed by the bees, which in
higher doses could be potentially toxic to them.
This hypothesis can best be tested by a trial
wherein a small number of commercial honey bee
colonies are offered a number of pyrethrum
producing plants, as well as a typical bee food source
such as clover, while controls are offered only the
clover. Mites could then be introduced to each hive
with note made as to the choice of the bees, and the
effects of the mite parasites on the experimental
colonies versus control colonies.
It might be beneficial to test wild-type honey bee
colonies in this manner as well, in case there could be
some genetic difference between them that affects the
bees’ preferences for pyrethrum producing flowers.
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}
\hline & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{$\begin{gathered}\text { Percent of colonies affected by } \\
\text { pathogen }\end{gathered}$} \\
\hline \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{ Pathogen } & $\begin{gathered}\text { Colonies with } \\
\text { colony collapse } \\
\text { disorder (\%) }\end{gathered}$ & $\begin{gathered}\text { Colonies without } \\
\text { colony collapse } \\
\text { disorder (\%) }\end{gathered}$ \\
\hline Viruses \\
IAPV & 83 & 5 \\
KBV & 100 & 76 \\
\hline Fungi \\
Nosema apis & 90 & 48 \\
Nosema ceranae & 100 & 81 \\
\hline All four pathogens & 77 & 0 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
Question 49:
An unstated assumption made by the authors about clover is that the plants
A) do not produce pyrethrums.
B) are members of the Chrysanthemum genus.
C) are usually located near wild-type honeybee colonies.
D) will not be a good food source for honeybees in the control colonies.
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_3-question_49 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Richard J. Sharpe and Lisa
Heyden, “Honey Bee Colony Collapse Disorder is Possibly
Caused by a Dietary Pyrethrum Deficiency.” ©2009 by
Elsevier Ltd. Colony collapse disorder is characterized by the
disappearance of adult worker bees from hives.
Honey bees are hosts to the pathogenic large
ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor (Varroa mites).
These mites feed on bee hemolymph (blood) and can
kill bees directly or by increasing their susceptibility
to secondary infection with fungi, bacteria or viruses.
Little is known about the natural defenses that keep
the mite infections under control.
Pyrethrums are a group of flowering plants which
include Chrysanthemum coccineum, Chrysanthemum
cinerariifolium, Chrysanthemum marschalli, and
related species. These plants produce potent
insecticides with anti-mite activity. The naturally
occurring insecticides are known as pyrethrums.
A synonym for the naturally occurring pyrethrums is
pyrethrin and synthetic analogues of pyrethrums are
known as pyrethroids. In fact, the human mite
infestation known as scabies (Sarcoptes scabiei) is
treated with a topical pyrethrum cream.
We suspect that the bees of commercial bee
colonies which are fed mono-crops are nutritionally
deficient. In particular, we postulate that the problem
is a diet deficient in anti-mite toxins: pyrethrums,
and possibly other nutrients which are inherent in
such plants. Without, at least, intermittent feeding on
the pyrethrum producing plants, bee colonies are
susceptible to mite infestations which can become
fatal either directly or due to a secondary infection of
immunocompromised or nutritionally deficient bees.
This secondary infection can be viral, bacterial or
fungal and may be due to one or more pathogens.
In addition, immunocompromised or nutritionally
deficient bees may be further weakened when
commercially produced insecticides are introduced
into their hives by bee keepers in an effort to fight
mite infestation. We further postulate that the proper
dosage necessary to prevent mite infestation may be
better left to the bees, who may seek out or avoid
pyrethrum containing plants depending on the
amount necessary to defend against mites and the
amount already consumed by the bees, which in
higher doses could be potentially toxic to them.
This hypothesis can best be tested by a trial
wherein a small number of commercial honey bee
colonies are offered a number of pyrethrum
producing plants, as well as a typical bee food source
such as clover, while controls are offered only the
clover. Mites could then be introduced to each hive
with note made as to the choice of the bees, and the
effects of the mite parasites on the experimental
colonies versus control colonies.
It might be beneficial to test wild-type honey bee
colonies in this manner as well, in case there could be
some genetic difference between them that affects the
bees’ preferences for pyrethrum producing flowers.
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}
\hline & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{$\begin{gathered}\text { Percent of colonies affected by } \\
\text { pathogen }\end{gathered}$} \\
\hline \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{ Pathogen } & $\begin{gathered}\text { Colonies with } \\
\text { colony collapse } \\
\text { disorder (\%) }\end{gathered}$ & $\begin{gathered}\text { Colonies without } \\
\text { colony collapse } \\
\text { disorder (\%) }\end{gathered}$ \\
\hline Viruses \\
IAPV & 83 & 5 \\
KBV & 100 & 76 \\
\hline Fungi \\
Nosema apis & 90 & 48 \\
Nosema ceranae & 100 & 81 \\
\hline All four pathogens & 77 & 0 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
Question 47:
As used in line 35, “postulate” most nearly means to
A) make an unfounded assumption.
B) put forth an idea or claim.
C) question a belief or theory.
D) conclude based on firm evidence.
Answer: | B | true | sat-practice_3-question_47 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Richard J. Sharpe and Lisa
Heyden, “Honey Bee Colony Collapse Disorder is Possibly
Caused by a Dietary Pyrethrum Deficiency.” ©2009 by
Elsevier Ltd. Colony collapse disorder is characterized by the
disappearance of adult worker bees from hives.
Honey bees are hosts to the pathogenic large
ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor (Varroa mites).
These mites feed on bee hemolymph (blood) and can
kill bees directly or by increasing their susceptibility
to secondary infection with fungi, bacteria or viruses.
Little is known about the natural defenses that keep
the mite infections under control.
Pyrethrums are a group of flowering plants which
include Chrysanthemum coccineum, Chrysanthemum
cinerariifolium, Chrysanthemum marschalli, and
related species. These plants produce potent
insecticides with anti-mite activity. The naturally
occurring insecticides are known as pyrethrums.
A synonym for the naturally occurring pyrethrums is
pyrethrin and synthetic analogues of pyrethrums are
known as pyrethroids. In fact, the human mite
infestation known as scabies (Sarcoptes scabiei) is
treated with a topical pyrethrum cream.
We suspect that the bees of commercial bee
colonies which are fed mono-crops are nutritionally
deficient. In particular, we postulate that the problem
is a diet deficient in anti-mite toxins: pyrethrums,
and possibly other nutrients which are inherent in
such plants. Without, at least, intermittent feeding on
the pyrethrum producing plants, bee colonies are
susceptible to mite infestations which can become
fatal either directly or due to a secondary infection of
immunocompromised or nutritionally deficient bees.
This secondary infection can be viral, bacterial or
fungal and may be due to one or more pathogens.
In addition, immunocompromised or nutritionally
deficient bees may be further weakened when
commercially produced insecticides are introduced
into their hives by bee keepers in an effort to fight
mite infestation. We further postulate that the proper
dosage necessary to prevent mite infestation may be
better left to the bees, who may seek out or avoid
pyrethrum containing plants depending on the
amount necessary to defend against mites and the
amount already consumed by the bees, which in
higher doses could be potentially toxic to them.
This hypothesis can best be tested by a trial
wherein a small number of commercial honey bee
colonies are offered a number of pyrethrum
producing plants, as well as a typical bee food source
such as clover, while controls are offered only the
clover. Mites could then be introduced to each hive
with note made as to the choice of the bees, and the
effects of the mite parasites on the experimental
colonies versus control colonies.
It might be beneficial to test wild-type honey bee
colonies in this manner as well, in case there could be
some genetic difference between them that affects the
bees’ preferences for pyrethrum producing flowers.
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}
\hline & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{$\begin{gathered}\text { Percent of colonies affected by } \\
\text { pathogen }\end{gathered}$} \\
\hline \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{ Pathogen } & $\begin{gathered}\text { Colonies with } \\
\text { colony collapse } \\
\text { disorder (\%) }\end{gathered}$ & $\begin{gathered}\text { Colonies without } \\
\text { colony collapse } \\
\text { disorder (\%) }\end{gathered}$ \\
\hline Viruses \\
IAPV & 83 & 5 \\
KBV & 100 & 76 \\
\hline Fungi \\
Nosema apis & 90 & 48 \\
Nosema ceranae & 100 & 81 \\
\hline All four pathogens & 77 & 0 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
Question 43:
In line 42, the authors state that a certain hypothesis “can best be tested by a trial.” Based on the passage, which of the following is a hypothesis the authors suggest be tested in a trial?
A) Honeybees that are exposed to both pyrethrums and mites are likely to develop a secondary infection by a virus, a bacterium, or a fungus.
B) Beekeepers who feed their honeybee colonies a diet of a single crop need to increase the use of insecticides to prevent mite infestations.
C) A honeybee diet that includes pyrethrums results in honeybee colonies that are more resistant to mite infestations.
D) Humans are more susceptible to varroa mites as a result of consuming nutritionally deficient food crops.
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_3-question_43 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Richard J. Sharpe and Lisa
Heyden, “Honey Bee Colony Collapse Disorder is Possibly
Caused by a Dietary Pyrethrum Deficiency.” ©2009 by
Elsevier Ltd. Colony collapse disorder is characterized by the
disappearance of adult worker bees from hives.
Honey bees are hosts to the pathogenic large
ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor (Varroa mites).
These mites feed on bee hemolymph (blood) and can
kill bees directly or by increasing their susceptibility
to secondary infection with fungi, bacteria or viruses.
Little is known about the natural defenses that keep
the mite infections under control.
Pyrethrums are a group of flowering plants which
include Chrysanthemum coccineum, Chrysanthemum
cinerariifolium, Chrysanthemum marschalli, and
related species. These plants produce potent
insecticides with anti-mite activity. The naturally
occurring insecticides are known as pyrethrums.
A synonym for the naturally occurring pyrethrums is
pyrethrin and synthetic analogues of pyrethrums are
known as pyrethroids. In fact, the human mite
infestation known as scabies (Sarcoptes scabiei) is
treated with a topical pyrethrum cream.
We suspect that the bees of commercial bee
colonies which are fed mono-crops are nutritionally
deficient. In particular, we postulate that the problem
is a diet deficient in anti-mite toxins: pyrethrums,
and possibly other nutrients which are inherent in
such plants. Without, at least, intermittent feeding on
the pyrethrum producing plants, bee colonies are
susceptible to mite infestations which can become
fatal either directly or due to a secondary infection of
immunocompromised or nutritionally deficient bees.
This secondary infection can be viral, bacterial or
fungal and may be due to one or more pathogens.
In addition, immunocompromised or nutritionally
deficient bees may be further weakened when
commercially produced insecticides are introduced
into their hives by bee keepers in an effort to fight
mite infestation. We further postulate that the proper
dosage necessary to prevent mite infestation may be
better left to the bees, who may seek out or avoid
pyrethrum containing plants depending on the
amount necessary to defend against mites and the
amount already consumed by the bees, which in
higher doses could be potentially toxic to them.
This hypothesis can best be tested by a trial
wherein a small number of commercial honey bee
colonies are offered a number of pyrethrum
producing plants, as well as a typical bee food source
such as clover, while controls are offered only the
clover. Mites could then be introduced to each hive
with note made as to the choice of the bees, and the
effects of the mite parasites on the experimental
colonies versus control colonies.
It might be beneficial to test wild-type honey bee
colonies in this manner as well, in case there could be
some genetic difference between them that affects the
bees’ preferences for pyrethrum producing flowers.
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}
\hline & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{$\begin{gathered}\text { Percent of colonies affected by } \\
\text { pathogen }\end{gathered}$} \\
\hline \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{ Pathogen } & $\begin{gathered}\text { Colonies with } \\
\text { colony collapse } \\
\text { disorder (\%) }\end{gathered}$ & $\begin{gathered}\text { Colonies without } \\
\text { colony collapse } \\
\text { disorder (\%) }\end{gathered}$ \\
\hline Viruses \\
IAPV & 83 & 5 \\
KBV & 100 & 76 \\
\hline Fungi \\
Nosema apis & 90 & 48 \\
Nosema ceranae & 100 & 81 \\
\hline All four pathogens & 77 & 0 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
Question 48:
The main purpose of the fourth paragraph (lines 42-50) is to
A) summarize the results of an experiment that confirmed the authors’ hypothesis about the role of clover in the diets of wild-type honeybees.
B) propose an experiment to investigate how different diets affect commercial honeybee colonies’ susceptibility to mite infestations.
C) provide a comparative nutritional analysis of the honey produced by the experimental colonies and by the control colonies.
D) predict the most likely outcome of an unfinished experiment summarized in the third paragraph (lines 19-41).
Answer: | B | true | sat-practice_3-question_48 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Richard J. Sharpe and Lisa
Heyden, “Honey Bee Colony Collapse Disorder is Possibly
Caused by a Dietary Pyrethrum Deficiency.” ©2009 by
Elsevier Ltd. Colony collapse disorder is characterized by the
disappearance of adult worker bees from hives.
Honey bees are hosts to the pathogenic large
ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor (Varroa mites).
These mites feed on bee hemolymph (blood) and can
kill bees directly or by increasing their susceptibility
to secondary infection with fungi, bacteria or viruses.
Little is known about the natural defenses that keep
the mite infections under control.
Pyrethrums are a group of flowering plants which
include Chrysanthemum coccineum, Chrysanthemum
cinerariifolium, Chrysanthemum marschalli, and
related species. These plants produce potent
insecticides with anti-mite activity. The naturally
occurring insecticides are known as pyrethrums.
A synonym for the naturally occurring pyrethrums is
pyrethrin and synthetic analogues of pyrethrums are
known as pyrethroids. In fact, the human mite
infestation known as scabies (Sarcoptes scabiei) is
treated with a topical pyrethrum cream.
We suspect that the bees of commercial bee
colonies which are fed mono-crops are nutritionally
deficient. In particular, we postulate that the problem
is a diet deficient in anti-mite toxins: pyrethrums,
and possibly other nutrients which are inherent in
such plants. Without, at least, intermittent feeding on
the pyrethrum producing plants, bee colonies are
susceptible to mite infestations which can become
fatal either directly or due to a secondary infection of
immunocompromised or nutritionally deficient bees.
This secondary infection can be viral, bacterial or
fungal and may be due to one or more pathogens.
In addition, immunocompromised or nutritionally
deficient bees may be further weakened when
commercially produced insecticides are introduced
into their hives by bee keepers in an effort to fight
mite infestation. We further postulate that the proper
dosage necessary to prevent mite infestation may be
better left to the bees, who may seek out or avoid
pyrethrum containing plants depending on the
amount necessary to defend against mites and the
amount already consumed by the bees, which in
higher doses could be potentially toxic to them.
This hypothesis can best be tested by a trial
wherein a small number of commercial honey bee
colonies are offered a number of pyrethrum
producing plants, as well as a typical bee food source
such as clover, while controls are offered only the
clover. Mites could then be introduced to each hive
with note made as to the choice of the bees, and the
effects of the mite parasites on the experimental
colonies versus control colonies.
It might be beneficial to test wild-type honey bee
colonies in this manner as well, in case there could be
some genetic difference between them that affects the
bees’ preferences for pyrethrum producing flowers.
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}
\hline & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{$\begin{gathered}\text { Percent of colonies affected by } \\
\text { pathogen }\end{gathered}$} \\
\hline \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{ Pathogen } & $\begin{gathered}\text { Colonies with } \\
\text { colony collapse } \\
\text { disorder (\%) }\end{gathered}$ & $\begin{gathered}\text { Colonies without } \\
\text { colony collapse } \\
\text { disorder (\%) }\end{gathered}$ \\
\hline Viruses \\
IAPV & 83 & 5 \\
KBV & 100 & 76 \\
\hline Fungi \\
Nosema apis & 90 & 48 \\
Nosema ceranae & 100 & 81 \\
\hline All four pathogens & 77 & 0 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
Question 42:
How do the words “can,” “may,” and “could” in the third paragraph (lines 19-41) help establish the tone of the paragraph?
A) They create an optimistic tone that makes clear the authors are hopeful about the effects of their research on colony collapse disorder.
B) They create a dubious tone that makes clear the authors do not have confidence in the usefulness of the research described.
C) They create a tentative tone that makes clear the authors suspect but do not know that their hypothesis is correct.
D) They create a critical tone that makes clear the authors are skeptical of claims that pyrethrums are inherent in mono-crops.
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_3-question_42 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from MacDonald Harris,
The Balloonist. ©2011 by The Estate of Donald Heiney.
During the summer of 1897, the narrator of this story, a
fictional Swedish scientist, has set out for the North Pole
in a hydrogen-powered balloon.
My emotions are complicated and not
readily verifiable. I feel a vast yearning that is
simultaneously a pleasure and a pain. I am certain
of the consummation of this yearning, but I don’t
know yet what form it will take, since I do not
understand quite what it is that the yearning desires.
For the first time there is borne in upon me the full
truth of what I myself said to the doctor only an hour
ago: that my motives in this undertaking are not
entirely clear. For years, for a lifetime, the machinery
of my destiny has worked in secret to prepare for this
moment; its clockwork has moved exactly toward
this time and place and no other. Rising slowly from
the earth that bore me and gave me sustenance, I am
carried helplessly toward an uninhabited and hostile,
or at best indifferent, part of the earth, littered with
the bones of explorers and the wrecks of ships, frozen
supply caches, messages scrawled with chilled fingers
and hidden in cairns that no eye will ever see.
Nobody has succeeded in this thing, and many have
died. Yet in freely willing this enterprise, in choosing
this moment and no other when the south wind
will carry me exactly northward at a velocity of
eight knots, I have converted the machinery of my
fate into the servant of my will. All this I understand,
as I understand each detail of the technique by which
this is carried out. What I don’t understand is why I
am so intent on going to this particular place. Who
wants the North Pole! What good is it! Can you eat
it? Will it carry you from Gothenburg to Malmö like
a railway? The Danish ministers have declared from
their pulpits that participation in polar expeditions is
beneficial to the soul’s eternal well-being, or so I read
in a newspaper. It isn’t clear how this doctrine is to
be interpreted, except that the Pole is something
difficult or impossible to attain which must
nevertheless be sought for, because man is
condemned to seek out and know everything
whether or not the knowledge gives him pleasure. In
short, it is the same unthinking lust for knowledge
that drove our First Parents out of the garden.
And suppose you were to find it in spite of all, this
wonderful place that everybody is so anxious to stand
on! What would you find? Exactly nothing.
A point precisely identical to all the others in a
completely featureless wasteland stretching around it
for hundreds of miles. It is an abstraction, a
mathematical fiction. No one but a Swedish madman
could take the slightest interest in it. Here I am. The
wind is still from the south, bearing us steadily
northward at the speed of a trotting dog. Behind us,
perhaps forever, lie the Cities of Men with their
teacups and their brass bedsteads. I am going forth of
my own volition to join the ghosts of Bering and
poor Franklin, of frozen De Long and his men.
What I am on the brink of knowing, I now see, is not
an ephemeral mathematical spot but myself. The
doctor was right, even though I dislike him.
Fundamentally I am a dangerous madman, and what
I do is both a challenge to my egotism and a
surrender to it.
Question 10:
As used in line 50, “bearing” most nearly means
A) carrying.
B) affecting.
C) yielding.
D) enduring.
Answer: | A | true | sat-practice_4-question_10 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from MacDonald Harris,
The Balloonist. ©2011 by The Estate of Donald Heiney.
During the summer of 1897, the narrator of this story, a
fictional Swedish scientist, has set out for the North Pole
in a hydrogen-powered balloon.
My emotions are complicated and not
readily verifiable. I feel a vast yearning that is
simultaneously a pleasure and a pain. I am certain
of the consummation of this yearning, but I don’t
know yet what form it will take, since I do not
understand quite what it is that the yearning desires.
For the first time there is borne in upon me the full
truth of what I myself said to the doctor only an hour
ago: that my motives in this undertaking are not
entirely clear. For years, for a lifetime, the machinery
of my destiny has worked in secret to prepare for this
moment; its clockwork has moved exactly toward
this time and place and no other. Rising slowly from
the earth that bore me and gave me sustenance, I am
carried helplessly toward an uninhabited and hostile,
or at best indifferent, part of the earth, littered with
the bones of explorers and the wrecks of ships, frozen
supply caches, messages scrawled with chilled fingers
and hidden in cairns that no eye will ever see.
Nobody has succeeded in this thing, and many have
died. Yet in freely willing this enterprise, in choosing
this moment and no other when the south wind
will carry me exactly northward at a velocity of
eight knots, I have converted the machinery of my
fate into the servant of my will. All this I understand,
as I understand each detail of the technique by which
this is carried out. What I don’t understand is why I
am so intent on going to this particular place. Who
wants the North Pole! What good is it! Can you eat
it? Will it carry you from Gothenburg to Malmö like
a railway? The Danish ministers have declared from
their pulpits that participation in polar expeditions is
beneficial to the soul’s eternal well-being, or so I read
in a newspaper. It isn’t clear how this doctrine is to
be interpreted, except that the Pole is something
difficult or impossible to attain which must
nevertheless be sought for, because man is
condemned to seek out and know everything
whether or not the knowledge gives him pleasure. In
short, it is the same unthinking lust for knowledge
that drove our First Parents out of the garden.
And suppose you were to find it in spite of all, this
wonderful place that everybody is so anxious to stand
on! What would you find? Exactly nothing.
A point precisely identical to all the others in a
completely featureless wasteland stretching around it
for hundreds of miles. It is an abstraction, a
mathematical fiction. No one but a Swedish madman
could take the slightest interest in it. Here I am. The
wind is still from the south, bearing us steadily
northward at the speed of a trotting dog. Behind us,
perhaps forever, lie the Cities of Men with their
teacups and their brass bedsteads. I am going forth of
my own volition to join the ghosts of Bering and
poor Franklin, of frozen De Long and his men.
What I am on the brink of knowing, I now see, is not
an ephemeral mathematical spot but myself. The
doctor was right, even though I dislike him.
Fundamentally I am a dangerous madman, and what
I do is both a challenge to my egotism and a
surrender to it.
Question 1:
Over the course of the passage, the narrator’s attitude shifts from
A) fear about the expedition to excitement about it.
B) doubt about his abilities to confidence in them.
C) uncertainty of his motives to recognition of them.
D) disdain for the North Pole to appreciation of it.
Answer: | C | false | sat-practice_4-question_1 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from MacDonald Harris,
The Balloonist. ©2011 by The Estate of Donald Heiney.
During the summer of 1897, the narrator of this story, a
fictional Swedish scientist, has set out for the North Pole
in a hydrogen-powered balloon.
My emotions are complicated and not
readily verifiable. I feel a vast yearning that is
simultaneously a pleasure and a pain. I am certain
of the consummation of this yearning, but I don’t
know yet what form it will take, since I do not
understand quite what it is that the yearning desires.
For the first time there is borne in upon me the full
truth of what I myself said to the doctor only an hour
ago: that my motives in this undertaking are not
entirely clear. For years, for a lifetime, the machinery
of my destiny has worked in secret to prepare for this
moment; its clockwork has moved exactly toward
this time and place and no other. Rising slowly from
the earth that bore me and gave me sustenance, I am
carried helplessly toward an uninhabited and hostile,
or at best indifferent, part of the earth, littered with
the bones of explorers and the wrecks of ships, frozen
supply caches, messages scrawled with chilled fingers
and hidden in cairns that no eye will ever see.
Nobody has succeeded in this thing, and many have
died. Yet in freely willing this enterprise, in choosing
this moment and no other when the south wind
will carry me exactly northward at a velocity of
eight knots, I have converted the machinery of my
fate into the servant of my will. All this I understand,
as I understand each detail of the technique by which
this is carried out. What I don’t understand is why I
am so intent on going to this particular place. Who
wants the North Pole! What good is it! Can you eat
it? Will it carry you from Gothenburg to Malmö like
a railway? The Danish ministers have declared from
their pulpits that participation in polar expeditions is
beneficial to the soul’s eternal well-being, or so I read
in a newspaper. It isn’t clear how this doctrine is to
be interpreted, except that the Pole is something
difficult or impossible to attain which must
nevertheless be sought for, because man is
condemned to seek out and know everything
whether or not the knowledge gives him pleasure. In
short, it is the same unthinking lust for knowledge
that drove our First Parents out of the garden.
And suppose you were to find it in spite of all, this
wonderful place that everybody is so anxious to stand
on! What would you find? Exactly nothing.
A point precisely identical to all the others in a
completely featureless wasteland stretching around it
for hundreds of miles. It is an abstraction, a
mathematical fiction. No one but a Swedish madman
could take the slightest interest in it. Here I am. The
wind is still from the south, bearing us steadily
northward at the speed of a trotting dog. Behind us,
perhaps forever, lie the Cities of Men with their
teacups and their brass bedsteads. I am going forth of
my own volition to join the ghosts of Bering and
poor Franklin, of frozen De Long and his men.
What I am on the brink of knowing, I now see, is not
an ephemeral mathematical spot but myself. The
doctor was right, even though I dislike him.
Fundamentally I am a dangerous madman, and what
I do is both a challenge to my egotism and a
surrender to it.
Question 3:
As used in lines 1-2, “not readily verifiable” most nearly means
A) unable to be authenticated.
B) likely to be contradicted.
C) without empirical support.
D) not completely understood.
Answer: | D | true | sat-practice_4-question_3 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from MacDonald Harris,
The Balloonist. ©2011 by The Estate of Donald Heiney.
During the summer of 1897, the narrator of this story, a
fictional Swedish scientist, has set out for the North Pole
in a hydrogen-powered balloon.
My emotions are complicated and not
readily verifiable. I feel a vast yearning that is
simultaneously a pleasure and a pain. I am certain
of the consummation of this yearning, but I don’t
know yet what form it will take, since I do not
understand quite what it is that the yearning desires.
For the first time there is borne in upon me the full
truth of what I myself said to the doctor only an hour
ago: that my motives in this undertaking are not
entirely clear. For years, for a lifetime, the machinery
of my destiny has worked in secret to prepare for this
moment; its clockwork has moved exactly toward
this time and place and no other. Rising slowly from
the earth that bore me and gave me sustenance, I am
carried helplessly toward an uninhabited and hostile,
or at best indifferent, part of the earth, littered with
the bones of explorers and the wrecks of ships, frozen
supply caches, messages scrawled with chilled fingers
and hidden in cairns that no eye will ever see.
Nobody has succeeded in this thing, and many have
died. Yet in freely willing this enterprise, in choosing
this moment and no other when the south wind
will carry me exactly northward at a velocity of
eight knots, I have converted the machinery of my
fate into the servant of my will. All this I understand,
as I understand each detail of the technique by which
this is carried out. What I don’t understand is why I
am so intent on going to this particular place. Who
wants the North Pole! What good is it! Can you eat
it? Will it carry you from Gothenburg to Malmö like
a railway? The Danish ministers have declared from
their pulpits that participation in polar expeditions is
beneficial to the soul’s eternal well-being, or so I read
in a newspaper. It isn’t clear how this doctrine is to
be interpreted, except that the Pole is something
difficult or impossible to attain which must
nevertheless be sought for, because man is
condemned to seek out and know everything
whether or not the knowledge gives him pleasure. In
short, it is the same unthinking lust for knowledge
that drove our First Parents out of the garden.
And suppose you were to find it in spite of all, this
wonderful place that everybody is so anxious to stand
on! What would you find? Exactly nothing.
A point precisely identical to all the others in a
completely featureless wasteland stretching around it
for hundreds of miles. It is an abstraction, a
mathematical fiction. No one but a Swedish madman
could take the slightest interest in it. Here I am. The
wind is still from the south, bearing us steadily
northward at the speed of a trotting dog. Behind us,
perhaps forever, lie the Cities of Men with their
teacups and their brass bedsteads. I am going forth of
my own volition to join the ghosts of Bering and
poor Franklin, of frozen De Long and his men.
What I am on the brink of knowing, I now see, is not
an ephemeral mathematical spot but myself. The
doctor was right, even though I dislike him.
Fundamentally I am a dangerous madman, and what
I do is both a challenge to my egotism and a
surrender to it.
Question 4:
The sentence in lines 10-13 (“For years... other”) mainly serves to
A) expose a side of the narrator that he prefers to keep hidden.
B) demonstrate that the narrator thinks in a methodical and scientific manner.
C) show that the narrator feels himself to be influenced by powerful and independent forces.
D) emphasize the length of time during which the narrator has prepared for his expedition.
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_4-question_4 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from MacDonald Harris,
The Balloonist. ©2011 by The Estate of Donald Heiney.
During the summer of 1897, the narrator of this story, a
fictional Swedish scientist, has set out for the North Pole
in a hydrogen-powered balloon.
My emotions are complicated and not
readily verifiable. I feel a vast yearning that is
simultaneously a pleasure and a pain. I am certain
of the consummation of this yearning, but I don’t
know yet what form it will take, since I do not
understand quite what it is that the yearning desires.
For the first time there is borne in upon me the full
truth of what I myself said to the doctor only an hour
ago: that my motives in this undertaking are not
entirely clear. For years, for a lifetime, the machinery
of my destiny has worked in secret to prepare for this
moment; its clockwork has moved exactly toward
this time and place and no other. Rising slowly from
the earth that bore me and gave me sustenance, I am
carried helplessly toward an uninhabited and hostile,
or at best indifferent, part of the earth, littered with
the bones of explorers and the wrecks of ships, frozen
supply caches, messages scrawled with chilled fingers
and hidden in cairns that no eye will ever see.
Nobody has succeeded in this thing, and many have
died. Yet in freely willing this enterprise, in choosing
this moment and no other when the south wind
will carry me exactly northward at a velocity of
eight knots, I have converted the machinery of my
fate into the servant of my will. All this I understand,
as I understand each detail of the technique by which
this is carried out. What I don’t understand is why I
am so intent on going to this particular place. Who
wants the North Pole! What good is it! Can you eat
it? Will it carry you from Gothenburg to Malmö like
a railway? The Danish ministers have declared from
their pulpits that participation in polar expeditions is
beneficial to the soul’s eternal well-being, or so I read
in a newspaper. It isn’t clear how this doctrine is to
be interpreted, except that the Pole is something
difficult or impossible to attain which must
nevertheless be sought for, because man is
condemned to seek out and know everything
whether or not the knowledge gives him pleasure. In
short, it is the same unthinking lust for knowledge
that drove our First Parents out of the garden.
And suppose you were to find it in spite of all, this
wonderful place that everybody is so anxious to stand
on! What would you find? Exactly nothing.
A point precisely identical to all the others in a
completely featureless wasteland stretching around it
for hundreds of miles. It is an abstraction, a
mathematical fiction. No one but a Swedish madman
could take the slightest interest in it. Here I am. The
wind is still from the south, bearing us steadily
northward at the speed of a trotting dog. Behind us,
perhaps forever, lie the Cities of Men with their
teacups and their brass bedsteads. I am going forth of
my own volition to join the ghosts of Bering and
poor Franklin, of frozen De Long and his men.
What I am on the brink of knowing, I now see, is not
an ephemeral mathematical spot but myself. The
doctor was right, even though I dislike him.
Fundamentally I am a dangerous madman, and what
I do is both a challenge to my egotism and a
surrender to it.
Question 7:
Which choice best describes the narrator’s view of his expedition to the North Pole?
A) Immoral but inevitable
B) Absurd but necessary
C) Socially beneficial but misunderstood
D) Scientifically important but hazardous
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_4-question_7 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from MacDonald Harris,
The Balloonist. ©2011 by The Estate of Donald Heiney.
During the summer of 1897, the narrator of this story, a
fictional Swedish scientist, has set out for the North Pole
in a hydrogen-powered balloon.
My emotions are complicated and not
readily verifiable. I feel a vast yearning that is
simultaneously a pleasure and a pain. I am certain
of the consummation of this yearning, but I don’t
know yet what form it will take, since I do not
understand quite what it is that the yearning desires.
For the first time there is borne in upon me the full
truth of what I myself said to the doctor only an hour
ago: that my motives in this undertaking are not
entirely clear. For years, for a lifetime, the machinery
of my destiny has worked in secret to prepare for this
moment; its clockwork has moved exactly toward
this time and place and no other. Rising slowly from
the earth that bore me and gave me sustenance, I am
carried helplessly toward an uninhabited and hostile,
or at best indifferent, part of the earth, littered with
the bones of explorers and the wrecks of ships, frozen
supply caches, messages scrawled with chilled fingers
and hidden in cairns that no eye will ever see.
Nobody has succeeded in this thing, and many have
died. Yet in freely willing this enterprise, in choosing
this moment and no other when the south wind
will carry me exactly northward at a velocity of
eight knots, I have converted the machinery of my
fate into the servant of my will. All this I understand,
as I understand each detail of the technique by which
this is carried out. What I don’t understand is why I
am so intent on going to this particular place. Who
wants the North Pole! What good is it! Can you eat
it? Will it carry you from Gothenburg to Malmö like
a railway? The Danish ministers have declared from
their pulpits that participation in polar expeditions is
beneficial to the soul’s eternal well-being, or so I read
in a newspaper. It isn’t clear how this doctrine is to
be interpreted, except that the Pole is something
difficult or impossible to attain which must
nevertheless be sought for, because man is
condemned to seek out and know everything
whether or not the knowledge gives him pleasure. In
short, it is the same unthinking lust for knowledge
that drove our First Parents out of the garden.
And suppose you were to find it in spite of all, this
wonderful place that everybody is so anxious to stand
on! What would you find? Exactly nothing.
A point precisely identical to all the others in a
completely featureless wasteland stretching around it
for hundreds of miles. It is an abstraction, a
mathematical fiction. No one but a Swedish madman
could take the slightest interest in it. Here I am. The
wind is still from the south, bearing us steadily
northward at the speed of a trotting dog. Behind us,
perhaps forever, lie the Cities of Men with their
teacups and their brass bedsteads. I am going forth of
my own volition to join the ghosts of Bering and
poor Franklin, of frozen De Long and his men.
What I am on the brink of knowing, I now see, is not
an ephemeral mathematical spot but myself. The
doctor was right, even though I dislike him.
Fundamentally I am a dangerous madman, and what
I do is both a challenge to my egotism and a
surrender to it.
Question 8:
The question the narrator asks in lines 30-31 (“Will it... railway”) most nearly implies that
A) balloons will never replace other modes of transportation.
B) the North Pole is farther away than the cities usually reached by train.
C) people often travel from one city to another without considering the implications.
D) reaching the North Pole has no foreseeable benefit to humanity.
Answer: | D | true | sat-practice_4-question_8 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from MacDonald Harris,
The Balloonist. ©2011 by The Estate of Donald Heiney.
During the summer of 1897, the narrator of this story, a
fictional Swedish scientist, has set out for the North Pole
in a hydrogen-powered balloon.
My emotions are complicated and not
readily verifiable. I feel a vast yearning that is
simultaneously a pleasure and a pain. I am certain
of the consummation of this yearning, but I don’t
know yet what form it will take, since I do not
understand quite what it is that the yearning desires.
For the first time there is borne in upon me the full
truth of what I myself said to the doctor only an hour
ago: that my motives in this undertaking are not
entirely clear. For years, for a lifetime, the machinery
of my destiny has worked in secret to prepare for this
moment; its clockwork has moved exactly toward
this time and place and no other. Rising slowly from
the earth that bore me and gave me sustenance, I am
carried helplessly toward an uninhabited and hostile,
or at best indifferent, part of the earth, littered with
the bones of explorers and the wrecks of ships, frozen
supply caches, messages scrawled with chilled fingers
and hidden in cairns that no eye will ever see.
Nobody has succeeded in this thing, and many have
died. Yet in freely willing this enterprise, in choosing
this moment and no other when the south wind
will carry me exactly northward at a velocity of
eight knots, I have converted the machinery of my
fate into the servant of my will. All this I understand,
as I understand each detail of the technique by which
this is carried out. What I don’t understand is why I
am so intent on going to this particular place. Who
wants the North Pole! What good is it! Can you eat
it? Will it carry you from Gothenburg to Malmö like
a railway? The Danish ministers have declared from
their pulpits that participation in polar expeditions is
beneficial to the soul’s eternal well-being, or so I read
in a newspaper. It isn’t clear how this doctrine is to
be interpreted, except that the Pole is something
difficult or impossible to attain which must
nevertheless be sought for, because man is
condemned to seek out and know everything
whether or not the knowledge gives him pleasure. In
short, it is the same unthinking lust for knowledge
that drove our First Parents out of the garden.
And suppose you were to find it in spite of all, this
wonderful place that everybody is so anxious to stand
on! What would you find? Exactly nothing.
A point precisely identical to all the others in a
completely featureless wasteland stretching around it
for hundreds of miles. It is an abstraction, a
mathematical fiction. No one but a Swedish madman
could take the slightest interest in it. Here I am. The
wind is still from the south, bearing us steadily
northward at the speed of a trotting dog. Behind us,
perhaps forever, lie the Cities of Men with their
teacups and their brass bedsteads. I am going forth of
my own volition to join the ghosts of Bering and
poor Franklin, of frozen De Long and his men.
What I am on the brink of knowing, I now see, is not
an ephemeral mathematical spot but myself. The
doctor was right, even though I dislike him.
Fundamentally I am a dangerous madman, and what
I do is both a challenge to my egotism and a
surrender to it.
Question 9:
As used in line 49, “take the slightest interest in” most nearly means
A) accept responsibility for.
B) possess little regard for.
C) pay no attention to.
D) have curiosity about.
Answer: | D | true | sat-practice_4-question_9 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from MacDonald Harris,
The Balloonist. ©2011 by The Estate of Donald Heiney.
During the summer of 1897, the narrator of this story, a
fictional Swedish scientist, has set out for the North Pole
in a hydrogen-powered balloon.
My emotions are complicated and not
readily verifiable. I feel a vast yearning that is
simultaneously a pleasure and a pain. I am certain
of the consummation of this yearning, but I don’t
know yet what form it will take, since I do not
understand quite what it is that the yearning desires.
For the first time there is borne in upon me the full
truth of what I myself said to the doctor only an hour
ago: that my motives in this undertaking are not
entirely clear. For years, for a lifetime, the machinery
of my destiny has worked in secret to prepare for this
moment; its clockwork has moved exactly toward
this time and place and no other. Rising slowly from
the earth that bore me and gave me sustenance, I am
carried helplessly toward an uninhabited and hostile,
or at best indifferent, part of the earth, littered with
the bones of explorers and the wrecks of ships, frozen
supply caches, messages scrawled with chilled fingers
and hidden in cairns that no eye will ever see.
Nobody has succeeded in this thing, and many have
died. Yet in freely willing this enterprise, in choosing
this moment and no other when the south wind
will carry me exactly northward at a velocity of
eight knots, I have converted the machinery of my
fate into the servant of my will. All this I understand,
as I understand each detail of the technique by which
this is carried out. What I don’t understand is why I
am so intent on going to this particular place. Who
wants the North Pole! What good is it! Can you eat
it? Will it carry you from Gothenburg to Malmö like
a railway? The Danish ministers have declared from
their pulpits that participation in polar expeditions is
beneficial to the soul’s eternal well-being, or so I read
in a newspaper. It isn’t clear how this doctrine is to
be interpreted, except that the Pole is something
difficult or impossible to attain which must
nevertheless be sought for, because man is
condemned to seek out and know everything
whether or not the knowledge gives him pleasure. In
short, it is the same unthinking lust for knowledge
that drove our First Parents out of the garden.
And suppose you were to find it in spite of all, this
wonderful place that everybody is so anxious to stand
on! What would you find? Exactly nothing.
A point precisely identical to all the others in a
completely featureless wasteland stretching around it
for hundreds of miles. It is an abstraction, a
mathematical fiction. No one but a Swedish madman
could take the slightest interest in it. Here I am. The
wind is still from the south, bearing us steadily
northward at the speed of a trotting dog. Behind us,
perhaps forever, lie the Cities of Men with their
teacups and their brass bedsteads. I am going forth of
my own volition to join the ghosts of Bering and
poor Franklin, of frozen De Long and his men.
What I am on the brink of knowing, I now see, is not
an ephemeral mathematical spot but myself. The
doctor was right, even though I dislike him.
Fundamentally I am a dangerous madman, and what
I do is both a challenge to my egotism and a
surrender to it.
Question 5:
The narrator indicates that many previous explorers seeking the North Pole have
A) perished in the attempt.
B) made surprising discoveries.
C) failed to determine its exact location.
D) had different motivations than his own.
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_4-question_5 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Alan Ehrenhalt, The Great
Inversion and the Future of the American City. ©2013 by
Vintage. Ehrenhalt is an urbanologist—a scholar of cities
and their development. Demographic inversion is a
phenomenon that describes the rearrangement of living
patterns throughout a metropolitan area.
We are not witnessing the abandonment of the
suburbs, or a movement of millions of people back to
the city all at once. The 2010 census certainly did not
turn up evidence of a middle-class stampede to the
nation’s cities. The news was mixed: Some of the
larger cities on the East Coast tended to gain
population, albeit in small increments. Those in the
Midwest, including Chicago, tended to lose
substantial numbers. The cities that showed gains in
overall population during the entire decade tended to
be in the South and Southwest. But when it comes to
measuring demographic inversion, raw census
numbers are an ineffective blunt instrument. A closer
look at the results shows that the most powerful
demographic events of the past decade were the
movement of African Americans out of central cities
(180,000 of them in Chicago alone) and the
settlement of immigrant groups in suburbs, often
ones many miles distant from downtown.
Central-city areas that gained affluent residents in
the first part of the decade maintained that
population in the recession years from 2007 to 2009.
They also, according to a 2011 study by Brookings,
suffered considerably less from increased
unemployment than the suburbs did. Not many
young professionals moved to new downtown
condos in the recession years because few such
residences were being built. But there is no reason to
believe that the demographic trends prevailing prior
to the construction bust will not resume once that
bust is over. It is important to remember that
demographic inversion is not a proxy for population
growth; it can occur in cities that are growing, those
whose numbers are flat, and even in those
undergoing a modest decline in size.
America’s major cities face enormous fiscal
problems, many of them the result of public pension
obligations they incurred in the more prosperous
years of the past two decades. Some, Chicago
prominent among them, simply are not producing
enough revenue to support the level of public
services to which most of the citizens have grown to
feel entitled. How the cities are going to solve this
problem, I do not know. What I do know is that if
fiscal crisis were going to drive affluent professionals
out of central cities, it would have done so by now.
There is no evidence that it has.
The truth is that we are living at a moment in
which the massive outward migration of the affluent
that characterized the second half of the
twentieth century is coming to an end. And we need
to adjust our perceptions of cities, suburbs, and
urban mobility as a result.
Much of our perspective on the process of
metropolitan settlement dates, whether we realize it
or not, from a paper written in 1925 by the
University of Chicago sociologist Ernest W. Burgess.
It was Burgess who defined four urban/suburban
zones of settlement: a central business district; an
area of manufacturing just beyond it; then a
residential area inhabited by the industrial and
immigrant working class; and finally an outer
enclave of single-family dwellings.
Burgess was right about the urban America of
1925; he was right about the urban America of 1974.
Virtually every city in the country had a downtown,
where the commercial life of the metropolis was
conducted; it had a factory district just beyond; it had
districts of working-class residences just beyond that;
and it had residential suburbs for the wealthy and the
upper middle class at the far end of the continuum.
As a family moved up the economic ladder, it also
moved outward from crowded working-class
districts to more spacious apartments and,
eventually, to a suburban home. The suburbs of
Burgess’s time bore little resemblance to those at the
end of the twentieth century, but the theory still
essentially worked. People moved ahead in life by
moving farther out.
But in the past decade, in quite a few places, this
model has ceased to describe reality. There are still
downtown commercial districts, but there are no
factory districts lying next to them. There are
scarcely any factories at all. These close-in parts of
the city, whose few residents Burgess described as
dwelling in “submerged regions of poverty,
degradation and disease,” are increasingly the
preserve of the affluent who work in the commercial
core. And just as crucially newcomers to America are
not settling on the inside and accumulating the
resources to move out; they are living in the suburbs
from day one.
Question 16:
The passage implies that American cities in 1974
A) were witnessing the flight of minority populations to the suburbs.
B) had begun to lose their manufacturing sectors.
C) had a traditional four-zone structure.
D) were already experiencing demographic inversion.
Answer: | C | false | sat-practice_4-question_16 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Alan Ehrenhalt, The Great
Inversion and the Future of the American City. ©2013 by
Vintage. Ehrenhalt is an urbanologist—a scholar of cities
and their development. Demographic inversion is a
phenomenon that describes the rearrangement of living
patterns throughout a metropolitan area.
We are not witnessing the abandonment of the
suburbs, or a movement of millions of people back to
the city all at once. The 2010 census certainly did not
turn up evidence of a middle-class stampede to the
nation’s cities. The news was mixed: Some of the
larger cities on the East Coast tended to gain
population, albeit in small increments. Those in the
Midwest, including Chicago, tended to lose
substantial numbers. The cities that showed gains in
overall population during the entire decade tended to
be in the South and Southwest. But when it comes to
measuring demographic inversion, raw census
numbers are an ineffective blunt instrument. A closer
look at the results shows that the most powerful
demographic events of the past decade were the
movement of African Americans out of central cities
(180,000 of them in Chicago alone) and the
settlement of immigrant groups in suburbs, often
ones many miles distant from downtown.
Central-city areas that gained affluent residents in
the first part of the decade maintained that
population in the recession years from 2007 to 2009.
They also, according to a 2011 study by Brookings,
suffered considerably less from increased
unemployment than the suburbs did. Not many
young professionals moved to new downtown
condos in the recession years because few such
residences were being built. But there is no reason to
believe that the demographic trends prevailing prior
to the construction bust will not resume once that
bust is over. It is important to remember that
demographic inversion is not a proxy for population
growth; it can occur in cities that are growing, those
whose numbers are flat, and even in those
undergoing a modest decline in size.
America’s major cities face enormous fiscal
problems, many of them the result of public pension
obligations they incurred in the more prosperous
years of the past two decades. Some, Chicago
prominent among them, simply are not producing
enough revenue to support the level of public
services to which most of the citizens have grown to
feel entitled. How the cities are going to solve this
problem, I do not know. What I do know is that if
fiscal crisis were going to drive affluent professionals
out of central cities, it would have done so by now.
There is no evidence that it has.
The truth is that we are living at a moment in
which the massive outward migration of the affluent
that characterized the second half of the
twentieth century is coming to an end. And we need
to adjust our perceptions of cities, suburbs, and
urban mobility as a result.
Much of our perspective on the process of
metropolitan settlement dates, whether we realize it
or not, from a paper written in 1925 by the
University of Chicago sociologist Ernest W. Burgess.
It was Burgess who defined four urban/suburban
zones of settlement: a central business district; an
area of manufacturing just beyond it; then a
residential area inhabited by the industrial and
immigrant working class; and finally an outer
enclave of single-family dwellings.
Burgess was right about the urban America of
1925; he was right about the urban America of 1974.
Virtually every city in the country had a downtown,
where the commercial life of the metropolis was
conducted; it had a factory district just beyond; it had
districts of working-class residences just beyond that;
and it had residential suburbs for the wealthy and the
upper middle class at the far end of the continuum.
As a family moved up the economic ladder, it also
moved outward from crowded working-class
districts to more spacious apartments and,
eventually, to a suburban home. The suburbs of
Burgess’s time bore little resemblance to those at the
end of the twentieth century, but the theory still
essentially worked. People moved ahead in life by
moving farther out.
But in the past decade, in quite a few places, this
model has ceased to describe reality. There are still
downtown commercial districts, but there are no
factory districts lying next to them. There are
scarcely any factories at all. These close-in parts of
the city, whose few residents Burgess described as
dwelling in “submerged regions of poverty,
degradation and disease,” are increasingly the
preserve of the affluent who work in the commercial
core. And just as crucially newcomers to America are
not settling on the inside and accumulating the
resources to move out; they are living in the suburbs
from day one.
Question 12:
According to the passage, members of which group moved away from central-city areas in large numbers in the early 2000s?
A) The unemployed
B) Immigrants
C) Young professionals
D) African Americans
Answer: | D | false | sat-practice_4-question_12 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Alan Ehrenhalt, The Great
Inversion and the Future of the American City. ©2013 by
Vintage. Ehrenhalt is an urbanologist—a scholar of cities
and their development. Demographic inversion is a
phenomenon that describes the rearrangement of living
patterns throughout a metropolitan area.
We are not witnessing the abandonment of the
suburbs, or a movement of millions of people back to
the city all at once. The 2010 census certainly did not
turn up evidence of a middle-class stampede to the
nation’s cities. The news was mixed: Some of the
larger cities on the East Coast tended to gain
population, albeit in small increments. Those in the
Midwest, including Chicago, tended to lose
substantial numbers. The cities that showed gains in
overall population during the entire decade tended to
be in the South and Southwest. But when it comes to
measuring demographic inversion, raw census
numbers are an ineffective blunt instrument. A closer
look at the results shows that the most powerful
demographic events of the past decade were the
movement of African Americans out of central cities
(180,000 of them in Chicago alone) and the
settlement of immigrant groups in suburbs, often
ones many miles distant from downtown.
Central-city areas that gained affluent residents in
the first part of the decade maintained that
population in the recession years from 2007 to 2009.
They also, according to a 2011 study by Brookings,
suffered considerably less from increased
unemployment than the suburbs did. Not many
young professionals moved to new downtown
condos in the recession years because few such
residences were being built. But there is no reason to
believe that the demographic trends prevailing prior
to the construction bust will not resume once that
bust is over. It is important to remember that
demographic inversion is not a proxy for population
growth; it can occur in cities that are growing, those
whose numbers are flat, and even in those
undergoing a modest decline in size.
America’s major cities face enormous fiscal
problems, many of them the result of public pension
obligations they incurred in the more prosperous
years of the past two decades. Some, Chicago
prominent among them, simply are not producing
enough revenue to support the level of public
services to which most of the citizens have grown to
feel entitled. How the cities are going to solve this
problem, I do not know. What I do know is that if
fiscal crisis were going to drive affluent professionals
out of central cities, it would have done so by now.
There is no evidence that it has.
The truth is that we are living at a moment in
which the massive outward migration of the affluent
that characterized the second half of the
twentieth century is coming to an end. And we need
to adjust our perceptions of cities, suburbs, and
urban mobility as a result.
Much of our perspective on the process of
metropolitan settlement dates, whether we realize it
or not, from a paper written in 1925 by the
University of Chicago sociologist Ernest W. Burgess.
It was Burgess who defined four urban/suburban
zones of settlement: a central business district; an
area of manufacturing just beyond it; then a
residential area inhabited by the industrial and
immigrant working class; and finally an outer
enclave of single-family dwellings.
Burgess was right about the urban America of
1925; he was right about the urban America of 1974.
Virtually every city in the country had a downtown,
where the commercial life of the metropolis was
conducted; it had a factory district just beyond; it had
districts of working-class residences just beyond that;
and it had residential suburbs for the wealthy and the
upper middle class at the far end of the continuum.
As a family moved up the economic ladder, it also
moved outward from crowded working-class
districts to more spacious apartments and,
eventually, to a suburban home. The suburbs of
Burgess’s time bore little resemblance to those at the
end of the twentieth century, but the theory still
essentially worked. People moved ahead in life by
moving farther out.
But in the past decade, in quite a few places, this
model has ceased to describe reality. There are still
downtown commercial districts, but there are no
factory districts lying next to them. There are
scarcely any factories at all. These close-in parts of
the city, whose few residents Burgess described as
dwelling in “submerged regions of poverty,
degradation and disease,” are increasingly the
preserve of the affluent who work in the commercial
core. And just as crucially newcomers to America are
not settling on the inside and accumulating the
resources to move out; they are living in the suburbs
from day one.
Question 14:
According to the passage, which choice best describes the current financial situation in many major American cities?
A) Expected tax increases due to demand for public works
B) Economic hardship due to promises made in past years
C) Greater overall prosperity due to an increased inner-city tax base
D) Insufficient revenues due to a decrease in manufacturing
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_4-question_14 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Alan Ehrenhalt, The Great
Inversion and the Future of the American City. ©2013 by
Vintage. Ehrenhalt is an urbanologist—a scholar of cities
and their development. Demographic inversion is a
phenomenon that describes the rearrangement of living
patterns throughout a metropolitan area.
We are not witnessing the abandonment of the
suburbs, or a movement of millions of people back to
the city all at once. The 2010 census certainly did not
turn up evidence of a middle-class stampede to the
nation’s cities. The news was mixed: Some of the
larger cities on the East Coast tended to gain
population, albeit in small increments. Those in the
Midwest, including Chicago, tended to lose
substantial numbers. The cities that showed gains in
overall population during the entire decade tended to
be in the South and Southwest. But when it comes to
measuring demographic inversion, raw census
numbers are an ineffective blunt instrument. A closer
look at the results shows that the most powerful
demographic events of the past decade were the
movement of African Americans out of central cities
(180,000 of them in Chicago alone) and the
settlement of immigrant groups in suburbs, often
ones many miles distant from downtown.
Central-city areas that gained affluent residents in
the first part of the decade maintained that
population in the recession years from 2007 to 2009.
They also, according to a 2011 study by Brookings,
suffered considerably less from increased
unemployment than the suburbs did. Not many
young professionals moved to new downtown
condos in the recession years because few such
residences were being built. But there is no reason to
believe that the demographic trends prevailing prior
to the construction bust will not resume once that
bust is over. It is important to remember that
demographic inversion is not a proxy for population
growth; it can occur in cities that are growing, those
whose numbers are flat, and even in those
undergoing a modest decline in size.
America’s major cities face enormous fiscal
problems, many of them the result of public pension
obligations they incurred in the more prosperous
years of the past two decades. Some, Chicago
prominent among them, simply are not producing
enough revenue to support the level of public
services to which most of the citizens have grown to
feel entitled. How the cities are going to solve this
problem, I do not know. What I do know is that if
fiscal crisis were going to drive affluent professionals
out of central cities, it would have done so by now.
There is no evidence that it has.
The truth is that we are living at a moment in
which the massive outward migration of the affluent
that characterized the second half of the
twentieth century is coming to an end. And we need
to adjust our perceptions of cities, suburbs, and
urban mobility as a result.
Much of our perspective on the process of
metropolitan settlement dates, whether we realize it
or not, from a paper written in 1925 by the
University of Chicago sociologist Ernest W. Burgess.
It was Burgess who defined four urban/suburban
zones of settlement: a central business district; an
area of manufacturing just beyond it; then a
residential area inhabited by the industrial and
immigrant working class; and finally an outer
enclave of single-family dwellings.
Burgess was right about the urban America of
1925; he was right about the urban America of 1974.
Virtually every city in the country had a downtown,
where the commercial life of the metropolis was
conducted; it had a factory district just beyond; it had
districts of working-class residences just beyond that;
and it had residential suburbs for the wealthy and the
upper middle class at the far end of the continuum.
As a family moved up the economic ladder, it also
moved outward from crowded working-class
districts to more spacious apartments and,
eventually, to a suburban home. The suburbs of
Burgess’s time bore little resemblance to those at the
end of the twentieth century, but the theory still
essentially worked. People moved ahead in life by
moving farther out.
But in the past decade, in quite a few places, this
model has ceased to describe reality. There are still
downtown commercial districts, but there are no
factory districts lying next to them. There are
scarcely any factories at all. These close-in parts of
the city, whose few residents Burgess described as
dwelling in “submerged regions of poverty,
degradation and disease,” are increasingly the
preserve of the affluent who work in the commercial
core. And just as crucially newcomers to America are
not settling on the inside and accumulating the
resources to move out; they are living in the suburbs
from day one.
Question 18:
As used in line 68, “conducted” is closest in meaning to
A) carried out.
B) supervised.
C) regulated.
D) inhibited.
Answer: | A | true | sat-practice_4-question_18 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Alan Ehrenhalt, The Great
Inversion and the Future of the American City. ©2013 by
Vintage. Ehrenhalt is an urbanologist—a scholar of cities
and their development. Demographic inversion is a
phenomenon that describes the rearrangement of living
patterns throughout a metropolitan area.
We are not witnessing the abandonment of the
suburbs, or a movement of millions of people back to
the city all at once. The 2010 census certainly did not
turn up evidence of a middle-class stampede to the
nation’s cities. The news was mixed: Some of the
larger cities on the East Coast tended to gain
population, albeit in small increments. Those in the
Midwest, including Chicago, tended to lose
substantial numbers. The cities that showed gains in
overall population during the entire decade tended to
be in the South and Southwest. But when it comes to
measuring demographic inversion, raw census
numbers are an ineffective blunt instrument. A closer
look at the results shows that the most powerful
demographic events of the past decade were the
movement of African Americans out of central cities
(180,000 of them in Chicago alone) and the
settlement of immigrant groups in suburbs, often
ones many miles distant from downtown.
Central-city areas that gained affluent residents in
the first part of the decade maintained that
population in the recession years from 2007 to 2009.
They also, according to a 2011 study by Brookings,
suffered considerably less from increased
unemployment than the suburbs did. Not many
young professionals moved to new downtown
condos in the recession years because few such
residences were being built. But there is no reason to
believe that the demographic trends prevailing prior
to the construction bust will not resume once that
bust is over. It is important to remember that
demographic inversion is not a proxy for population
growth; it can occur in cities that are growing, those
whose numbers are flat, and even in those
undergoing a modest decline in size.
America’s major cities face enormous fiscal
problems, many of them the result of public pension
obligations they incurred in the more prosperous
years of the past two decades. Some, Chicago
prominent among them, simply are not producing
enough revenue to support the level of public
services to which most of the citizens have grown to
feel entitled. How the cities are going to solve this
problem, I do not know. What I do know is that if
fiscal crisis were going to drive affluent professionals
out of central cities, it would have done so by now.
There is no evidence that it has.
The truth is that we are living at a moment in
which the massive outward migration of the affluent
that characterized the second half of the
twentieth century is coming to an end. And we need
to adjust our perceptions of cities, suburbs, and
urban mobility as a result.
Much of our perspective on the process of
metropolitan settlement dates, whether we realize it
or not, from a paper written in 1925 by the
University of Chicago sociologist Ernest W. Burgess.
It was Burgess who defined four urban/suburban
zones of settlement: a central business district; an
area of manufacturing just beyond it; then a
residential area inhabited by the industrial and
immigrant working class; and finally an outer
enclave of single-family dwellings.
Burgess was right about the urban America of
1925; he was right about the urban America of 1974.
Virtually every city in the country had a downtown,
where the commercial life of the metropolis was
conducted; it had a factory district just beyond; it had
districts of working-class residences just beyond that;
and it had residential suburbs for the wealthy and the
upper middle class at the far end of the continuum.
As a family moved up the economic ladder, it also
moved outward from crowded working-class
districts to more spacious apartments and,
eventually, to a suburban home. The suburbs of
Burgess’s time bore little resemblance to those at the
end of the twentieth century, but the theory still
essentially worked. People moved ahead in life by
moving farther out.
But in the past decade, in quite a few places, this
model has ceased to describe reality. There are still
downtown commercial districts, but there are no
factory districts lying next to them. There are
scarcely any factories at all. These close-in parts of
the city, whose few residents Burgess described as
dwelling in “submerged regions of poverty,
degradation and disease,” are increasingly the
preserve of the affluent who work in the commercial
core. And just as crucially newcomers to America are
not settling on the inside and accumulating the
resources to move out; they are living in the suburbs
from day one.
Question 11:
Which choice best summarizes the first paragraph of the passage (lines 1-35)?
A) The 2010 census demonstrated a sizeable growth in the number of middle-class families moving into inner cities.
B) The 2010 census is not a reliable instrument for measuring population trends in American cities.
C) Population growth and demographic inversion are distinct phenomena, and demographic inversion is evident in many American cities.
D) Population growth in American cities has been increasing since roughly 2000, while suburban populations have decreased.
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_4-question_11 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Alan Ehrenhalt, The Great
Inversion and the Future of the American City. ©2013 by
Vintage. Ehrenhalt is an urbanologist—a scholar of cities
and their development. Demographic inversion is a
phenomenon that describes the rearrangement of living
patterns throughout a metropolitan area.
We are not witnessing the abandonment of the
suburbs, or a movement of millions of people back to
the city all at once. The 2010 census certainly did not
turn up evidence of a middle-class stampede to the
nation’s cities. The news was mixed: Some of the
larger cities on the East Coast tended to gain
population, albeit in small increments. Those in the
Midwest, including Chicago, tended to lose
substantial numbers. The cities that showed gains in
overall population during the entire decade tended to
be in the South and Southwest. But when it comes to
measuring demographic inversion, raw census
numbers are an ineffective blunt instrument. A closer
look at the results shows that the most powerful
demographic events of the past decade were the
movement of African Americans out of central cities
(180,000 of them in Chicago alone) and the
settlement of immigrant groups in suburbs, often
ones many miles distant from downtown.
Central-city areas that gained affluent residents in
the first part of the decade maintained that
population in the recession years from 2007 to 2009.
They also, according to a 2011 study by Brookings,
suffered considerably less from increased
unemployment than the suburbs did. Not many
young professionals moved to new downtown
condos in the recession years because few such
residences were being built. But there is no reason to
believe that the demographic trends prevailing prior
to the construction bust will not resume once that
bust is over. It is important to remember that
demographic inversion is not a proxy for population
growth; it can occur in cities that are growing, those
whose numbers are flat, and even in those
undergoing a modest decline in size.
America’s major cities face enormous fiscal
problems, many of them the result of public pension
obligations they incurred in the more prosperous
years of the past two decades. Some, Chicago
prominent among them, simply are not producing
enough revenue to support the level of public
services to which most of the citizens have grown to
feel entitled. How the cities are going to solve this
problem, I do not know. What I do know is that if
fiscal crisis were going to drive affluent professionals
out of central cities, it would have done so by now.
There is no evidence that it has.
The truth is that we are living at a moment in
which the massive outward migration of the affluent
that characterized the second half of the
twentieth century is coming to an end. And we need
to adjust our perceptions of cities, suburbs, and
urban mobility as a result.
Much of our perspective on the process of
metropolitan settlement dates, whether we realize it
or not, from a paper written in 1925 by the
University of Chicago sociologist Ernest W. Burgess.
It was Burgess who defined four urban/suburban
zones of settlement: a central business district; an
area of manufacturing just beyond it; then a
residential area inhabited by the industrial and
immigrant working class; and finally an outer
enclave of single-family dwellings.
Burgess was right about the urban America of
1925; he was right about the urban America of 1974.
Virtually every city in the country had a downtown,
where the commercial life of the metropolis was
conducted; it had a factory district just beyond; it had
districts of working-class residences just beyond that;
and it had residential suburbs for the wealthy and the
upper middle class at the far end of the continuum.
As a family moved up the economic ladder, it also
moved outward from crowded working-class
districts to more spacious apartments and,
eventually, to a suburban home. The suburbs of
Burgess’s time bore little resemblance to those at the
end of the twentieth century, but the theory still
essentially worked. People moved ahead in life by
moving farther out.
But in the past decade, in quite a few places, this
model has ceased to describe reality. There are still
downtown commercial districts, but there are no
factory districts lying next to them. There are
scarcely any factories at all. These close-in parts of
the city, whose few residents Burgess described as
dwelling in “submerged regions of poverty,
degradation and disease,” are increasingly the
preserve of the affluent who work in the commercial
core. And just as crucially newcomers to America are
not settling on the inside and accumulating the
resources to move out; they are living in the suburbs
from day one.
Question 13:
In line 34, “flat” is closest in meaning to
A) static.
B) deflated.
C) featureless.
D) obscure.
Answer: | A | true | sat-practice_4-question_13 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Emily Anthes, Frankenstein's
Cat. ©2013 by Emily Anthes.
When scientists first learned how to edit the
genomes of animals, they began to imagine all the
ways they could use this new power. Creating
brightly colored novelty pets was not a high priority.
Instead, most researchers envisioned far more
consequential applications, hoping to create
genetically engineered animals that saved human
lives. One enterprise is now delivering on this dream.
Welcome to the world of “pharming,” in which
simple genetic tweaks turn animals into living
pharmaceutical factories.
Many of the proteins that our cells crank out
naturally make for good medicine. Our bodies’ own
enzymes, hormones, clotting factors, and antibodies
are commonly used to treat cancer, diabetes,
autoimmune diseases, and more. The trouble is that
it’s difficult and expensive to make these compounds
on an industrial scale, and as a result, patients can
face shortages of the medicines they need. Dairy
animals, on the other hand, are expert protein
producers, their udders swollen with milk. So the
creation of the first transgenic animals—first mice,
then other species—in the 1980s gave scientists an
idea: What if they put the gene for a human antibody
or enzyme into a cow, goat, or sheep? If they put the
gene in just the right place, under the control of the
right molecular switch, maybe they could engineer
animals that produced healing human proteins in
their milk. Then doctors could collect medicine by
the bucketful.
Throughout the 1980s and ’90s, studies provided
proof of principle, as scientists created transgenic
mice, sheep, goats, pigs, cattle, and rabbits that did in
fact make therapeutic compounds in their milk.
At first, this work was merely gee-whiz, scientific
geekery, lab-bound thought experiments come true.
That all changed with ATryn, a drug produced by the
Massachusetts firm GTC Biotherapeutics. ATryn is
antithrombin, an anticoagulant that can be used to
prevent life-threatening blood clots. The compound,
made by our liver cells, plays a key role in keeping
our bodies clot-free. It acts as a molecular bouncer,
sidling up to clot-forming compounds and escorting
them out of the bloodstream. But as many as 1 in
2,000 Americans are born with a genetic mutation
that prevents them from making antithrombin.
These patients are prone to clots, especially in their
legs and lungs, and they are at elevated risk of
suffering from fatal complications during surgery
and childbirth. Supplemental antithrombin can
reduce this risk, and GTC decided to try to
manufacture the compound using genetically
engineered goats.
To create its special herd of goats, GTC used
microinjection, the same technique that produced
GloFish and AquAdvantage salmon. The company’s
scientists took the gene for human antithrombin and
injected it directly into fertilized goat eggs. Then they
implanted the eggs in the wombs of female goats.
When the kids were born, some of them proved to be
transgenic, the human gene nestled safely in their
cells. The researchers paired the antithrombin gene
with a promoter (which is a sequence of DNA that
controls gene activity) that is normally active in the
goat’s mammary glands during milk production.
When the transgenic females lactated, the promoter
turned the transgene on and the goats’ udders filled
with milk containing antithrombin. All that was left
to do was to collect the milk, and extract and purify
the protein. Et voilà—human medicine! And, for
GTC, liquid gold. ATryn hit the market in 2006,
becoming the world’s first transgenic animal drug.
Over the course of a year, the “milking parlors” on
GTC’s 300-acre farm in Massachusetts can collect
more than a kilogram of medicine from a single
animal.
Question 30:
The most likely purpose of the parenthetical information in lines 63-64 is to
A) illustrate an abstract concept.
B) describe a new hypothesis.
C) clarify a claim.
D) define a term.
Answer: | D | true | sat-practice_4-question_30 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Emily Anthes, Frankenstein's
Cat. ©2013 by Emily Anthes.
When scientists first learned how to edit the
genomes of animals, they began to imagine all the
ways they could use this new power. Creating
brightly colored novelty pets was not a high priority.
Instead, most researchers envisioned far more
consequential applications, hoping to create
genetically engineered animals that saved human
lives. One enterprise is now delivering on this dream.
Welcome to the world of “pharming,” in which
simple genetic tweaks turn animals into living
pharmaceutical factories.
Many of the proteins that our cells crank out
naturally make for good medicine. Our bodies’ own
enzymes, hormones, clotting factors, and antibodies
are commonly used to treat cancer, diabetes,
autoimmune diseases, and more. The trouble is that
it’s difficult and expensive to make these compounds
on an industrial scale, and as a result, patients can
face shortages of the medicines they need. Dairy
animals, on the other hand, are expert protein
producers, their udders swollen with milk. So the
creation of the first transgenic animals—first mice,
then other species—in the 1980s gave scientists an
idea: What if they put the gene for a human antibody
or enzyme into a cow, goat, or sheep? If they put the
gene in just the right place, under the control of the
right molecular switch, maybe they could engineer
animals that produced healing human proteins in
their milk. Then doctors could collect medicine by
the bucketful.
Throughout the 1980s and ’90s, studies provided
proof of principle, as scientists created transgenic
mice, sheep, goats, pigs, cattle, and rabbits that did in
fact make therapeutic compounds in their milk.
At first, this work was merely gee-whiz, scientific
geekery, lab-bound thought experiments come true.
That all changed with ATryn, a drug produced by the
Massachusetts firm GTC Biotherapeutics. ATryn is
antithrombin, an anticoagulant that can be used to
prevent life-threatening blood clots. The compound,
made by our liver cells, plays a key role in keeping
our bodies clot-free. It acts as a molecular bouncer,
sidling up to clot-forming compounds and escorting
them out of the bloodstream. But as many as 1 in
2,000 Americans are born with a genetic mutation
that prevents them from making antithrombin.
These patients are prone to clots, especially in their
legs and lungs, and they are at elevated risk of
suffering from fatal complications during surgery
and childbirth. Supplemental antithrombin can
reduce this risk, and GTC decided to try to
manufacture the compound using genetically
engineered goats.
To create its special herd of goats, GTC used
microinjection, the same technique that produced
GloFish and AquAdvantage salmon. The company’s
scientists took the gene for human antithrombin and
injected it directly into fertilized goat eggs. Then they
implanted the eggs in the wombs of female goats.
When the kids were born, some of them proved to be
transgenic, the human gene nestled safely in their
cells. The researchers paired the antithrombin gene
with a promoter (which is a sequence of DNA that
controls gene activity) that is normally active in the
goat’s mammary glands during milk production.
When the transgenic females lactated, the promoter
turned the transgene on and the goats’ udders filled
with milk containing antithrombin. All that was left
to do was to collect the milk, and extract and purify
the protein. Et voilà—human medicine! And, for
GTC, liquid gold. ATryn hit the market in 2006,
becoming the world’s first transgenic animal drug.
Over the course of a year, the “milking parlors” on
GTC’s 300-acre farm in Massachusetts can collect
more than a kilogram of medicine from a single
animal.
Question 22:
The primary purpose of the passage is to
A) present the background of a medical breakthrough.
B) evaluate the research that led to a scientific discovery.
C) summarize the findings of a long-term research project.
D) explain the development of a branch of scientific study.
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_4-question_22 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Emily Anthes, Frankenstein's
Cat. ©2013 by Emily Anthes.
When scientists first learned how to edit the
genomes of animals, they began to imagine all the
ways they could use this new power. Creating
brightly colored novelty pets was not a high priority.
Instead, most researchers envisioned far more
consequential applications, hoping to create
genetically engineered animals that saved human
lives. One enterprise is now delivering on this dream.
Welcome to the world of “pharming,” in which
simple genetic tweaks turn animals into living
pharmaceutical factories.
Many of the proteins that our cells crank out
naturally make for good medicine. Our bodies’ own
enzymes, hormones, clotting factors, and antibodies
are commonly used to treat cancer, diabetes,
autoimmune diseases, and more. The trouble is that
it’s difficult and expensive to make these compounds
on an industrial scale, and as a result, patients can
face shortages of the medicines they need. Dairy
animals, on the other hand, are expert protein
producers, their udders swollen with milk. So the
creation of the first transgenic animals—first mice,
then other species—in the 1980s gave scientists an
idea: What if they put the gene for a human antibody
or enzyme into a cow, goat, or sheep? If they put the
gene in just the right place, under the control of the
right molecular switch, maybe they could engineer
animals that produced healing human proteins in
their milk. Then doctors could collect medicine by
the bucketful.
Throughout the 1980s and ’90s, studies provided
proof of principle, as scientists created transgenic
mice, sheep, goats, pigs, cattle, and rabbits that did in
fact make therapeutic compounds in their milk.
At first, this work was merely gee-whiz, scientific
geekery, lab-bound thought experiments come true.
That all changed with ATryn, a drug produced by the
Massachusetts firm GTC Biotherapeutics. ATryn is
antithrombin, an anticoagulant that can be used to
prevent life-threatening blood clots. The compound,
made by our liver cells, plays a key role in keeping
our bodies clot-free. It acts as a molecular bouncer,
sidling up to clot-forming compounds and escorting
them out of the bloodstream. But as many as 1 in
2,000 Americans are born with a genetic mutation
that prevents them from making antithrombin.
These patients are prone to clots, especially in their
legs and lungs, and they are at elevated risk of
suffering from fatal complications during surgery
and childbirth. Supplemental antithrombin can
reduce this risk, and GTC decided to try to
manufacture the compound using genetically
engineered goats.
To create its special herd of goats, GTC used
microinjection, the same technique that produced
GloFish and AquAdvantage salmon. The company’s
scientists took the gene for human antithrombin and
injected it directly into fertilized goat eggs. Then they
implanted the eggs in the wombs of female goats.
When the kids were born, some of them proved to be
transgenic, the human gene nestled safely in their
cells. The researchers paired the antithrombin gene
with a promoter (which is a sequence of DNA that
controls gene activity) that is normally active in the
goat’s mammary glands during milk production.
When the transgenic females lactated, the promoter
turned the transgene on and the goats’ udders filled
with milk containing antithrombin. All that was left
to do was to collect the milk, and extract and purify
the protein. Et voilà—human medicine! And, for
GTC, liquid gold. ATryn hit the market in 2006,
becoming the world’s first transgenic animal drug.
Over the course of a year, the “milking parlors” on
GTC’s 300-acre farm in Massachusetts can collect
more than a kilogram of medicine from a single
animal.
Question 23:
The author’s attitude toward pharming is best described as one of
A) apprehension.
B) ambivalence.
C) appreciation.
D) astonishment.
Answer: | C | false | sat-practice_4-question_23 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Emily Anthes, Frankenstein's
Cat. ©2013 by Emily Anthes.
When scientists first learned how to edit the
genomes of animals, they began to imagine all the
ways they could use this new power. Creating
brightly colored novelty pets was not a high priority.
Instead, most researchers envisioned far more
consequential applications, hoping to create
genetically engineered animals that saved human
lives. One enterprise is now delivering on this dream.
Welcome to the world of “pharming,” in which
simple genetic tweaks turn animals into living
pharmaceutical factories.
Many of the proteins that our cells crank out
naturally make for good medicine. Our bodies’ own
enzymes, hormones, clotting factors, and antibodies
are commonly used to treat cancer, diabetes,
autoimmune diseases, and more. The trouble is that
it’s difficult and expensive to make these compounds
on an industrial scale, and as a result, patients can
face shortages of the medicines they need. Dairy
animals, on the other hand, are expert protein
producers, their udders swollen with milk. So the
creation of the first transgenic animals—first mice,
then other species—in the 1980s gave scientists an
idea: What if they put the gene for a human antibody
or enzyme into a cow, goat, or sheep? If they put the
gene in just the right place, under the control of the
right molecular switch, maybe they could engineer
animals that produced healing human proteins in
their milk. Then doctors could collect medicine by
the bucketful.
Throughout the 1980s and ’90s, studies provided
proof of principle, as scientists created transgenic
mice, sheep, goats, pigs, cattle, and rabbits that did in
fact make therapeutic compounds in their milk.
At first, this work was merely gee-whiz, scientific
geekery, lab-bound thought experiments come true.
That all changed with ATryn, a drug produced by the
Massachusetts firm GTC Biotherapeutics. ATryn is
antithrombin, an anticoagulant that can be used to
prevent life-threatening blood clots. The compound,
made by our liver cells, plays a key role in keeping
our bodies clot-free. It acts as a molecular bouncer,
sidling up to clot-forming compounds and escorting
them out of the bloodstream. But as many as 1 in
2,000 Americans are born with a genetic mutation
that prevents them from making antithrombin.
These patients are prone to clots, especially in their
legs and lungs, and they are at elevated risk of
suffering from fatal complications during surgery
and childbirth. Supplemental antithrombin can
reduce this risk, and GTC decided to try to
manufacture the compound using genetically
engineered goats.
To create its special herd of goats, GTC used
microinjection, the same technique that produced
GloFish and AquAdvantage salmon. The company’s
scientists took the gene for human antithrombin and
injected it directly into fertilized goat eggs. Then they
implanted the eggs in the wombs of female goats.
When the kids were born, some of them proved to be
transgenic, the human gene nestled safely in their
cells. The researchers paired the antithrombin gene
with a promoter (which is a sequence of DNA that
controls gene activity) that is normally active in the
goat’s mammary glands during milk production.
When the transgenic females lactated, the promoter
turned the transgene on and the goats’ udders filled
with milk containing antithrombin. All that was left
to do was to collect the milk, and extract and purify
the protein. Et voilà—human medicine! And, for
GTC, liquid gold. ATryn hit the market in 2006,
becoming the world’s first transgenic animal drug.
Over the course of a year, the “milking parlors” on
GTC’s 300-acre farm in Massachusetts can collect
more than a kilogram of medicine from a single
animal.
Question 25:
What does the author suggest about the transgenic studies done in the 1980s and 1990s?
A) They were limited by the expensive nature of animal research.
B) They were not expected to yield products ready for human use.
C) They were completed when an anticoagulant compound was identified.
D) They focused only on the molecular properties of cows, goats, and sheep.
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_4-question_25 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Emily Anthes, Frankenstein's
Cat. ©2013 by Emily Anthes.
When scientists first learned how to edit the
genomes of animals, they began to imagine all the
ways they could use this new power. Creating
brightly colored novelty pets was not a high priority.
Instead, most researchers envisioned far more
consequential applications, hoping to create
genetically engineered animals that saved human
lives. One enterprise is now delivering on this dream.
Welcome to the world of “pharming,” in which
simple genetic tweaks turn animals into living
pharmaceutical factories.
Many of the proteins that our cells crank out
naturally make for good medicine. Our bodies’ own
enzymes, hormones, clotting factors, and antibodies
are commonly used to treat cancer, diabetes,
autoimmune diseases, and more. The trouble is that
it’s difficult and expensive to make these compounds
on an industrial scale, and as a result, patients can
face shortages of the medicines they need. Dairy
animals, on the other hand, are expert protein
producers, their udders swollen with milk. So the
creation of the first transgenic animals—first mice,
then other species—in the 1980s gave scientists an
idea: What if they put the gene for a human antibody
or enzyme into a cow, goat, or sheep? If they put the
gene in just the right place, under the control of the
right molecular switch, maybe they could engineer
animals that produced healing human proteins in
their milk. Then doctors could collect medicine by
the bucketful.
Throughout the 1980s and ’90s, studies provided
proof of principle, as scientists created transgenic
mice, sheep, goats, pigs, cattle, and rabbits that did in
fact make therapeutic compounds in their milk.
At first, this work was merely gee-whiz, scientific
geekery, lab-bound thought experiments come true.
That all changed with ATryn, a drug produced by the
Massachusetts firm GTC Biotherapeutics. ATryn is
antithrombin, an anticoagulant that can be used to
prevent life-threatening blood clots. The compound,
made by our liver cells, plays a key role in keeping
our bodies clot-free. It acts as a molecular bouncer,
sidling up to clot-forming compounds and escorting
them out of the bloodstream. But as many as 1 in
2,000 Americans are born with a genetic mutation
that prevents them from making antithrombin.
These patients are prone to clots, especially in their
legs and lungs, and they are at elevated risk of
suffering from fatal complications during surgery
and childbirth. Supplemental antithrombin can
reduce this risk, and GTC decided to try to
manufacture the compound using genetically
engineered goats.
To create its special herd of goats, GTC used
microinjection, the same technique that produced
GloFish and AquAdvantage salmon. The company’s
scientists took the gene for human antithrombin and
injected it directly into fertilized goat eggs. Then they
implanted the eggs in the wombs of female goats.
When the kids were born, some of them proved to be
transgenic, the human gene nestled safely in their
cells. The researchers paired the antithrombin gene
with a promoter (which is a sequence of DNA that
controls gene activity) that is normally active in the
goat’s mammary glands during milk production.
When the transgenic females lactated, the promoter
turned the transgene on and the goats’ udders filled
with milk containing antithrombin. All that was left
to do was to collect the milk, and extract and purify
the protein. Et voilà—human medicine! And, for
GTC, liquid gold. ATryn hit the market in 2006,
becoming the world’s first transgenic animal drug.
Over the course of a year, the “milking parlors” on
GTC’s 300-acre farm in Massachusetts can collect
more than a kilogram of medicine from a single
animal.
Question 29:
Which of the following does the author suggest about the “female goats” mentioned in line 59?
A) They secreted antithrombin in their milk after giving birth.
B) Some of their kids were not born with the antithrombin gene.
C) They were the first animals to receive microinjections.
D) Their cells already contained genes usually found in humans.
Answer: | B | true | sat-practice_4-question_29 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Emily Anthes, Frankenstein's
Cat. ©2013 by Emily Anthes.
When scientists first learned how to edit the
genomes of animals, they began to imagine all the
ways they could use this new power. Creating
brightly colored novelty pets was not a high priority.
Instead, most researchers envisioned far more
consequential applications, hoping to create
genetically engineered animals that saved human
lives. One enterprise is now delivering on this dream.
Welcome to the world of “pharming,” in which
simple genetic tweaks turn animals into living
pharmaceutical factories.
Many of the proteins that our cells crank out
naturally make for good medicine. Our bodies’ own
enzymes, hormones, clotting factors, and antibodies
are commonly used to treat cancer, diabetes,
autoimmune diseases, and more. The trouble is that
it’s difficult and expensive to make these compounds
on an industrial scale, and as a result, patients can
face shortages of the medicines they need. Dairy
animals, on the other hand, are expert protein
producers, their udders swollen with milk. So the
creation of the first transgenic animals—first mice,
then other species—in the 1980s gave scientists an
idea: What if they put the gene for a human antibody
or enzyme into a cow, goat, or sheep? If they put the
gene in just the right place, under the control of the
right molecular switch, maybe they could engineer
animals that produced healing human proteins in
their milk. Then doctors could collect medicine by
the bucketful.
Throughout the 1980s and ’90s, studies provided
proof of principle, as scientists created transgenic
mice, sheep, goats, pigs, cattle, and rabbits that did in
fact make therapeutic compounds in their milk.
At first, this work was merely gee-whiz, scientific
geekery, lab-bound thought experiments come true.
That all changed with ATryn, a drug produced by the
Massachusetts firm GTC Biotherapeutics. ATryn is
antithrombin, an anticoagulant that can be used to
prevent life-threatening blood clots. The compound,
made by our liver cells, plays a key role in keeping
our bodies clot-free. It acts as a molecular bouncer,
sidling up to clot-forming compounds and escorting
them out of the bloodstream. But as many as 1 in
2,000 Americans are born with a genetic mutation
that prevents them from making antithrombin.
These patients are prone to clots, especially in their
legs and lungs, and they are at elevated risk of
suffering from fatal complications during surgery
and childbirth. Supplemental antithrombin can
reduce this risk, and GTC decided to try to
manufacture the compound using genetically
engineered goats.
To create its special herd of goats, GTC used
microinjection, the same technique that produced
GloFish and AquAdvantage salmon. The company’s
scientists took the gene for human antithrombin and
injected it directly into fertilized goat eggs. Then they
implanted the eggs in the wombs of female goats.
When the kids were born, some of them proved to be
transgenic, the human gene nestled safely in their
cells. The researchers paired the antithrombin gene
with a promoter (which is a sequence of DNA that
controls gene activity) that is normally active in the
goat’s mammary glands during milk production.
When the transgenic females lactated, the promoter
turned the transgene on and the goats’ udders filled
with milk containing antithrombin. All that was left
to do was to collect the milk, and extract and purify
the protein. Et voilà—human medicine! And, for
GTC, liquid gold. ATryn hit the market in 2006,
becoming the world’s first transgenic animal drug.
Over the course of a year, the “milking parlors” on
GTC’s 300-acre farm in Massachusetts can collect
more than a kilogram of medicine from a single
animal.
Question 27:
According to the passage, which of the following is true of antithrombin?
A) It reduces compounds that lead to blood clots.
B) It stems from a genetic mutation that is rare in humans.
C) It is a sequence of DNA known as a promoter.
D) It occurs naturally in goats’ mammary glands.
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_4-question_27 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Emily Anthes, Frankenstein's
Cat. ©2013 by Emily Anthes.
When scientists first learned how to edit the
genomes of animals, they began to imagine all the
ways they could use this new power. Creating
brightly colored novelty pets was not a high priority.
Instead, most researchers envisioned far more
consequential applications, hoping to create
genetically engineered animals that saved human
lives. One enterprise is now delivering on this dream.
Welcome to the world of “pharming,” in which
simple genetic tweaks turn animals into living
pharmaceutical factories.
Many of the proteins that our cells crank out
naturally make for good medicine. Our bodies’ own
enzymes, hormones, clotting factors, and antibodies
are commonly used to treat cancer, diabetes,
autoimmune diseases, and more. The trouble is that
it’s difficult and expensive to make these compounds
on an industrial scale, and as a result, patients can
face shortages of the medicines they need. Dairy
animals, on the other hand, are expert protein
producers, their udders swollen with milk. So the
creation of the first transgenic animals—first mice,
then other species—in the 1980s gave scientists an
idea: What if they put the gene for a human antibody
or enzyme into a cow, goat, or sheep? If they put the
gene in just the right place, under the control of the
right molecular switch, maybe they could engineer
animals that produced healing human proteins in
their milk. Then doctors could collect medicine by
the bucketful.
Throughout the 1980s and ’90s, studies provided
proof of principle, as scientists created transgenic
mice, sheep, goats, pigs, cattle, and rabbits that did in
fact make therapeutic compounds in their milk.
At first, this work was merely gee-whiz, scientific
geekery, lab-bound thought experiments come true.
That all changed with ATryn, a drug produced by the
Massachusetts firm GTC Biotherapeutics. ATryn is
antithrombin, an anticoagulant that can be used to
prevent life-threatening blood clots. The compound,
made by our liver cells, plays a key role in keeping
our bodies clot-free. It acts as a molecular bouncer,
sidling up to clot-forming compounds and escorting
them out of the bloodstream. But as many as 1 in
2,000 Americans are born with a genetic mutation
that prevents them from making antithrombin.
These patients are prone to clots, especially in their
legs and lungs, and they are at elevated risk of
suffering from fatal complications during surgery
and childbirth. Supplemental antithrombin can
reduce this risk, and GTC decided to try to
manufacture the compound using genetically
engineered goats.
To create its special herd of goats, GTC used
microinjection, the same technique that produced
GloFish and AquAdvantage salmon. The company’s
scientists took the gene for human antithrombin and
injected it directly into fertilized goat eggs. Then they
implanted the eggs in the wombs of female goats.
When the kids were born, some of them proved to be
transgenic, the human gene nestled safely in their
cells. The researchers paired the antithrombin gene
with a promoter (which is a sequence of DNA that
controls gene activity) that is normally active in the
goat’s mammary glands during milk production.
When the transgenic females lactated, the promoter
turned the transgene on and the goats’ udders filled
with milk containing antithrombin. All that was left
to do was to collect the milk, and extract and purify
the protein. Et voilà—human medicine! And, for
GTC, liquid gold. ATryn hit the market in 2006,
becoming the world’s first transgenic animal drug.
Over the course of a year, the “milking parlors” on
GTC’s 300-acre farm in Massachusetts can collect
more than a kilogram of medicine from a single
animal.
Question 31:
The phrase “liquid gold” (line 71) most directly suggests that
A) GTC has invested a great deal of money in the microinjection technique.
B) GTC’s milking parlors have significantly increased milk production.
C) transgenic goats will soon be a valuable asset for dairy farmers.
D) ATryn has proved to be a financially beneficial product for GTC.
Answer: | D | true | sat-practice_4-question_31 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Emily Anthes, Frankenstein's
Cat. ©2013 by Emily Anthes.
When scientists first learned how to edit the
genomes of animals, they began to imagine all the
ways they could use this new power. Creating
brightly colored novelty pets was not a high priority.
Instead, most researchers envisioned far more
consequential applications, hoping to create
genetically engineered animals that saved human
lives. One enterprise is now delivering on this dream.
Welcome to the world of “pharming,” in which
simple genetic tweaks turn animals into living
pharmaceutical factories.
Many of the proteins that our cells crank out
naturally make for good medicine. Our bodies’ own
enzymes, hormones, clotting factors, and antibodies
are commonly used to treat cancer, diabetes,
autoimmune diseases, and more. The trouble is that
it’s difficult and expensive to make these compounds
on an industrial scale, and as a result, patients can
face shortages of the medicines they need. Dairy
animals, on the other hand, are expert protein
producers, their udders swollen with milk. So the
creation of the first transgenic animals—first mice,
then other species—in the 1980s gave scientists an
idea: What if they put the gene for a human antibody
or enzyme into a cow, goat, or sheep? If they put the
gene in just the right place, under the control of the
right molecular switch, maybe they could engineer
animals that produced healing human proteins in
their milk. Then doctors could collect medicine by
the bucketful.
Throughout the 1980s and ’90s, studies provided
proof of principle, as scientists created transgenic
mice, sheep, goats, pigs, cattle, and rabbits that did in
fact make therapeutic compounds in their milk.
At first, this work was merely gee-whiz, scientific
geekery, lab-bound thought experiments come true.
That all changed with ATryn, a drug produced by the
Massachusetts firm GTC Biotherapeutics. ATryn is
antithrombin, an anticoagulant that can be used to
prevent life-threatening blood clots. The compound,
made by our liver cells, plays a key role in keeping
our bodies clot-free. It acts as a molecular bouncer,
sidling up to clot-forming compounds and escorting
them out of the bloodstream. But as many as 1 in
2,000 Americans are born with a genetic mutation
that prevents them from making antithrombin.
These patients are prone to clots, especially in their
legs and lungs, and they are at elevated risk of
suffering from fatal complications during surgery
and childbirth. Supplemental antithrombin can
reduce this risk, and GTC decided to try to
manufacture the compound using genetically
engineered goats.
To create its special herd of goats, GTC used
microinjection, the same technique that produced
GloFish and AquAdvantage salmon. The company’s
scientists took the gene for human antithrombin and
injected it directly into fertilized goat eggs. Then they
implanted the eggs in the wombs of female goats.
When the kids were born, some of them proved to be
transgenic, the human gene nestled safely in their
cells. The researchers paired the antithrombin gene
with a promoter (which is a sequence of DNA that
controls gene activity) that is normally active in the
goat’s mammary glands during milk production.
When the transgenic females lactated, the promoter
turned the transgene on and the goats’ udders filled
with milk containing antithrombin. All that was left
to do was to collect the milk, and extract and purify
the protein. Et voilà—human medicine! And, for
GTC, liquid gold. ATryn hit the market in 2006,
becoming the world’s first transgenic animal drug.
Over the course of a year, the “milking parlors” on
GTC’s 300-acre farm in Massachusetts can collect
more than a kilogram of medicine from a single
animal.
Question 24:
As used in line 20, “expert” most nearly means
A) knowledgeable.
B) professional.
C) capable.
D) trained.
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_4-question_24 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Edmund Burke, Reflections on the
Revolution in France. Originally published in 1790. Passage 2
is adapted from Thomas Paine, Rights of Man. Originally
published in 1791.
Passage 1
To avoid . . . the evils of inconstancy and
versatility, ten thousand times worse than those of
obstinacy and the blindest prejudice, we have
consecrated the state, that no man should approach
to look into its defects or corruptions but with due
caution; that he should never dream of beginning its
reformation by its subversion; that he should
approach to the faults of the state as to the wounds of
a father, with pious awe and trembling solicitude. By
this wise prejudice we are taught to look with horror
on those children of their country who are prompt
rashly to hack that aged parent in pieces, and put him
into the kettle of magicians, in hopes that by their
poisonous weeds, and wild incantations, they may
regenerate the paternal constitution, and renovate
their father’s life.
Society is indeed a contract. Subordinate contracts
for objects of mere occasional interest may be
dissolved at pleasure—but the state ought not to be
considered as nothing better than a partnership
agreement in a trade of pepper and coffee, calico or
tobacco, or some other such low concern, to be taken
up for a little temporary interest, and to be dissolved
by the fancy of the parties. It is to be looked on with
other reverence; because it is not a partnership in
things subservient only to the gross animal existence
of a temporary and perishable nature. It is a
partnership in all science; a partnership in all art; a
partnership in every virtue, and in all perfection.
As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained
in many generations, it becomes a partnership not
only between those who are living, but between those
who are living, those who are dead, and those who
are to be born. . . . The municipal corporations of
that universal kingdom are not morally at liberty at
their pleasure, and on their speculations of a
contingent improvement, wholly to separate and tear
asunder the bands of their subordinate community,
and to dissolve it into an unsocial, uncivil,
unconnected chaos of elementary principles.
Passage 2
Every age and generation must be as free to act for
itself, in all cases, as the ages and generations which
preceded it. The vanity and presumption of
governing beyond the grave, is the most ridiculous
and insolent of all tyrannies.
Man has no property in man; neither has any
generation a property in the generations which are to
follow. The Parliament or the people of 1688, or of
any other period, had no more right to dispose of the
people of the present day, or to bind or to control
them in any shape whatever, than the parliament or
the people of the present day have to dispose of, bind,
or control those who are to live a hundred or a
thousand years hence.
Every generation is, and must be, competent
to all the purposes which its occasions require. It is
the living, and not the dead, that are to be
accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power
and his wants cease with him; and having no longer
any participation in the concerns of this world, he
has no longer any authority in directing who shall be
its governors, or how its government shall be
organized, or how administered....
Those who have quitted the world, and those who
are not yet arrived at it, are as remote from each
other, as the utmost stretch of mortal imagination
can conceive. What possible obligation, then, can
exist between them; what rule or principle can be laid
down, that two nonentities, the one out of existence,
and the other not in, and who never can meet in this
world, that the one should control the other to the
end of time?...
The circumstances of the world are continually
changing, and the opinions of men change also; and
as government is for the living, and not for the dead,
it is the living only that has any right in it. That
which may be thought right and found convenient in
one age, may be thought wrong and found
inconvenient in another. In such cases, who is to
decide, the living, or the dead?
Question 41:
The main purpose of both passages is to
A) suggest a way to resolve a particular political struggle.
B) discuss the relationship between people and their government.
C) evaluate the consequences of rapid political change.
D) describe the duties that governments have to their citizens.
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_4-question_41 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Edmund Burke, Reflections on the
Revolution in France. Originally published in 1790. Passage 2
is adapted from Thomas Paine, Rights of Man. Originally
published in 1791.
Passage 1
To avoid . . . the evils of inconstancy and
versatility, ten thousand times worse than those of
obstinacy and the blindest prejudice, we have
consecrated the state, that no man should approach
to look into its defects or corruptions but with due
caution; that he should never dream of beginning its
reformation by its subversion; that he should
approach to the faults of the state as to the wounds of
a father, with pious awe and trembling solicitude. By
this wise prejudice we are taught to look with horror
on those children of their country who are prompt
rashly to hack that aged parent in pieces, and put him
into the kettle of magicians, in hopes that by their
poisonous weeds, and wild incantations, they may
regenerate the paternal constitution, and renovate
their father’s life.
Society is indeed a contract. Subordinate contracts
for objects of mere occasional interest may be
dissolved at pleasure—but the state ought not to be
considered as nothing better than a partnership
agreement in a trade of pepper and coffee, calico or
tobacco, or some other such low concern, to be taken
up for a little temporary interest, and to be dissolved
by the fancy of the parties. It is to be looked on with
other reverence; because it is not a partnership in
things subservient only to the gross animal existence
of a temporary and perishable nature. It is a
partnership in all science; a partnership in all art; a
partnership in every virtue, and in all perfection.
As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained
in many generations, it becomes a partnership not
only between those who are living, but between those
who are living, those who are dead, and those who
are to be born. . . . The municipal corporations of
that universal kingdom are not morally at liberty at
their pleasure, and on their speculations of a
contingent improvement, wholly to separate and tear
asunder the bands of their subordinate community,
and to dissolve it into an unsocial, uncivil,
unconnected chaos of elementary principles.
Passage 2
Every age and generation must be as free to act for
itself, in all cases, as the ages and generations which
preceded it. The vanity and presumption of
governing beyond the grave, is the most ridiculous
and insolent of all tyrannies.
Man has no property in man; neither has any
generation a property in the generations which are to
follow. The Parliament or the people of 1688, or of
any other period, had no more right to dispose of the
people of the present day, or to bind or to control
them in any shape whatever, than the parliament or
the people of the present day have to dispose of, bind,
or control those who are to live a hundred or a
thousand years hence.
Every generation is, and must be, competent
to all the purposes which its occasions require. It is
the living, and not the dead, that are to be
accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power
and his wants cease with him; and having no longer
any participation in the concerns of this world, he
has no longer any authority in directing who shall be
its governors, or how its government shall be
organized, or how administered....
Those who have quitted the world, and those who
are not yet arrived at it, are as remote from each
other, as the utmost stretch of mortal imagination
can conceive. What possible obligation, then, can
exist between them; what rule or principle can be laid
down, that two nonentities, the one out of existence,
and the other not in, and who never can meet in this
world, that the one should control the other to the
end of time?...
The circumstances of the world are continually
changing, and the opinions of men change also; and
as government is for the living, and not for the dead,
it is the living only that has any right in it. That
which may be thought right and found convenient in
one age, may be thought wrong and found
inconvenient in another. In such cases, who is to
decide, the living, or the dead?
Question 33:
As used in line 4, “state” most nearly refers to a
A) style of living.
B) position in life.
C) temporary condition.
D) political entity.
Answer: | D | true | sat-practice_4-question_33 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Edmund Burke, Reflections on the
Revolution in France. Originally published in 1790. Passage 2
is adapted from Thomas Paine, Rights of Man. Originally
published in 1791.
Passage 1
To avoid . . . the evils of inconstancy and
versatility, ten thousand times worse than those of
obstinacy and the blindest prejudice, we have
consecrated the state, that no man should approach
to look into its defects or corruptions but with due
caution; that he should never dream of beginning its
reformation by its subversion; that he should
approach to the faults of the state as to the wounds of
a father, with pious awe and trembling solicitude. By
this wise prejudice we are taught to look with horror
on those children of their country who are prompt
rashly to hack that aged parent in pieces, and put him
into the kettle of magicians, in hopes that by their
poisonous weeds, and wild incantations, they may
regenerate the paternal constitution, and renovate
their father’s life.
Society is indeed a contract. Subordinate contracts
for objects of mere occasional interest may be
dissolved at pleasure—but the state ought not to be
considered as nothing better than a partnership
agreement in a trade of pepper and coffee, calico or
tobacco, or some other such low concern, to be taken
up for a little temporary interest, and to be dissolved
by the fancy of the parties. It is to be looked on with
other reverence; because it is not a partnership in
things subservient only to the gross animal existence
of a temporary and perishable nature. It is a
partnership in all science; a partnership in all art; a
partnership in every virtue, and in all perfection.
As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained
in many generations, it becomes a partnership not
only between those who are living, but between those
who are living, those who are dead, and those who
are to be born. . . . The municipal corporations of
that universal kingdom are not morally at liberty at
their pleasure, and on their speculations of a
contingent improvement, wholly to separate and tear
asunder the bands of their subordinate community,
and to dissolve it into an unsocial, uncivil,
unconnected chaos of elementary principles.
Passage 2
Every age and generation must be as free to act for
itself, in all cases, as the ages and generations which
preceded it. The vanity and presumption of
governing beyond the grave, is the most ridiculous
and insolent of all tyrannies.
Man has no property in man; neither has any
generation a property in the generations which are to
follow. The Parliament or the people of 1688, or of
any other period, had no more right to dispose of the
people of the present day, or to bind or to control
them in any shape whatever, than the parliament or
the people of the present day have to dispose of, bind,
or control those who are to live a hundred or a
thousand years hence.
Every generation is, and must be, competent
to all the purposes which its occasions require. It is
the living, and not the dead, that are to be
accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power
and his wants cease with him; and having no longer
any participation in the concerns of this world, he
has no longer any authority in directing who shall be
its governors, or how its government shall be
organized, or how administered....
Those who have quitted the world, and those who
are not yet arrived at it, are as remote from each
other, as the utmost stretch of mortal imagination
can conceive. What possible obligation, then, can
exist between them; what rule or principle can be laid
down, that two nonentities, the one out of existence,
and the other not in, and who never can meet in this
world, that the one should control the other to the
end of time?...
The circumstances of the world are continually
changing, and the opinions of men change also; and
as government is for the living, and not for the dead,
it is the living only that has any right in it. That
which may be thought right and found convenient in
one age, may be thought wrong and found
inconvenient in another. In such cases, who is to
decide, the living, or the dead?
Question 36:
How would Paine most likely respond to Burke’s statement in lines 30-34, Passage 1 (“As the... born”)?
A) He would assert that the notion of a partnership across generations is less plausible to people of his era than it was to people in the past.
B) He would argue that there are no politically meaningful links between the dead, the living, and the unborn.
C) He would question the possibility that significant changes to a political system could be accomplished within a single generation.
D) He would point out that we cannot know what judgments the dead would make about contemporary issues.
Answer: | B | true | sat-practice_4-question_36 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Edmund Burke, Reflections on the
Revolution in France. Originally published in 1790. Passage 2
is adapted from Thomas Paine, Rights of Man. Originally
published in 1791.
Passage 1
To avoid . . . the evils of inconstancy and
versatility, ten thousand times worse than those of
obstinacy and the blindest prejudice, we have
consecrated the state, that no man should approach
to look into its defects or corruptions but with due
caution; that he should never dream of beginning its
reformation by its subversion; that he should
approach to the faults of the state as to the wounds of
a father, with pious awe and trembling solicitude. By
this wise prejudice we are taught to look with horror
on those children of their country who are prompt
rashly to hack that aged parent in pieces, and put him
into the kettle of magicians, in hopes that by their
poisonous weeds, and wild incantations, they may
regenerate the paternal constitution, and renovate
their father’s life.
Society is indeed a contract. Subordinate contracts
for objects of mere occasional interest may be
dissolved at pleasure—but the state ought not to be
considered as nothing better than a partnership
agreement in a trade of pepper and coffee, calico or
tobacco, or some other such low concern, to be taken
up for a little temporary interest, and to be dissolved
by the fancy of the parties. It is to be looked on with
other reverence; because it is not a partnership in
things subservient only to the gross animal existence
of a temporary and perishable nature. It is a
partnership in all science; a partnership in all art; a
partnership in every virtue, and in all perfection.
As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained
in many generations, it becomes a partnership not
only between those who are living, but between those
who are living, those who are dead, and those who
are to be born. . . . The municipal corporations of
that universal kingdom are not morally at liberty at
their pleasure, and on their speculations of a
contingent improvement, wholly to separate and tear
asunder the bands of their subordinate community,
and to dissolve it into an unsocial, uncivil,
unconnected chaos of elementary principles.
Passage 2
Every age and generation must be as free to act for
itself, in all cases, as the ages and generations which
preceded it. The vanity and presumption of
governing beyond the grave, is the most ridiculous
and insolent of all tyrannies.
Man has no property in man; neither has any
generation a property in the generations which are to
follow. The Parliament or the people of 1688, or of
any other period, had no more right to dispose of the
people of the present day, or to bind or to control
them in any shape whatever, than the parliament or
the people of the present day have to dispose of, bind,
or control those who are to live a hundred or a
thousand years hence.
Every generation is, and must be, competent
to all the purposes which its occasions require. It is
the living, and not the dead, that are to be
accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power
and his wants cease with him; and having no longer
any participation in the concerns of this world, he
has no longer any authority in directing who shall be
its governors, or how its government shall be
organized, or how administered....
Those who have quitted the world, and those who
are not yet arrived at it, are as remote from each
other, as the utmost stretch of mortal imagination
can conceive. What possible obligation, then, can
exist between them; what rule or principle can be laid
down, that two nonentities, the one out of existence,
and the other not in, and who never can meet in this
world, that the one should control the other to the
end of time?...
The circumstances of the world are continually
changing, and the opinions of men change also; and
as government is for the living, and not for the dead,
it is the living only that has any right in it. That
which may be thought right and found convenient in
one age, may be thought wrong and found
inconvenient in another. In such cases, who is to
decide, the living, or the dead?
Question 40:
Which choice best states the relationship between the two passages?
A) Passage 2 challenges the primary argument of Passage 1.
B) Passage 2 advocates an alternative approach to a problem discussed in Passage 1.
C) Passage 2 provides further evidence to support an idea introduced in Passage 1.
D) Passage 2 exemplifies an attitude promoted in Passage 1.
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_4-question_40 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Edmund Burke, Reflections on the
Revolution in France. Originally published in 1790. Passage 2
is adapted from Thomas Paine, Rights of Man. Originally
published in 1791.
Passage 1
To avoid . . . the evils of inconstancy and
versatility, ten thousand times worse than those of
obstinacy and the blindest prejudice, we have
consecrated the state, that no man should approach
to look into its defects or corruptions but with due
caution; that he should never dream of beginning its
reformation by its subversion; that he should
approach to the faults of the state as to the wounds of
a father, with pious awe and trembling solicitude. By
this wise prejudice we are taught to look with horror
on those children of their country who are prompt
rashly to hack that aged parent in pieces, and put him
into the kettle of magicians, in hopes that by their
poisonous weeds, and wild incantations, they may
regenerate the paternal constitution, and renovate
their father’s life.
Society is indeed a contract. Subordinate contracts
for objects of mere occasional interest may be
dissolved at pleasure—but the state ought not to be
considered as nothing better than a partnership
agreement in a trade of pepper and coffee, calico or
tobacco, or some other such low concern, to be taken
up for a little temporary interest, and to be dissolved
by the fancy of the parties. It is to be looked on with
other reverence; because it is not a partnership in
things subservient only to the gross animal existence
of a temporary and perishable nature. It is a
partnership in all science; a partnership in all art; a
partnership in every virtue, and in all perfection.
As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained
in many generations, it becomes a partnership not
only between those who are living, but between those
who are living, those who are dead, and those who
are to be born. . . . The municipal corporations of
that universal kingdom are not morally at liberty at
their pleasure, and on their speculations of a
contingent improvement, wholly to separate and tear
asunder the bands of their subordinate community,
and to dissolve it into an unsocial, uncivil,
unconnected chaos of elementary principles.
Passage 2
Every age and generation must be as free to act for
itself, in all cases, as the ages and generations which
preceded it. The vanity and presumption of
governing beyond the grave, is the most ridiculous
and insolent of all tyrannies.
Man has no property in man; neither has any
generation a property in the generations which are to
follow. The Parliament or the people of 1688, or of
any other period, had no more right to dispose of the
people of the present day, or to bind or to control
them in any shape whatever, than the parliament or
the people of the present day have to dispose of, bind,
or control those who are to live a hundred or a
thousand years hence.
Every generation is, and must be, competent
to all the purposes which its occasions require. It is
the living, and not the dead, that are to be
accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power
and his wants cease with him; and having no longer
any participation in the concerns of this world, he
has no longer any authority in directing who shall be
its governors, or how its government shall be
organized, or how administered....
Those who have quitted the world, and those who
are not yet arrived at it, are as remote from each
other, as the utmost stretch of mortal imagination
can conceive. What possible obligation, then, can
exist between them; what rule or principle can be laid
down, that two nonentities, the one out of existence,
and the other not in, and who never can meet in this
world, that the one should control the other to the
end of time?...
The circumstances of the world are continually
changing, and the opinions of men change also; and
as government is for the living, and not for the dead,
it is the living only that has any right in it. That
which may be thought right and found convenient in
one age, may be thought wrong and found
inconvenient in another. In such cases, who is to
decide, the living, or the dead?
Question 35:
It can most reasonably be inferred from Passage 2 that Paine views historical precedents as
A) generally helpful to those who want to change society.
B) surprisingly difficult for many people to comprehend.
C) frequently responsible for human progress.
D) largely irrelevant to current political decisions.
Answer: | D | false | sat-practice_4-question_35 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Edmund Burke, Reflections on the
Revolution in France. Originally published in 1790. Passage 2
is adapted from Thomas Paine, Rights of Man. Originally
published in 1791.
Passage 1
To avoid . . . the evils of inconstancy and
versatility, ten thousand times worse than those of
obstinacy and the blindest prejudice, we have
consecrated the state, that no man should approach
to look into its defects or corruptions but with due
caution; that he should never dream of beginning its
reformation by its subversion; that he should
approach to the faults of the state as to the wounds of
a father, with pious awe and trembling solicitude. By
this wise prejudice we are taught to look with horror
on those children of their country who are prompt
rashly to hack that aged parent in pieces, and put him
into the kettle of magicians, in hopes that by their
poisonous weeds, and wild incantations, they may
regenerate the paternal constitution, and renovate
their father’s life.
Society is indeed a contract. Subordinate contracts
for objects of mere occasional interest may be
dissolved at pleasure—but the state ought not to be
considered as nothing better than a partnership
agreement in a trade of pepper and coffee, calico or
tobacco, or some other such low concern, to be taken
up for a little temporary interest, and to be dissolved
by the fancy of the parties. It is to be looked on with
other reverence; because it is not a partnership in
things subservient only to the gross animal existence
of a temporary and perishable nature. It is a
partnership in all science; a partnership in all art; a
partnership in every virtue, and in all perfection.
As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained
in many generations, it becomes a partnership not
only between those who are living, but between those
who are living, those who are dead, and those who
are to be born. . . . The municipal corporations of
that universal kingdom are not morally at liberty at
their pleasure, and on their speculations of a
contingent improvement, wholly to separate and tear
asunder the bands of their subordinate community,
and to dissolve it into an unsocial, uncivil,
unconnected chaos of elementary principles.
Passage 2
Every age and generation must be as free to act for
itself, in all cases, as the ages and generations which
preceded it. The vanity and presumption of
governing beyond the grave, is the most ridiculous
and insolent of all tyrannies.
Man has no property in man; neither has any
generation a property in the generations which are to
follow. The Parliament or the people of 1688, or of
any other period, had no more right to dispose of the
people of the present day, or to bind or to control
them in any shape whatever, than the parliament or
the people of the present day have to dispose of, bind,
or control those who are to live a hundred or a
thousand years hence.
Every generation is, and must be, competent
to all the purposes which its occasions require. It is
the living, and not the dead, that are to be
accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power
and his wants cease with him; and having no longer
any participation in the concerns of this world, he
has no longer any authority in directing who shall be
its governors, or how its government shall be
organized, or how administered....
Those who have quitted the world, and those who
are not yet arrived at it, are as remote from each
other, as the utmost stretch of mortal imagination
can conceive. What possible obligation, then, can
exist between them; what rule or principle can be laid
down, that two nonentities, the one out of existence,
and the other not in, and who never can meet in this
world, that the one should control the other to the
end of time?...
The circumstances of the world are continually
changing, and the opinions of men change also; and
as government is for the living, and not for the dead,
it is the living only that has any right in it. That
which may be thought right and found convenient in
one age, may be thought wrong and found
inconvenient in another. In such cases, who is to
decide, the living, or the dead?
Question 38:
Which choice best describes how Burke would most likely have reacted to Paine’s remarks in the final paragraph of Passage 2?
A) With approval, because adapting to new events may enhance existing partnerships.
B) With resignation, because changing circumstances are an inevitable aspect of life.
C) With skepticism, because Paine does not substantiate his claim with examples of governments changed for the better.
D) With disapproval, because changing conditions are insufficient justification for changing the form of government.
Answer: | D | false | sat-practice_4-question_38 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Edmund Burke, Reflections on the
Revolution in France. Originally published in 1790. Passage 2
is adapted from Thomas Paine, Rights of Man. Originally
published in 1791.
Passage 1
To avoid . . . the evils of inconstancy and
versatility, ten thousand times worse than those of
obstinacy and the blindest prejudice, we have
consecrated the state, that no man should approach
to look into its defects or corruptions but with due
caution; that he should never dream of beginning its
reformation by its subversion; that he should
approach to the faults of the state as to the wounds of
a father, with pious awe and trembling solicitude. By
this wise prejudice we are taught to look with horror
on those children of their country who are prompt
rashly to hack that aged parent in pieces, and put him
into the kettle of magicians, in hopes that by their
poisonous weeds, and wild incantations, they may
regenerate the paternal constitution, and renovate
their father’s life.
Society is indeed a contract. Subordinate contracts
for objects of mere occasional interest may be
dissolved at pleasure—but the state ought not to be
considered as nothing better than a partnership
agreement in a trade of pepper and coffee, calico or
tobacco, or some other such low concern, to be taken
up for a little temporary interest, and to be dissolved
by the fancy of the parties. It is to be looked on with
other reverence; because it is not a partnership in
things subservient only to the gross animal existence
of a temporary and perishable nature. It is a
partnership in all science; a partnership in all art; a
partnership in every virtue, and in all perfection.
As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained
in many generations, it becomes a partnership not
only between those who are living, but between those
who are living, those who are dead, and those who
are to be born. . . . The municipal corporations of
that universal kingdom are not morally at liberty at
their pleasure, and on their speculations of a
contingent improvement, wholly to separate and tear
asunder the bands of their subordinate community,
and to dissolve it into an unsocial, uncivil,
unconnected chaos of elementary principles.
Passage 2
Every age and generation must be as free to act for
itself, in all cases, as the ages and generations which
preceded it. The vanity and presumption of
governing beyond the grave, is the most ridiculous
and insolent of all tyrannies.
Man has no property in man; neither has any
generation a property in the generations which are to
follow. The Parliament or the people of 1688, or of
any other period, had no more right to dispose of the
people of the present day, or to bind or to control
them in any shape whatever, than the parliament or
the people of the present day have to dispose of, bind,
or control those who are to live a hundred or a
thousand years hence.
Every generation is, and must be, competent
to all the purposes which its occasions require. It is
the living, and not the dead, that are to be
accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power
and his wants cease with him; and having no longer
any participation in the concerns of this world, he
has no longer any authority in directing who shall be
its governors, or how its government shall be
organized, or how administered....
Those who have quitted the world, and those who
are not yet arrived at it, are as remote from each
other, as the utmost stretch of mortal imagination
can conceive. What possible obligation, then, can
exist between them; what rule or principle can be laid
down, that two nonentities, the one out of existence,
and the other not in, and who never can meet in this
world, that the one should control the other to the
end of time?...
The circumstances of the world are continually
changing, and the opinions of men change also; and
as government is for the living, and not for the dead,
it is the living only that has any right in it. That
which may be thought right and found convenient in
one age, may be thought wrong and found
inconvenient in another. In such cases, who is to
decide, the living, or the dead?
Question 34:
As used in line 22, “low” most nearly means
A) petty.
B) weak.
C) inadequate.
D) depleted.
Answer: | A | true | sat-practice_4-question_34 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Edmund Burke, Reflections on the
Revolution in France. Originally published in 1790. Passage 2
is adapted from Thomas Paine, Rights of Man. Originally
published in 1791.
Passage 1
To avoid . . . the evils of inconstancy and
versatility, ten thousand times worse than those of
obstinacy and the blindest prejudice, we have
consecrated the state, that no man should approach
to look into its defects or corruptions but with due
caution; that he should never dream of beginning its
reformation by its subversion; that he should
approach to the faults of the state as to the wounds of
a father, with pious awe and trembling solicitude. By
this wise prejudice we are taught to look with horror
on those children of their country who are prompt
rashly to hack that aged parent in pieces, and put him
into the kettle of magicians, in hopes that by their
poisonous weeds, and wild incantations, they may
regenerate the paternal constitution, and renovate
their father’s life.
Society is indeed a contract. Subordinate contracts
for objects of mere occasional interest may be
dissolved at pleasure—but the state ought not to be
considered as nothing better than a partnership
agreement in a trade of pepper and coffee, calico or
tobacco, or some other such low concern, to be taken
up for a little temporary interest, and to be dissolved
by the fancy of the parties. It is to be looked on with
other reverence; because it is not a partnership in
things subservient only to the gross animal existence
of a temporary and perishable nature. It is a
partnership in all science; a partnership in all art; a
partnership in every virtue, and in all perfection.
As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained
in many generations, it becomes a partnership not
only between those who are living, but between those
who are living, those who are dead, and those who
are to be born. . . . The municipal corporations of
that universal kingdom are not morally at liberty at
their pleasure, and on their speculations of a
contingent improvement, wholly to separate and tear
asunder the bands of their subordinate community,
and to dissolve it into an unsocial, uncivil,
unconnected chaos of elementary principles.
Passage 2
Every age and generation must be as free to act for
itself, in all cases, as the ages and generations which
preceded it. The vanity and presumption of
governing beyond the grave, is the most ridiculous
and insolent of all tyrannies.
Man has no property in man; neither has any
generation a property in the generations which are to
follow. The Parliament or the people of 1688, or of
any other period, had no more right to dispose of the
people of the present day, or to bind or to control
them in any shape whatever, than the parliament or
the people of the present day have to dispose of, bind,
or control those who are to live a hundred or a
thousand years hence.
Every generation is, and must be, competent
to all the purposes which its occasions require. It is
the living, and not the dead, that are to be
accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power
and his wants cease with him; and having no longer
any participation in the concerns of this world, he
has no longer any authority in directing who shall be
its governors, or how its government shall be
organized, or how administered....
Those who have quitted the world, and those who
are not yet arrived at it, are as remote from each
other, as the utmost stretch of mortal imagination
can conceive. What possible obligation, then, can
exist between them; what rule or principle can be laid
down, that two nonentities, the one out of existence,
and the other not in, and who never can meet in this
world, that the one should control the other to the
end of time?...
The circumstances of the world are continually
changing, and the opinions of men change also; and
as government is for the living, and not for the dead,
it is the living only that has any right in it. That
which may be thought right and found convenient in
one age, may be thought wrong and found
inconvenient in another. In such cases, who is to
decide, the living, or the dead?
Question 32:
In Passage 1, Burke indicates that a contract between a person and society differs from other contracts mainly in its
A) brevity and prominence.
B) complexity and rigidity.
C) precision and usefulness.
D) seriousness and permanence.
Answer: | D | false | sat-practice_4-question_32 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
qThis passage is adapted from Carolyn Gramling, “Source of
Mysterious Medieval Eruption Identified.” ©2013 by
American Association for the Advancement of Science.
About 750 years ago, a powerful volcano erupted
somewhere on Earth, kicking off a centuries-long
cold snap known as the Little Ice Age. Identifying the
volcano responsible has been tricky.
That a powerful volcano erupted somewhere in
the world, sometime in the Middle Ages, is written in
polar ice cores in the form of layers of sulfate
deposits and tiny shards of volcanic glass. These
cores suggest that the amount of sulfur the mystery
volcano sent into the stratosphere put it firmly
among the ranks of the strongest climate-perturbing
eruptions of the current geological epoch, the
Holocene, a period that stretches from 10,000 years
ago to the present. A haze of stratospheric sulfur
cools the climate by reflecting solar energy back into
space.
In 2012, a team of scientists led by geochemist
Gifford Miller strengthened the link between the
mystery eruption and the onset of the Little Ice Age
by using radiocarbon dating of dead plant material
from beneath the ice caps on Baffin Island and
Iceland, as well as ice and sediment core data, to
determine that the cold summers and ice growth
began abruptly between 1275 and 1300 C.E. (and
became intensified between 1430 and 1455 C.E.).
Such a sudden onset pointed to a huge volcanic
eruption injecting sulfur into the stratosphere and
starting the cooling. Subsequent, unusually large and
frequent eruptions of other volcanoes, as well as
sea-ice/ocean feedbacks persisting long after the
aerosols have been removed from the atmosphere,
may have prolonged the cooling through the 1700s.
Volcanologist Franck Lavigne and colleagues now
think they’ve identified the volcano in question:
Indonesia’s Samalas. One line of evidence, they note,
is historical records. According to Babad Lombok,
records of the island written on palm leaves in Old
Javanese, Samalas erupted catastrophically before the
end of the 13th century, devastating surrounding
villages—including Lombok’s capital at the time,
Pamatan—with ash and fast-moving sweeps of hot
rock and gas called pyroclastic flows.
The researchers then began to reconstruct the
formation of the large, 800-meter-deep caldera [a
basin-shaped volcanic crater] that now sits atop the
volcano. They examined 130 outcrops on the flanks
of the volcano, exposing sequences of pumice—ash
hardened into rock—and other pyroclastic material.
The volume of ash deposited, and the estimated
height of the eruption plume (43 kilometers above
sea level) put the eruption’s magnitude at a
minimum of 7 on the volcanic explosivity index
(which has a scale of 1 to 8)—making it one of the
largest known in the Holocene.
The team also performed radiocarbon analyses on
carbonized tree trunks and branches buried within
the pyroclastic deposits to confirm the date of the
eruption; it could not, they concluded, have
happened before 1257 C.E., and certainly happened
in the 13th century.
It’s not a total surprise that an Indonesian volcano
might be the source of the eruption, Miller says. “An
equatorial eruption is more consistent with the
apparent climate impacts.” And, he adds, with sulfate
appearing in both polar ice caps—Arctic and
Antarctic—there is “a strong consensus” that this
also supports an equatorial source.
Another possible candidate—both in terms of
timing and geographical location—is Ecuador’s
Quilotoa, estimated to have last erupted between
1147 and 1320 C.E. But when Lavigne’s team
examined shards of volcanic glass from this volcano,
they found that they didn’t match the chemical
composition of the glass found in polar ice cores,
whereas the Samalas glass is a much closer match.
That, they suggest, further strengthens the case that
Samalas was responsible for the medieval “year
without summer” in 1258 C.E.
Question 49:
Which choice best supports the claim that Quilotoa was not responsible for the Little Ice Age?
A) Lines 3-4 (“Identifying... tricky”)
B) Lines 26-28 (“Sucha... cooling”)
C) Lines 43-46 (“The researchers... atop the volcano”)
D) Lines 71-75 (“But... closer match”)
Answer: | D | true | sat-practice_4-question_49 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
qThis passage is adapted from Carolyn Gramling, “Source of
Mysterious Medieval Eruption Identified.” ©2013 by
American Association for the Advancement of Science.
About 750 years ago, a powerful volcano erupted
somewhere on Earth, kicking off a centuries-long
cold snap known as the Little Ice Age. Identifying the
volcano responsible has been tricky.
That a powerful volcano erupted somewhere in
the world, sometime in the Middle Ages, is written in
polar ice cores in the form of layers of sulfate
deposits and tiny shards of volcanic glass. These
cores suggest that the amount of sulfur the mystery
volcano sent into the stratosphere put it firmly
among the ranks of the strongest climate-perturbing
eruptions of the current geological epoch, the
Holocene, a period that stretches from 10,000 years
ago to the present. A haze of stratospheric sulfur
cools the climate by reflecting solar energy back into
space.
In 2012, a team of scientists led by geochemist
Gifford Miller strengthened the link between the
mystery eruption and the onset of the Little Ice Age
by using radiocarbon dating of dead plant material
from beneath the ice caps on Baffin Island and
Iceland, as well as ice and sediment core data, to
determine that the cold summers and ice growth
began abruptly between 1275 and 1300 C.E. (and
became intensified between 1430 and 1455 C.E.).
Such a sudden onset pointed to a huge volcanic
eruption injecting sulfur into the stratosphere and
starting the cooling. Subsequent, unusually large and
frequent eruptions of other volcanoes, as well as
sea-ice/ocean feedbacks persisting long after the
aerosols have been removed from the atmosphere,
may have prolonged the cooling through the 1700s.
Volcanologist Franck Lavigne and colleagues now
think they’ve identified the volcano in question:
Indonesia’s Samalas. One line of evidence, they note,
is historical records. According to Babad Lombok,
records of the island written on palm leaves in Old
Javanese, Samalas erupted catastrophically before the
end of the 13th century, devastating surrounding
villages—including Lombok’s capital at the time,
Pamatan—with ash and fast-moving sweeps of hot
rock and gas called pyroclastic flows.
The researchers then began to reconstruct the
formation of the large, 800-meter-deep caldera [a
basin-shaped volcanic crater] that now sits atop the
volcano. They examined 130 outcrops on the flanks
of the volcano, exposing sequences of pumice—ash
hardened into rock—and other pyroclastic material.
The volume of ash deposited, and the estimated
height of the eruption plume (43 kilometers above
sea level) put the eruption’s magnitude at a
minimum of 7 on the volcanic explosivity index
(which has a scale of 1 to 8)—making it one of the
largest known in the Holocene.
The team also performed radiocarbon analyses on
carbonized tree trunks and branches buried within
the pyroclastic deposits to confirm the date of the
eruption; it could not, they concluded, have
happened before 1257 C.E., and certainly happened
in the 13th century.
It’s not a total surprise that an Indonesian volcano
might be the source of the eruption, Miller says. “An
equatorial eruption is more consistent with the
apparent climate impacts.” And, he adds, with sulfate
appearing in both polar ice caps—Arctic and
Antarctic—there is “a strong consensus” that this
also supports an equatorial source.
Another possible candidate—both in terms of
timing and geographical location—is Ecuador’s
Quilotoa, estimated to have last erupted between
1147 and 1320 C.E. But when Lavigne’s team
examined shards of volcanic glass from this volcano,
they found that they didn’t match the chemical
composition of the glass found in polar ice cores,
whereas the Samalas glass is a much closer match.
That, they suggest, further strengthens the case that
Samalas was responsible for the medieval “year
without summer” in 1258 C.E.
Question 46:
Where does the author indicate the medieval volcanic eruption most probably was located?
A) Near the equator, in Indonesia
B) In the Arctic region
C) In the Antarctic region
D) Near the equator, in Ecuador
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_4-question_46 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
qThis passage is adapted from Carolyn Gramling, “Source of
Mysterious Medieval Eruption Identified.” ©2013 by
American Association for the Advancement of Science.
About 750 years ago, a powerful volcano erupted
somewhere on Earth, kicking off a centuries-long
cold snap known as the Little Ice Age. Identifying the
volcano responsible has been tricky.
That a powerful volcano erupted somewhere in
the world, sometime in the Middle Ages, is written in
polar ice cores in the form of layers of sulfate
deposits and tiny shards of volcanic glass. These
cores suggest that the amount of sulfur the mystery
volcano sent into the stratosphere put it firmly
among the ranks of the strongest climate-perturbing
eruptions of the current geological epoch, the
Holocene, a period that stretches from 10,000 years
ago to the present. A haze of stratospheric sulfur
cools the climate by reflecting solar energy back into
space.
In 2012, a team of scientists led by geochemist
Gifford Miller strengthened the link between the
mystery eruption and the onset of the Little Ice Age
by using radiocarbon dating of dead plant material
from beneath the ice caps on Baffin Island and
Iceland, as well as ice and sediment core data, to
determine that the cold summers and ice growth
began abruptly between 1275 and 1300 C.E. (and
became intensified between 1430 and 1455 C.E.).
Such a sudden onset pointed to a huge volcanic
eruption injecting sulfur into the stratosphere and
starting the cooling. Subsequent, unusually large and
frequent eruptions of other volcanoes, as well as
sea-ice/ocean feedbacks persisting long after the
aerosols have been removed from the atmosphere,
may have prolonged the cooling through the 1700s.
Volcanologist Franck Lavigne and colleagues now
think they’ve identified the volcano in question:
Indonesia’s Samalas. One line of evidence, they note,
is historical records. According to Babad Lombok,
records of the island written on palm leaves in Old
Javanese, Samalas erupted catastrophically before the
end of the 13th century, devastating surrounding
villages—including Lombok’s capital at the time,
Pamatan—with ash and fast-moving sweeps of hot
rock and gas called pyroclastic flows.
The researchers then began to reconstruct the
formation of the large, 800-meter-deep caldera [a
basin-shaped volcanic crater] that now sits atop the
volcano. They examined 130 outcrops on the flanks
of the volcano, exposing sequences of pumice—ash
hardened into rock—and other pyroclastic material.
The volume of ash deposited, and the estimated
height of the eruption plume (43 kilometers above
sea level) put the eruption’s magnitude at a
minimum of 7 on the volcanic explosivity index
(which has a scale of 1 to 8)—making it one of the
largest known in the Holocene.
The team also performed radiocarbon analyses on
carbonized tree trunks and branches buried within
the pyroclastic deposits to confirm the date of the
eruption; it could not, they concluded, have
happened before 1257 C.E., and certainly happened
in the 13th century.
It’s not a total surprise that an Indonesian volcano
might be the source of the eruption, Miller says. “An
equatorial eruption is more consistent with the
apparent climate impacts.” And, he adds, with sulfate
appearing in both polar ice caps—Arctic and
Antarctic—there is “a strong consensus” that this
also supports an equatorial source.
Another possible candidate—both in terms of
timing and geographical location—is Ecuador’s
Quilotoa, estimated to have last erupted between
1147 and 1320 C.E. But when Lavigne’s team
examined shards of volcanic glass from this volcano,
they found that they didn’t match the chemical
composition of the glass found in polar ice cores,
whereas the Samalas glass is a much closer match.
That, they suggest, further strengthens the case that
Samalas was responsible for the medieval “year
without summer” in 1258 C.E.
Question 42:
The main purpose of the passage is to
A) describe periods in Earth’s recent geologic history.
B) explain the methods scientists use in radiocarbon analysis.
C) describe evidence linking the volcano Samalas to the Little Ice Age.
D) explain how volcanic glass forms during volcanic eruptions.
Answer: | C | false | sat-practice_4-question_42 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
qThis passage is adapted from Carolyn Gramling, “Source of
Mysterious Medieval Eruption Identified.” ©2013 by
American Association for the Advancement of Science.
About 750 years ago, a powerful volcano erupted
somewhere on Earth, kicking off a centuries-long
cold snap known as the Little Ice Age. Identifying the
volcano responsible has been tricky.
That a powerful volcano erupted somewhere in
the world, sometime in the Middle Ages, is written in
polar ice cores in the form of layers of sulfate
deposits and tiny shards of volcanic glass. These
cores suggest that the amount of sulfur the mystery
volcano sent into the stratosphere put it firmly
among the ranks of the strongest climate-perturbing
eruptions of the current geological epoch, the
Holocene, a period that stretches from 10,000 years
ago to the present. A haze of stratospheric sulfur
cools the climate by reflecting solar energy back into
space.
In 2012, a team of scientists led by geochemist
Gifford Miller strengthened the link between the
mystery eruption and the onset of the Little Ice Age
by using radiocarbon dating of dead plant material
from beneath the ice caps on Baffin Island and
Iceland, as well as ice and sediment core data, to
determine that the cold summers and ice growth
began abruptly between 1275 and 1300 C.E. (and
became intensified between 1430 and 1455 C.E.).
Such a sudden onset pointed to a huge volcanic
eruption injecting sulfur into the stratosphere and
starting the cooling. Subsequent, unusually large and
frequent eruptions of other volcanoes, as well as
sea-ice/ocean feedbacks persisting long after the
aerosols have been removed from the atmosphere,
may have prolonged the cooling through the 1700s.
Volcanologist Franck Lavigne and colleagues now
think they’ve identified the volcano in question:
Indonesia’s Samalas. One line of evidence, they note,
is historical records. According to Babad Lombok,
records of the island written on palm leaves in Old
Javanese, Samalas erupted catastrophically before the
end of the 13th century, devastating surrounding
villages—including Lombok’s capital at the time,
Pamatan—with ash and fast-moving sweeps of hot
rock and gas called pyroclastic flows.
The researchers then began to reconstruct the
formation of the large, 800-meter-deep caldera [a
basin-shaped volcanic crater] that now sits atop the
volcano. They examined 130 outcrops on the flanks
of the volcano, exposing sequences of pumice—ash
hardened into rock—and other pyroclastic material.
The volume of ash deposited, and the estimated
height of the eruption plume (43 kilometers above
sea level) put the eruption’s magnitude at a
minimum of 7 on the volcanic explosivity index
(which has a scale of 1 to 8)—making it one of the
largest known in the Holocene.
The team also performed radiocarbon analyses on
carbonized tree trunks and branches buried within
the pyroclastic deposits to confirm the date of the
eruption; it could not, they concluded, have
happened before 1257 C.E., and certainly happened
in the 13th century.
It’s not a total surprise that an Indonesian volcano
might be the source of the eruption, Miller says. “An
equatorial eruption is more consistent with the
apparent climate impacts.” And, he adds, with sulfate
appearing in both polar ice caps—Arctic and
Antarctic—there is “a strong consensus” that this
also supports an equatorial source.
Another possible candidate—both in terms of
timing and geographical location—is Ecuador’s
Quilotoa, estimated to have last erupted between
1147 and 1320 C.E. But when Lavigne’s team
examined shards of volcanic glass from this volcano,
they found that they didn’t match the chemical
composition of the glass found in polar ice cores,
whereas the Samalas glass is a much closer match.
That, they suggest, further strengthens the case that
Samalas was responsible for the medieval “year
without summer” in 1258 C.E.
Question 48:
As used in line 68, the phrase “Another possible candidate” implies that
A) powerful volcanic eruptions occur frequently.
B) the effects of volcanic eruptions can last for centuries.
C) scientists know of other volcanoes that erupted during the Middle Ages.
D) other volcanoes have calderas that are very large.
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_4-question_48 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
qThis passage is adapted from Carolyn Gramling, “Source of
Mysterious Medieval Eruption Identified.” ©2013 by
American Association for the Advancement of Science.
About 750 years ago, a powerful volcano erupted
somewhere on Earth, kicking off a centuries-long
cold snap known as the Little Ice Age. Identifying the
volcano responsible has been tricky.
That a powerful volcano erupted somewhere in
the world, sometime in the Middle Ages, is written in
polar ice cores in the form of layers of sulfate
deposits and tiny shards of volcanic glass. These
cores suggest that the amount of sulfur the mystery
volcano sent into the stratosphere put it firmly
among the ranks of the strongest climate-perturbing
eruptions of the current geological epoch, the
Holocene, a period that stretches from 10,000 years
ago to the present. A haze of stratospheric sulfur
cools the climate by reflecting solar energy back into
space.
In 2012, a team of scientists led by geochemist
Gifford Miller strengthened the link between the
mystery eruption and the onset of the Little Ice Age
by using radiocarbon dating of dead plant material
from beneath the ice caps on Baffin Island and
Iceland, as well as ice and sediment core data, to
determine that the cold summers and ice growth
began abruptly between 1275 and 1300 C.E. (and
became intensified between 1430 and 1455 C.E.).
Such a sudden onset pointed to a huge volcanic
eruption injecting sulfur into the stratosphere and
starting the cooling. Subsequent, unusually large and
frequent eruptions of other volcanoes, as well as
sea-ice/ocean feedbacks persisting long after the
aerosols have been removed from the atmosphere,
may have prolonged the cooling through the 1700s.
Volcanologist Franck Lavigne and colleagues now
think they’ve identified the volcano in question:
Indonesia’s Samalas. One line of evidence, they note,
is historical records. According to Babad Lombok,
records of the island written on palm leaves in Old
Javanese, Samalas erupted catastrophically before the
end of the 13th century, devastating surrounding
villages—including Lombok’s capital at the time,
Pamatan—with ash and fast-moving sweeps of hot
rock and gas called pyroclastic flows.
The researchers then began to reconstruct the
formation of the large, 800-meter-deep caldera [a
basin-shaped volcanic crater] that now sits atop the
volcano. They examined 130 outcrops on the flanks
of the volcano, exposing sequences of pumice—ash
hardened into rock—and other pyroclastic material.
The volume of ash deposited, and the estimated
height of the eruption plume (43 kilometers above
sea level) put the eruption’s magnitude at a
minimum of 7 on the volcanic explosivity index
(which has a scale of 1 to 8)—making it one of the
largest known in the Holocene.
The team also performed radiocarbon analyses on
carbonized tree trunks and branches buried within
the pyroclastic deposits to confirm the date of the
eruption; it could not, they concluded, have
happened before 1257 C.E., and certainly happened
in the 13th century.
It’s not a total surprise that an Indonesian volcano
might be the source of the eruption, Miller says. “An
equatorial eruption is more consistent with the
apparent climate impacts.” And, he adds, with sulfate
appearing in both polar ice caps—Arctic and
Antarctic—there is “a strong consensus” that this
also supports an equatorial source.
Another possible candidate—both in terms of
timing and geographical location—is Ecuador’s
Quilotoa, estimated to have last erupted between
1147 and 1320 C.E. But when Lavigne’s team
examined shards of volcanic glass from this volcano,
they found that they didn’t match the chemical
composition of the glass found in polar ice cores,
whereas the Samalas glass is a much closer match.
That, they suggest, further strengthens the case that
Samalas was responsible for the medieval “year
without summer” in 1258 C.E.
Question 43:
Over the course of the passage, the focus shifts from
A) a criticism of a scientific model to a new theory.
B) a description of a recorded event to its likely cause.
C) the use of ice core samples to a new method of measuring sulfates.
D) the use of radiocarbon dating to an examination of volcanic glass.
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_4-question_43 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
qThis passage is adapted from Carolyn Gramling, “Source of
Mysterious Medieval Eruption Identified.” ©2013 by
American Association for the Advancement of Science.
About 750 years ago, a powerful volcano erupted
somewhere on Earth, kicking off a centuries-long
cold snap known as the Little Ice Age. Identifying the
volcano responsible has been tricky.
That a powerful volcano erupted somewhere in
the world, sometime in the Middle Ages, is written in
polar ice cores in the form of layers of sulfate
deposits and tiny shards of volcanic glass. These
cores suggest that the amount of sulfur the mystery
volcano sent into the stratosphere put it firmly
among the ranks of the strongest climate-perturbing
eruptions of the current geological epoch, the
Holocene, a period that stretches from 10,000 years
ago to the present. A haze of stratospheric sulfur
cools the climate by reflecting solar energy back into
space.
In 2012, a team of scientists led by geochemist
Gifford Miller strengthened the link between the
mystery eruption and the onset of the Little Ice Age
by using radiocarbon dating of dead plant material
from beneath the ice caps on Baffin Island and
Iceland, as well as ice and sediment core data, to
determine that the cold summers and ice growth
began abruptly between 1275 and 1300 C.E. (and
became intensified between 1430 and 1455 C.E.).
Such a sudden onset pointed to a huge volcanic
eruption injecting sulfur into the stratosphere and
starting the cooling. Subsequent, unusually large and
frequent eruptions of other volcanoes, as well as
sea-ice/ocean feedbacks persisting long after the
aerosols have been removed from the atmosphere,
may have prolonged the cooling through the 1700s.
Volcanologist Franck Lavigne and colleagues now
think they’ve identified the volcano in question:
Indonesia’s Samalas. One line of evidence, they note,
is historical records. According to Babad Lombok,
records of the island written on palm leaves in Old
Javanese, Samalas erupted catastrophically before the
end of the 13th century, devastating surrounding
villages—including Lombok’s capital at the time,
Pamatan—with ash and fast-moving sweeps of hot
rock and gas called pyroclastic flows.
The researchers then began to reconstruct the
formation of the large, 800-meter-deep caldera [a
basin-shaped volcanic crater] that now sits atop the
volcano. They examined 130 outcrops on the flanks
of the volcano, exposing sequences of pumice—ash
hardened into rock—and other pyroclastic material.
The volume of ash deposited, and the estimated
height of the eruption plume (43 kilometers above
sea level) put the eruption’s magnitude at a
minimum of 7 on the volcanic explosivity index
(which has a scale of 1 to 8)—making it one of the
largest known in the Holocene.
The team also performed radiocarbon analyses on
carbonized tree trunks and branches buried within
the pyroclastic deposits to confirm the date of the
eruption; it could not, they concluded, have
happened before 1257 C.E., and certainly happened
in the 13th century.
It’s not a total surprise that an Indonesian volcano
might be the source of the eruption, Miller says. “An
equatorial eruption is more consistent with the
apparent climate impacts.” And, he adds, with sulfate
appearing in both polar ice caps—Arctic and
Antarctic—there is “a strong consensus” that this
also supports an equatorial source.
Another possible candidate—both in terms of
timing and geographical location—is Ecuador’s
Quilotoa, estimated to have last erupted between
1147 and 1320 C.E. But when Lavigne’s team
examined shards of volcanic glass from this volcano,
they found that they didn’t match the chemical
composition of the glass found in polar ice cores,
whereas the Samalas glass is a much closer match.
That, they suggest, further strengthens the case that
Samalas was responsible for the medieval “year
without summer” in 1258 C.E.
Question 45:
The author uses the phrase “is written in” (line 6) most likely to
A) demonstrate the concept of the hands-on nature of the work done by scientists.
B) highlight the fact that scientists often write about their discoveries.
C) underscore the sense of importance that scientists have regarding their work.
D) reinforce the idea that the evidence is there and can be interpreted by scientists.
Answer: | D | true | sat-practice_4-question_45 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from William Maxwell, The Folded
Leaf. ©1959 by William Maxwell. Originally published
in 1945.
The Alcazar Restaurant was on Sheridan Road
near Devon Avenue. It was long and narrow, with
tables for two along the walls and tables for four
down the middle. The decoration was art moderne,
except for the series of murals depicting the four
seasons, and the sick ferns in the front window.
Lymie sat down at the second table from the cash
register, and ordered his dinner. The history book,
which he propped against the catsup and the glass
sugar bowl, had been used by others before him.
Blank pages front and back were filled in with maps,
drawings, dates, comic cartoons, and organs of the
body; also with names and messages no longer clear
and never absolutely legible. On nearly every other
page there was some marginal notation, either in ink
or in very hard pencil. And unless someone had
upset a glass of water, the marks on page 177 were
from tears.
While Lymie read about the Peace of Paris, signed
on the thirtieth of May, 1814, between France and
the Allied powers, his right hand managed again and
again to bring food up to his mouth. Sometimes he
chewed, sometimes he swallowed whole the food that
he had no idea he was eating. The Congress of
Vienna met, with some allowance for delays, early in
November of the same year, and all the powers
engaged in the war on either side sent
plenipotentiaries. It was by far the most splendid and
important assembly ever convoked to discuss and
determine the affairs of Europe. The Emperor of
Russia, the King of Prussia, the Kings of Bavaria,
Denmark, and Wurttemberg, all were present in
person at the court of the Emperor Francis I in the
Austrian capital. When Lymie put down his fork and
began to count them off, one by one, on the fingers
of his left hand, the waitress, whose name was Irma,
thought he was through eating and tried to take his
plate away. He stopped her. Prince Metternich (his
right thumb) presided over the Congress, and
Prince Talleyrand (the index finger) represented
France.
A party of four, two men and two women, came
into the restaurant, all talking at once, and took
possession of the center table nearest Lymie.
The women had shingled hair and short tight skirts
which exposed the underside of their knees when
they sat down. One of the women had the face of a
young boy but disguised by one trick or another
(rouge, lipstick, powder, wet bangs plastered against
the high forehead, and a pair of long pendent
earrings) to look like a woman of thirty-five, which
as a matter of fact she was. The men were older. They
laughed more than there seemed any occasion for,
while they were deciding between soup and shrimp
cocktail, and their laughter was too loud. But it was
the women’s voices, the terrible not quite sober pitch
of the women’s voices which caused Lymie to skim
over two whole pages without knowing what was on
them. Fortunately he realized this and went back.
Otherwise he might never have known about the
secret treaty concluded between England, France,
and Austria, when the pretensions of Prussia and
Russia, acting in concert, seemed to threaten a
renewal of the attack. The results of the Congress
were stated clearly at the bottom of page 67 and at
the top of page 68, but before Lymie got halfway
through them, a coat that he recognized as his
father’s was hung on the hook next to his chair.
Lymie closed the book and said, “I didn’t think you
were coming.”
Time is probably no more unkind to sporting
characters than it is to other people, but physical
decay unsustained by respectability is somehow more
noticeable. Mr. Peters’ hair was turning gray and his
scalp showed through on top. He had lost weight
also; he no longer filled out his clothes the way he
used to. His color was poor, and the flower had
disappeared from his buttonhole. In its place was an
American Legion button.
Apparently he himself was not aware that there
had been any change. He straightened his tie
self-consciously and when Irma handed him a menu,
he gestured with it so that the two women at the next
table would notice the diamond ring on the fourth
finger of his right hand. Both of these things, and
also the fact that his hands showed signs of the
manicurist, one can blame on the young man who
had his picture taken with a derby hat on the back of
his head, and also sitting with a girl in the curve of
the moon. The young man had never for one second
deserted Mr. Peters. He was always there, tugging at
Mr. Peters’ elbow, making him do things that were
not becoming in a man of forty-five.
Question 10:
As used in line 93, “becoming” most nearly means
A) emerging.
B) fitting.
C) developing.
D) happening.
Answer: | B | true | sat-practice_5-question_10 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from William Maxwell, The Folded
Leaf. ©1959 by William Maxwell. Originally published
in 1945.
The Alcazar Restaurant was on Sheridan Road
near Devon Avenue. It was long and narrow, with
tables for two along the walls and tables for four
down the middle. The decoration was art moderne,
except for the series of murals depicting the four
seasons, and the sick ferns in the front window.
Lymie sat down at the second table from the cash
register, and ordered his dinner. The history book,
which he propped against the catsup and the glass
sugar bowl, had been used by others before him.
Blank pages front and back were filled in with maps,
drawings, dates, comic cartoons, and organs of the
body; also with names and messages no longer clear
and never absolutely legible. On nearly every other
page there was some marginal notation, either in ink
or in very hard pencil. And unless someone had
upset a glass of water, the marks on page 177 were
from tears.
While Lymie read about the Peace of Paris, signed
on the thirtieth of May, 1814, between France and
the Allied powers, his right hand managed again and
again to bring food up to his mouth. Sometimes he
chewed, sometimes he swallowed whole the food that
he had no idea he was eating. The Congress of
Vienna met, with some allowance for delays, early in
November of the same year, and all the powers
engaged in the war on either side sent
plenipotentiaries. It was by far the most splendid and
important assembly ever convoked to discuss and
determine the affairs of Europe. The Emperor of
Russia, the King of Prussia, the Kings of Bavaria,
Denmark, and Wurttemberg, all were present in
person at the court of the Emperor Francis I in the
Austrian capital. When Lymie put down his fork and
began to count them off, one by one, on the fingers
of his left hand, the waitress, whose name was Irma,
thought he was through eating and tried to take his
plate away. He stopped her. Prince Metternich (his
right thumb) presided over the Congress, and
Prince Talleyrand (the index finger) represented
France.
A party of four, two men and two women, came
into the restaurant, all talking at once, and took
possession of the center table nearest Lymie.
The women had shingled hair and short tight skirts
which exposed the underside of their knees when
they sat down. One of the women had the face of a
young boy but disguised by one trick or another
(rouge, lipstick, powder, wet bangs plastered against
the high forehead, and a pair of long pendent
earrings) to look like a woman of thirty-five, which
as a matter of fact she was. The men were older. They
laughed more than there seemed any occasion for,
while they were deciding between soup and shrimp
cocktail, and their laughter was too loud. But it was
the women’s voices, the terrible not quite sober pitch
of the women’s voices which caused Lymie to skim
over two whole pages without knowing what was on
them. Fortunately he realized this and went back.
Otherwise he might never have known about the
secret treaty concluded between England, France,
and Austria, when the pretensions of Prussia and
Russia, acting in concert, seemed to threaten a
renewal of the attack. The results of the Congress
were stated clearly at the bottom of page 67 and at
the top of page 68, but before Lymie got halfway
through them, a coat that he recognized as his
father’s was hung on the hook next to his chair.
Lymie closed the book and said, “I didn’t think you
were coming.”
Time is probably no more unkind to sporting
characters than it is to other people, but physical
decay unsustained by respectability is somehow more
noticeable. Mr. Peters’ hair was turning gray and his
scalp showed through on top. He had lost weight
also; he no longer filled out his clothes the way he
used to. His color was poor, and the flower had
disappeared from his buttonhole. In its place was an
American Legion button.
Apparently he himself was not aware that there
had been any change. He straightened his tie
self-consciously and when Irma handed him a menu,
he gestured with it so that the two women at the next
table would notice the diamond ring on the fourth
finger of his right hand. Both of these things, and
also the fact that his hands showed signs of the
manicurist, one can blame on the young man who
had his picture taken with a derby hat on the back of
his head, and also sitting with a girl in the curve of
the moon. The young man had never for one second
deserted Mr. Peters. He was always there, tugging at
Mr. Peters’ elbow, making him do things that were
not becoming in a man of forty-five.
Question 7:
The primary impression created by the narrator’s description of Mr. Peters in lines 74-79 is that he is
A) healthy and fit.
B) angry and menacing.
C) nervous and hesitant.
D) aging and shriveled.
Answer: | D | true | sat-practice_5-question_7 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from William Maxwell, The Folded
Leaf. ©1959 by William Maxwell. Originally published
in 1945.
The Alcazar Restaurant was on Sheridan Road
near Devon Avenue. It was long and narrow, with
tables for two along the walls and tables for four
down the middle. The decoration was art moderne,
except for the series of murals depicting the four
seasons, and the sick ferns in the front window.
Lymie sat down at the second table from the cash
register, and ordered his dinner. The history book,
which he propped against the catsup and the glass
sugar bowl, had been used by others before him.
Blank pages front and back were filled in with maps,
drawings, dates, comic cartoons, and organs of the
body; also with names and messages no longer clear
and never absolutely legible. On nearly every other
page there was some marginal notation, either in ink
or in very hard pencil. And unless someone had
upset a glass of water, the marks on page 177 were
from tears.
While Lymie read about the Peace of Paris, signed
on the thirtieth of May, 1814, between France and
the Allied powers, his right hand managed again and
again to bring food up to his mouth. Sometimes he
chewed, sometimes he swallowed whole the food that
he had no idea he was eating. The Congress of
Vienna met, with some allowance for delays, early in
November of the same year, and all the powers
engaged in the war on either side sent
plenipotentiaries. It was by far the most splendid and
important assembly ever convoked to discuss and
determine the affairs of Europe. The Emperor of
Russia, the King of Prussia, the Kings of Bavaria,
Denmark, and Wurttemberg, all were present in
person at the court of the Emperor Francis I in the
Austrian capital. When Lymie put down his fork and
began to count them off, one by one, on the fingers
of his left hand, the waitress, whose name was Irma,
thought he was through eating and tried to take his
plate away. He stopped her. Prince Metternich (his
right thumb) presided over the Congress, and
Prince Talleyrand (the index finger) represented
France.
A party of four, two men and two women, came
into the restaurant, all talking at once, and took
possession of the center table nearest Lymie.
The women had shingled hair and short tight skirts
which exposed the underside of their knees when
they sat down. One of the women had the face of a
young boy but disguised by one trick or another
(rouge, lipstick, powder, wet bangs plastered against
the high forehead, and a pair of long pendent
earrings) to look like a woman of thirty-five, which
as a matter of fact she was. The men were older. They
laughed more than there seemed any occasion for,
while they were deciding between soup and shrimp
cocktail, and their laughter was too loud. But it was
the women’s voices, the terrible not quite sober pitch
of the women’s voices which caused Lymie to skim
over two whole pages without knowing what was on
them. Fortunately he realized this and went back.
Otherwise he might never have known about the
secret treaty concluded between England, France,
and Austria, when the pretensions of Prussia and
Russia, acting in concert, seemed to threaten a
renewal of the attack. The results of the Congress
were stated clearly at the bottom of page 67 and at
the top of page 68, but before Lymie got halfway
through them, a coat that he recognized as his
father’s was hung on the hook next to his chair.
Lymie closed the book and said, “I didn’t think you
were coming.”
Time is probably no more unkind to sporting
characters than it is to other people, but physical
decay unsustained by respectability is somehow more
noticeable. Mr. Peters’ hair was turning gray and his
scalp showed through on top. He had lost weight
also; he no longer filled out his clothes the way he
used to. His color was poor, and the flower had
disappeared from his buttonhole. In its place was an
American Legion button.
Apparently he himself was not aware that there
had been any change. He straightened his tie
self-consciously and when Irma handed him a menu,
he gestured with it so that the two women at the next
table would notice the diamond ring on the fourth
finger of his right hand. Both of these things, and
also the fact that his hands showed signs of the
manicurist, one can blame on the young man who
had his picture taken with a derby hat on the back of
his head, and also sitting with a girl in the curve of
the moon. The young man had never for one second
deserted Mr. Peters. He was always there, tugging at
Mr. Peters’ elbow, making him do things that were
not becoming in a man of forty-five.
Question 1:
Over the course of the passage, the primary focus shifts from
A) Lymie’s inner thoughts to observations made by the other characters.
B) an exchange between strangers to a satisfying personal relationship.
C) the physical setting of the scene to the different characters’ personality traits.
D) Lymie’s experience reading a book to descriptions of people in the restaurant.
Answer: | D | false | sat-practice_5-question_1 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from William Maxwell, The Folded
Leaf. ©1959 by William Maxwell. Originally published
in 1945.
The Alcazar Restaurant was on Sheridan Road
near Devon Avenue. It was long and narrow, with
tables for two along the walls and tables for four
down the middle. The decoration was art moderne,
except for the series of murals depicting the four
seasons, and the sick ferns in the front window.
Lymie sat down at the second table from the cash
register, and ordered his dinner. The history book,
which he propped against the catsup and the glass
sugar bowl, had been used by others before him.
Blank pages front and back were filled in with maps,
drawings, dates, comic cartoons, and organs of the
body; also with names and messages no longer clear
and never absolutely legible. On nearly every other
page there was some marginal notation, either in ink
or in very hard pencil. And unless someone had
upset a glass of water, the marks on page 177 were
from tears.
While Lymie read about the Peace of Paris, signed
on the thirtieth of May, 1814, between France and
the Allied powers, his right hand managed again and
again to bring food up to his mouth. Sometimes he
chewed, sometimes he swallowed whole the food that
he had no idea he was eating. The Congress of
Vienna met, with some allowance for delays, early in
November of the same year, and all the powers
engaged in the war on either side sent
plenipotentiaries. It was by far the most splendid and
important assembly ever convoked to discuss and
determine the affairs of Europe. The Emperor of
Russia, the King of Prussia, the Kings of Bavaria,
Denmark, and Wurttemberg, all were present in
person at the court of the Emperor Francis I in the
Austrian capital. When Lymie put down his fork and
began to count them off, one by one, on the fingers
of his left hand, the waitress, whose name was Irma,
thought he was through eating and tried to take his
plate away. He stopped her. Prince Metternich (his
right thumb) presided over the Congress, and
Prince Talleyrand (the index finger) represented
France.
A party of four, two men and two women, came
into the restaurant, all talking at once, and took
possession of the center table nearest Lymie.
The women had shingled hair and short tight skirts
which exposed the underside of their knees when
they sat down. One of the women had the face of a
young boy but disguised by one trick or another
(rouge, lipstick, powder, wet bangs plastered against
the high forehead, and a pair of long pendent
earrings) to look like a woman of thirty-five, which
as a matter of fact she was. The men were older. They
laughed more than there seemed any occasion for,
while they were deciding between soup and shrimp
cocktail, and their laughter was too loud. But it was
the women’s voices, the terrible not quite sober pitch
of the women’s voices which caused Lymie to skim
over two whole pages without knowing what was on
them. Fortunately he realized this and went back.
Otherwise he might never have known about the
secret treaty concluded between England, France,
and Austria, when the pretensions of Prussia and
Russia, acting in concert, seemed to threaten a
renewal of the attack. The results of the Congress
were stated clearly at the bottom of page 67 and at
the top of page 68, but before Lymie got halfway
through them, a coat that he recognized as his
father’s was hung on the hook next to his chair.
Lymie closed the book and said, “I didn’t think you
were coming.”
Time is probably no more unkind to sporting
characters than it is to other people, but physical
decay unsustained by respectability is somehow more
noticeable. Mr. Peters’ hair was turning gray and his
scalp showed through on top. He had lost weight
also; he no longer filled out his clothes the way he
used to. His color was poor, and the flower had
disappeared from his buttonhole. In its place was an
American Legion button.
Apparently he himself was not aware that there
had been any change. He straightened his tie
self-consciously and when Irma handed him a menu,
he gestured with it so that the two women at the next
table would notice the diamond ring on the fourth
finger of his right hand. Both of these things, and
also the fact that his hands showed signs of the
manicurist, one can blame on the young man who
had his picture taken with a derby hat on the back of
his head, and also sitting with a girl in the curve of
the moon. The young man had never for one second
deserted Mr. Peters. He was always there, tugging at
Mr. Peters’ elbow, making him do things that were
not becoming in a man of forty-five.
Question 3:
It can reasonably be inferred that Irma, the waitress, thinks Lymie is “through eating” (line 37) because
A) he has begun reading his book.
B) his plate is empty.
C) he is no longer holding his fork.
D) he has asked her to clear the table.
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_5-question_3 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from William Maxwell, The Folded
Leaf. ©1959 by William Maxwell. Originally published
in 1945.
The Alcazar Restaurant was on Sheridan Road
near Devon Avenue. It was long and narrow, with
tables for two along the walls and tables for four
down the middle. The decoration was art moderne,
except for the series of murals depicting the four
seasons, and the sick ferns in the front window.
Lymie sat down at the second table from the cash
register, and ordered his dinner. The history book,
which he propped against the catsup and the glass
sugar bowl, had been used by others before him.
Blank pages front and back were filled in with maps,
drawings, dates, comic cartoons, and organs of the
body; also with names and messages no longer clear
and never absolutely legible. On nearly every other
page there was some marginal notation, either in ink
or in very hard pencil. And unless someone had
upset a glass of water, the marks on page 177 were
from tears.
While Lymie read about the Peace of Paris, signed
on the thirtieth of May, 1814, between France and
the Allied powers, his right hand managed again and
again to bring food up to his mouth. Sometimes he
chewed, sometimes he swallowed whole the food that
he had no idea he was eating. The Congress of
Vienna met, with some allowance for delays, early in
November of the same year, and all the powers
engaged in the war on either side sent
plenipotentiaries. It was by far the most splendid and
important assembly ever convoked to discuss and
determine the affairs of Europe. The Emperor of
Russia, the King of Prussia, the Kings of Bavaria,
Denmark, and Wurttemberg, all were present in
person at the court of the Emperor Francis I in the
Austrian capital. When Lymie put down his fork and
began to count them off, one by one, on the fingers
of his left hand, the waitress, whose name was Irma,
thought he was through eating and tried to take his
plate away. He stopped her. Prince Metternich (his
right thumb) presided over the Congress, and
Prince Talleyrand (the index finger) represented
France.
A party of four, two men and two women, came
into the restaurant, all talking at once, and took
possession of the center table nearest Lymie.
The women had shingled hair and short tight skirts
which exposed the underside of their knees when
they sat down. One of the women had the face of a
young boy but disguised by one trick or another
(rouge, lipstick, powder, wet bangs plastered against
the high forehead, and a pair of long pendent
earrings) to look like a woman of thirty-five, which
as a matter of fact she was. The men were older. They
laughed more than there seemed any occasion for,
while they were deciding between soup and shrimp
cocktail, and their laughter was too loud. But it was
the women’s voices, the terrible not quite sober pitch
of the women’s voices which caused Lymie to skim
over two whole pages without knowing what was on
them. Fortunately he realized this and went back.
Otherwise he might never have known about the
secret treaty concluded between England, France,
and Austria, when the pretensions of Prussia and
Russia, acting in concert, seemed to threaten a
renewal of the attack. The results of the Congress
were stated clearly at the bottom of page 67 and at
the top of page 68, but before Lymie got halfway
through them, a coat that he recognized as his
father’s was hung on the hook next to his chair.
Lymie closed the book and said, “I didn’t think you
were coming.”
Time is probably no more unkind to sporting
characters than it is to other people, but physical
decay unsustained by respectability is somehow more
noticeable. Mr. Peters’ hair was turning gray and his
scalp showed through on top. He had lost weight
also; he no longer filled out his clothes the way he
used to. His color was poor, and the flower had
disappeared from his buttonhole. In its place was an
American Legion button.
Apparently he himself was not aware that there
had been any change. He straightened his tie
self-consciously and when Irma handed him a menu,
he gestured with it so that the two women at the next
table would notice the diamond ring on the fourth
finger of his right hand. Both of these things, and
also the fact that his hands showed signs of the
manicurist, one can blame on the young man who
had his picture taken with a derby hat on the back of
his head, and also sitting with a girl in the curve of
the moon. The young man had never for one second
deserted Mr. Peters. He was always there, tugging at
Mr. Peters’ elbow, making him do things that were
not becoming in a man of forty-five.
Question 4:
Lymie’s primary impression of the “party of four” (line 42) is that they
A) are noisy and distracting.
B) are a refreshing change from the other customers.
C) resemble characters from his history book.
D) represent glamour and youth.
Answer: | A | true | sat-practice_5-question_4 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from William Maxwell, The Folded
Leaf. ©1959 by William Maxwell. Originally published
in 1945.
The Alcazar Restaurant was on Sheridan Road
near Devon Avenue. It was long and narrow, with
tables for two along the walls and tables for four
down the middle. The decoration was art moderne,
except for the series of murals depicting the four
seasons, and the sick ferns in the front window.
Lymie sat down at the second table from the cash
register, and ordered his dinner. The history book,
which he propped against the catsup and the glass
sugar bowl, had been used by others before him.
Blank pages front and back were filled in with maps,
drawings, dates, comic cartoons, and organs of the
body; also with names and messages no longer clear
and never absolutely legible. On nearly every other
page there was some marginal notation, either in ink
or in very hard pencil. And unless someone had
upset a glass of water, the marks on page 177 were
from tears.
While Lymie read about the Peace of Paris, signed
on the thirtieth of May, 1814, between France and
the Allied powers, his right hand managed again and
again to bring food up to his mouth. Sometimes he
chewed, sometimes he swallowed whole the food that
he had no idea he was eating. The Congress of
Vienna met, with some allowance for delays, early in
November of the same year, and all the powers
engaged in the war on either side sent
plenipotentiaries. It was by far the most splendid and
important assembly ever convoked to discuss and
determine the affairs of Europe. The Emperor of
Russia, the King of Prussia, the Kings of Bavaria,
Denmark, and Wurttemberg, all were present in
person at the court of the Emperor Francis I in the
Austrian capital. When Lymie put down his fork and
began to count them off, one by one, on the fingers
of his left hand, the waitress, whose name was Irma,
thought he was through eating and tried to take his
plate away. He stopped her. Prince Metternich (his
right thumb) presided over the Congress, and
Prince Talleyrand (the index finger) represented
France.
A party of four, two men and two women, came
into the restaurant, all talking at once, and took
possession of the center table nearest Lymie.
The women had shingled hair and short tight skirts
which exposed the underside of their knees when
they sat down. One of the women had the face of a
young boy but disguised by one trick or another
(rouge, lipstick, powder, wet bangs plastered against
the high forehead, and a pair of long pendent
earrings) to look like a woman of thirty-five, which
as a matter of fact she was. The men were older. They
laughed more than there seemed any occasion for,
while they were deciding between soup and shrimp
cocktail, and their laughter was too loud. But it was
the women’s voices, the terrible not quite sober pitch
of the women’s voices which caused Lymie to skim
over two whole pages without knowing what was on
them. Fortunately he realized this and went back.
Otherwise he might never have known about the
secret treaty concluded between England, France,
and Austria, when the pretensions of Prussia and
Russia, acting in concert, seemed to threaten a
renewal of the attack. The results of the Congress
were stated clearly at the bottom of page 67 and at
the top of page 68, but before Lymie got halfway
through them, a coat that he recognized as his
father’s was hung on the hook next to his chair.
Lymie closed the book and said, “I didn’t think you
were coming.”
Time is probably no more unkind to sporting
characters than it is to other people, but physical
decay unsustained by respectability is somehow more
noticeable. Mr. Peters’ hair was turning gray and his
scalp showed through on top. He had lost weight
also; he no longer filled out his clothes the way he
used to. His color was poor, and the flower had
disappeared from his buttonhole. In its place was an
American Legion button.
Apparently he himself was not aware that there
had been any change. He straightened his tie
self-consciously and when Irma handed him a menu,
he gestured with it so that the two women at the next
table would notice the diamond ring on the fourth
finger of his right hand. Both of these things, and
also the fact that his hands showed signs of the
manicurist, one can blame on the young man who
had his picture taken with a derby hat on the back of
his head, and also sitting with a girl in the curve of
the moon. The young man had never for one second
deserted Mr. Peters. He was always there, tugging at
Mr. Peters’ elbow, making him do things that were
not becoming in a man of forty-five.
Question 9:
Which choice best supports the conclusion that Mr. Peters wants to attract attention?
A) Lines 80-81 (“Apparently... change”)
B) Lines 81-85 (“He straightened... hand”)
C) Lines 90-91 (“The young . . . Mr. Peters”)
D) Lines 91-93 (“He was... forty-five”)
Answer: | B | true | sat-practice_5-question_9 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from William Maxwell, The Folded
Leaf. ©1959 by William Maxwell. Originally published
in 1945.
The Alcazar Restaurant was on Sheridan Road
near Devon Avenue. It was long and narrow, with
tables for two along the walls and tables for four
down the middle. The decoration was art moderne,
except for the series of murals depicting the four
seasons, and the sick ferns in the front window.
Lymie sat down at the second table from the cash
register, and ordered his dinner. The history book,
which he propped against the catsup and the glass
sugar bowl, had been used by others before him.
Blank pages front and back were filled in with maps,
drawings, dates, comic cartoons, and organs of the
body; also with names and messages no longer clear
and never absolutely legible. On nearly every other
page there was some marginal notation, either in ink
or in very hard pencil. And unless someone had
upset a glass of water, the marks on page 177 were
from tears.
While Lymie read about the Peace of Paris, signed
on the thirtieth of May, 1814, between France and
the Allied powers, his right hand managed again and
again to bring food up to his mouth. Sometimes he
chewed, sometimes he swallowed whole the food that
he had no idea he was eating. The Congress of
Vienna met, with some allowance for delays, early in
November of the same year, and all the powers
engaged in the war on either side sent
plenipotentiaries. It was by far the most splendid and
important assembly ever convoked to discuss and
determine the affairs of Europe. The Emperor of
Russia, the King of Prussia, the Kings of Bavaria,
Denmark, and Wurttemberg, all were present in
person at the court of the Emperor Francis I in the
Austrian capital. When Lymie put down his fork and
began to count them off, one by one, on the fingers
of his left hand, the waitress, whose name was Irma,
thought he was through eating and tried to take his
plate away. He stopped her. Prince Metternich (his
right thumb) presided over the Congress, and
Prince Talleyrand (the index finger) represented
France.
A party of four, two men and two women, came
into the restaurant, all talking at once, and took
possession of the center table nearest Lymie.
The women had shingled hair and short tight skirts
which exposed the underside of their knees when
they sat down. One of the women had the face of a
young boy but disguised by one trick or another
(rouge, lipstick, powder, wet bangs plastered against
the high forehead, and a pair of long pendent
earrings) to look like a woman of thirty-five, which
as a matter of fact she was. The men were older. They
laughed more than there seemed any occasion for,
while they were deciding between soup and shrimp
cocktail, and their laughter was too loud. But it was
the women’s voices, the terrible not quite sober pitch
of the women’s voices which caused Lymie to skim
over two whole pages without knowing what was on
them. Fortunately he realized this and went back.
Otherwise he might never have known about the
secret treaty concluded between England, France,
and Austria, when the pretensions of Prussia and
Russia, acting in concert, seemed to threaten a
renewal of the attack. The results of the Congress
were stated clearly at the bottom of page 67 and at
the top of page 68, but before Lymie got halfway
through them, a coat that he recognized as his
father’s was hung on the hook next to his chair.
Lymie closed the book and said, “I didn’t think you
were coming.”
Time is probably no more unkind to sporting
characters than it is to other people, but physical
decay unsustained by respectability is somehow more
noticeable. Mr. Peters’ hair was turning gray and his
scalp showed through on top. He had lost weight
also; he no longer filled out his clothes the way he
used to. His color was poor, and the flower had
disappeared from his buttonhole. In its place was an
American Legion button.
Apparently he himself was not aware that there
had been any change. He straightened his tie
self-consciously and when Irma handed him a menu,
he gestured with it so that the two women at the next
table would notice the diamond ring on the fourth
finger of his right hand. Both of these things, and
also the fact that his hands showed signs of the
manicurist, one can blame on the young man who
had his picture taken with a derby hat on the back of
his head, and also sitting with a girl in the curve of
the moon. The young man had never for one second
deserted Mr. Peters. He was always there, tugging at
Mr. Peters’ elbow, making him do things that were
not becoming in a man of forty-five.
Question 2:
The main purpose of the first paragraph is to
A) introduce the passage’s main character by showing his nightly habits.
B) indicate the date the passage takes place by presenting period details.
C) convey the passage’s setting by describing a place and an object.
D) foreshadow an event that is described in detail later in the passage.
Answer: | C | false | sat-practice_5-question_2 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from William Maxwell, The Folded
Leaf. ©1959 by William Maxwell. Originally published
in 1945.
The Alcazar Restaurant was on Sheridan Road
near Devon Avenue. It was long and narrow, with
tables for two along the walls and tables for four
down the middle. The decoration was art moderne,
except for the series of murals depicting the four
seasons, and the sick ferns in the front window.
Lymie sat down at the second table from the cash
register, and ordered his dinner. The history book,
which he propped against the catsup and the glass
sugar bowl, had been used by others before him.
Blank pages front and back were filled in with maps,
drawings, dates, comic cartoons, and organs of the
body; also with names and messages no longer clear
and never absolutely legible. On nearly every other
page there was some marginal notation, either in ink
or in very hard pencil. And unless someone had
upset a glass of water, the marks on page 177 were
from tears.
While Lymie read about the Peace of Paris, signed
on the thirtieth of May, 1814, between France and
the Allied powers, his right hand managed again and
again to bring food up to his mouth. Sometimes he
chewed, sometimes he swallowed whole the food that
he had no idea he was eating. The Congress of
Vienna met, with some allowance for delays, early in
November of the same year, and all the powers
engaged in the war on either side sent
plenipotentiaries. It was by far the most splendid and
important assembly ever convoked to discuss and
determine the affairs of Europe. The Emperor of
Russia, the King of Prussia, the Kings of Bavaria,
Denmark, and Wurttemberg, all were present in
person at the court of the Emperor Francis I in the
Austrian capital. When Lymie put down his fork and
began to count them off, one by one, on the fingers
of his left hand, the waitress, whose name was Irma,
thought he was through eating and tried to take his
plate away. He stopped her. Prince Metternich (his
right thumb) presided over the Congress, and
Prince Talleyrand (the index finger) represented
France.
A party of four, two men and two women, came
into the restaurant, all talking at once, and took
possession of the center table nearest Lymie.
The women had shingled hair and short tight skirts
which exposed the underside of their knees when
they sat down. One of the women had the face of a
young boy but disguised by one trick or another
(rouge, lipstick, powder, wet bangs plastered against
the high forehead, and a pair of long pendent
earrings) to look like a woman of thirty-five, which
as a matter of fact she was. The men were older. They
laughed more than there seemed any occasion for,
while they were deciding between soup and shrimp
cocktail, and their laughter was too loud. But it was
the women’s voices, the terrible not quite sober pitch
of the women’s voices which caused Lymie to skim
over two whole pages without knowing what was on
them. Fortunately he realized this and went back.
Otherwise he might never have known about the
secret treaty concluded between England, France,
and Austria, when the pretensions of Prussia and
Russia, acting in concert, seemed to threaten a
renewal of the attack. The results of the Congress
were stated clearly at the bottom of page 67 and at
the top of page 68, but before Lymie got halfway
through them, a coat that he recognized as his
father’s was hung on the hook next to his chair.
Lymie closed the book and said, “I didn’t think you
were coming.”
Time is probably no more unkind to sporting
characters than it is to other people, but physical
decay unsustained by respectability is somehow more
noticeable. Mr. Peters’ hair was turning gray and his
scalp showed through on top. He had lost weight
also; he no longer filled out his clothes the way he
used to. His color was poor, and the flower had
disappeared from his buttonhole. In its place was an
American Legion button.
Apparently he himself was not aware that there
had been any change. He straightened his tie
self-consciously and when Irma handed him a menu,
he gestured with it so that the two women at the next
table would notice the diamond ring on the fourth
finger of his right hand. Both of these things, and
also the fact that his hands showed signs of the
manicurist, one can blame on the young man who
had his picture taken with a derby hat on the back of
his head, and also sitting with a girl in the curve of
the moon. The young man had never for one second
deserted Mr. Peters. He was always there, tugging at
Mr. Peters’ elbow, making him do things that were
not becoming in a man of forty-five.
Question 8:
The main idea of the last paragraph is that Mr. Peters
A) neglects to spend any time with his family members.
B) behaves as if he is a younger version of himself.
C) is very conscious of symbols of wealth and power.
D) is preoccupied with the knowledge that he is growing old.
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_5-question_8 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from William Maxwell, The Folded
Leaf. ©1959 by William Maxwell. Originally published
in 1945.
The Alcazar Restaurant was on Sheridan Road
near Devon Avenue. It was long and narrow, with
tables for two along the walls and tables for four
down the middle. The decoration was art moderne,
except for the series of murals depicting the four
seasons, and the sick ferns in the front window.
Lymie sat down at the second table from the cash
register, and ordered his dinner. The history book,
which he propped against the catsup and the glass
sugar bowl, had been used by others before him.
Blank pages front and back were filled in with maps,
drawings, dates, comic cartoons, and organs of the
body; also with names and messages no longer clear
and never absolutely legible. On nearly every other
page there was some marginal notation, either in ink
or in very hard pencil. And unless someone had
upset a glass of water, the marks on page 177 were
from tears.
While Lymie read about the Peace of Paris, signed
on the thirtieth of May, 1814, between France and
the Allied powers, his right hand managed again and
again to bring food up to his mouth. Sometimes he
chewed, sometimes he swallowed whole the food that
he had no idea he was eating. The Congress of
Vienna met, with some allowance for delays, early in
November of the same year, and all the powers
engaged in the war on either side sent
plenipotentiaries. It was by far the most splendid and
important assembly ever convoked to discuss and
determine the affairs of Europe. The Emperor of
Russia, the King of Prussia, the Kings of Bavaria,
Denmark, and Wurttemberg, all were present in
person at the court of the Emperor Francis I in the
Austrian capital. When Lymie put down his fork and
began to count them off, one by one, on the fingers
of his left hand, the waitress, whose name was Irma,
thought he was through eating and tried to take his
plate away. He stopped her. Prince Metternich (his
right thumb) presided over the Congress, and
Prince Talleyrand (the index finger) represented
France.
A party of four, two men and two women, came
into the restaurant, all talking at once, and took
possession of the center table nearest Lymie.
The women had shingled hair and short tight skirts
which exposed the underside of their knees when
they sat down. One of the women had the face of a
young boy but disguised by one trick or another
(rouge, lipstick, powder, wet bangs plastered against
the high forehead, and a pair of long pendent
earrings) to look like a woman of thirty-five, which
as a matter of fact she was. The men were older. They
laughed more than there seemed any occasion for,
while they were deciding between soup and shrimp
cocktail, and their laughter was too loud. But it was
the women’s voices, the terrible not quite sober pitch
of the women’s voices which caused Lymie to skim
over two whole pages without knowing what was on
them. Fortunately he realized this and went back.
Otherwise he might never have known about the
secret treaty concluded between England, France,
and Austria, when the pretensions of Prussia and
Russia, acting in concert, seemed to threaten a
renewal of the attack. The results of the Congress
were stated clearly at the bottom of page 67 and at
the top of page 68, but before Lymie got halfway
through them, a coat that he recognized as his
father’s was hung on the hook next to his chair.
Lymie closed the book and said, “I didn’t think you
were coming.”
Time is probably no more unkind to sporting
characters than it is to other people, but physical
decay unsustained by respectability is somehow more
noticeable. Mr. Peters’ hair was turning gray and his
scalp showed through on top. He had lost weight
also; he no longer filled out his clothes the way he
used to. His color was poor, and the flower had
disappeared from his buttonhole. In its place was an
American Legion button.
Apparently he himself was not aware that there
had been any change. He straightened his tie
self-consciously and when Irma handed him a menu,
he gestured with it so that the two women at the next
table would notice the diamond ring on the fourth
finger of his right hand. Both of these things, and
also the fact that his hands showed signs of the
manicurist, one can blame on the young man who
had his picture taken with a derby hat on the back of
his head, and also sitting with a girl in the curve of
the moon. The young man had never for one second
deserted Mr. Peters. He was always there, tugging at
Mr. Peters’ elbow, making him do things that were
not becoming in a man of forty-five.
Question 6:
The narrator indicates that Lymie finally closes the history book because
A) his father has joined him at the table.
B) the people at the other table are too disruptive.
C) he has finished the chapter about the Congress.
D) he is preparing to leave the restaurant.
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_5-question_6 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Catharine Beecher, Essay on
Slavery and Abolitionism. Originally published in 1837.
Passage 2 is adapted from Angelina E. Grimké, Letters to
Catharine Beecher. Originally published in 1838. Grimké
encouraged Southern women to oppose slavery publicly.
Passage 1 is Beecher’s response to Grimké’s views.
Passage 2 is Grimké’s response to Beecher.
Passage 1
Heaven has appointed to one sex the superior,
and to the other the subordinate station, and this
without any reference to the character or conduct of
either. It is therefore as much for the dignity as it is
for the interest of females, in all respects to conform
to the duties of this relation. . . . But while woman
holds a subordinate relation in society to the other
sex, it is not because it was designed that her duties
or her influence should be any the less important, or
all-pervading. But it was designed that the mode of
gaining influence and of exercising power should be
altogether different and peculiar....
A man may act on society by the collision of
intellect, in public debate; he may urge his measures
by a sense of shame, by fear and by personal interest;
he may coerce by the combination of public
sentiment; he may drive by physical force, and he
does not outstep the boundaries of his sphere. But all
the power, and all the conquests that are lawful to
woman, are those only which appeal to the kindly,
generous, peaceful and benevolent principles.
Woman is to win every thing by peace and love;
by making herself so much respected, esteemed and
loved, that to yield to her opinions and to gratify her
wishes, will be the free-will offering of the heart. But
this is to be all accomplished in the domestic and
social circle. There let every woman become so
cultivated and refined in intellect, that her taste and
judgment will be respected; so benevolent in feeling
and action; that her motives will be reverenced;—so
unassuming and unambitious, that collision and
competition will be banished;—so “gentle and easy to
be entreated,” as that every heart will repose in her
presence; then, the fathers, the husbands, and the
sons, will find an influence thrown around them,
to which they will yield not only willingly but
proudly....
A woman may seek the aid of co-operation and
combination among her own sex, to assist her in her
appropriate offices of piety, charity, maternal and
domestic duty; but whatever, in any measure, throws
a woman into the attitude of a combatant, either for
herself or others—whatever binds her in a party
conflict—whatever obliges her in any way to exert
coercive influences, throws her out of her
appropriate sphere. If these general principles are
correct, they are entirely opposed to the plan of
arraying females in any Abolition movement.
Passage 2
The investigation of the rights of the slave has led
me to a better understanding of my own. I have
found the Anti-Slavery cause to be the high school of
morals in our land—the school in which human
rights are more fully investigated, and better
understood and taught, than in any other. Here a
great fundamental principle is uplifted and
illuminated, and from this central light, rays
innumerable stream all around.
Human beings have rights, because they are moral
beings: the rights of all men grow out of their moral
nature; and as all men have the same moral nature,
they have essentially the same rights. These rights
may be wrested from the slave, but they cannot be
alienated: his title to himself is as perfect now, as is
that of Lyman Beecher:1 it is stamped on his moral
being, and is, like it, imperishable. Now if rights are
founded in the nature of our moral being, then the
mere circumstance of sex does not give to man higher
rights and responsibilities, than to woman. To
suppose that it does, would be to deny the
self-evident truth, that the “physical constitution is
the mere instrument of the moral nature.” To
suppose that it does, would be to break up utterly the
relations, of the two natures, and to reverse their
functions, exalting the animal nature into a monarch,
and humbling the moral into a slave; making the
former a proprietor, and the latter its property.
When human beings are regarded as moral
beings, sex, instead of being enthroned upon the
summit, administering upon rights and
responsibilities, sinks into insignificance and
nothingness. My doctrine then is, that whatever it is
morally right for man to do, it is morally right for
woman to do. Our duties originate, not from
difference of sex, but from the diversity of our
relations in life, the various gifts and talents
committed to our care, and the different eras in
which we live.
Question 14:
As used in line 2, “station” most nearly means
A) region.
B) studio.
C) district.
D) rank.
Answer: | D | true | sat-practice_5-question_14 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Catharine Beecher, Essay on
Slavery and Abolitionism. Originally published in 1837.
Passage 2 is adapted from Angelina E. Grimké, Letters to
Catharine Beecher. Originally published in 1838. Grimké
encouraged Southern women to oppose slavery publicly.
Passage 1 is Beecher’s response to Grimké’s views.
Passage 2 is Grimké’s response to Beecher.
Passage 1
Heaven has appointed to one sex the superior,
and to the other the subordinate station, and this
without any reference to the character or conduct of
either. It is therefore as much for the dignity as it is
for the interest of females, in all respects to conform
to the duties of this relation. . . . But while woman
holds a subordinate relation in society to the other
sex, it is not because it was designed that her duties
or her influence should be any the less important, or
all-pervading. But it was designed that the mode of
gaining influence and of exercising power should be
altogether different and peculiar....
A man may act on society by the collision of
intellect, in public debate; he may urge his measures
by a sense of shame, by fear and by personal interest;
he may coerce by the combination of public
sentiment; he may drive by physical force, and he
does not outstep the boundaries of his sphere. But all
the power, and all the conquests that are lawful to
woman, are those only which appeal to the kindly,
generous, peaceful and benevolent principles.
Woman is to win every thing by peace and love;
by making herself so much respected, esteemed and
loved, that to yield to her opinions and to gratify her
wishes, will be the free-will offering of the heart. But
this is to be all accomplished in the domestic and
social circle. There let every woman become so
cultivated and refined in intellect, that her taste and
judgment will be respected; so benevolent in feeling
and action; that her motives will be reverenced;—so
unassuming and unambitious, that collision and
competition will be banished;—so “gentle and easy to
be entreated,” as that every heart will repose in her
presence; then, the fathers, the husbands, and the
sons, will find an influence thrown around them,
to which they will yield not only willingly but
proudly....
A woman may seek the aid of co-operation and
combination among her own sex, to assist her in her
appropriate offices of piety, charity, maternal and
domestic duty; but whatever, in any measure, throws
a woman into the attitude of a combatant, either for
herself or others—whatever binds her in a party
conflict—whatever obliges her in any way to exert
coercive influences, throws her out of her
appropriate sphere. If these general principles are
correct, they are entirely opposed to the plan of
arraying females in any Abolition movement.
Passage 2
The investigation of the rights of the slave has led
me to a better understanding of my own. I have
found the Anti-Slavery cause to be the high school of
morals in our land—the school in which human
rights are more fully investigated, and better
understood and taught, than in any other. Here a
great fundamental principle is uplifted and
illuminated, and from this central light, rays
innumerable stream all around.
Human beings have rights, because they are moral
beings: the rights of all men grow out of their moral
nature; and as all men have the same moral nature,
they have essentially the same rights. These rights
may be wrested from the slave, but they cannot be
alienated: his title to himself is as perfect now, as is
that of Lyman Beecher:1 it is stamped on his moral
being, and is, like it, imperishable. Now if rights are
founded in the nature of our moral being, then the
mere circumstance of sex does not give to man higher
rights and responsibilities, than to woman. To
suppose that it does, would be to deny the
self-evident truth, that the “physical constitution is
the mere instrument of the moral nature.” To
suppose that it does, would be to break up utterly the
relations, of the two natures, and to reverse their
functions, exalting the animal nature into a monarch,
and humbling the moral into a slave; making the
former a proprietor, and the latter its property.
When human beings are regarded as moral
beings, sex, instead of being enthroned upon the
summit, administering upon rights and
responsibilities, sinks into insignificance and
nothingness. My doctrine then is, that whatever it is
morally right for man to do, it is morally right for
woman to do. Our duties originate, not from
difference of sex, but from the diversity of our
relations in life, the various gifts and talents
committed to our care, and the different eras in
which we live.
Question 16:
What is Grimké’s central claim in Passage 2?
A) The rights of individuals are not determined by race or gender.
B) Men and women must learn to work together to improve society.
C) Moral rights are the most important distinction between human beings and animals.
D) Men and women should have equal opportunities to flourish.
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_5-question_16 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Catharine Beecher, Essay on
Slavery and Abolitionism. Originally published in 1837.
Passage 2 is adapted from Angelina E. Grimké, Letters to
Catharine Beecher. Originally published in 1838. Grimké
encouraged Southern women to oppose slavery publicly.
Passage 1 is Beecher’s response to Grimké’s views.
Passage 2 is Grimké’s response to Beecher.
Passage 1
Heaven has appointed to one sex the superior,
and to the other the subordinate station, and this
without any reference to the character or conduct of
either. It is therefore as much for the dignity as it is
for the interest of females, in all respects to conform
to the duties of this relation. . . . But while woman
holds a subordinate relation in society to the other
sex, it is not because it was designed that her duties
or her influence should be any the less important, or
all-pervading. But it was designed that the mode of
gaining influence and of exercising power should be
altogether different and peculiar....
A man may act on society by the collision of
intellect, in public debate; he may urge his measures
by a sense of shame, by fear and by personal interest;
he may coerce by the combination of public
sentiment; he may drive by physical force, and he
does not outstep the boundaries of his sphere. But all
the power, and all the conquests that are lawful to
woman, are those only which appeal to the kindly,
generous, peaceful and benevolent principles.
Woman is to win every thing by peace and love;
by making herself so much respected, esteemed and
loved, that to yield to her opinions and to gratify her
wishes, will be the free-will offering of the heart. But
this is to be all accomplished in the domestic and
social circle. There let every woman become so
cultivated and refined in intellect, that her taste and
judgment will be respected; so benevolent in feeling
and action; that her motives will be reverenced;—so
unassuming and unambitious, that collision and
competition will be banished;—so “gentle and easy to
be entreated,” as that every heart will repose in her
presence; then, the fathers, the husbands, and the
sons, will find an influence thrown around them,
to which they will yield not only willingly but
proudly....
A woman may seek the aid of co-operation and
combination among her own sex, to assist her in her
appropriate offices of piety, charity, maternal and
domestic duty; but whatever, in any measure, throws
a woman into the attitude of a combatant, either for
herself or others—whatever binds her in a party
conflict—whatever obliges her in any way to exert
coercive influences, throws her out of her
appropriate sphere. If these general principles are
correct, they are entirely opposed to the plan of
arraying females in any Abolition movement.
Passage 2
The investigation of the rights of the slave has led
me to a better understanding of my own. I have
found the Anti-Slavery cause to be the high school of
morals in our land—the school in which human
rights are more fully investigated, and better
understood and taught, than in any other. Here a
great fundamental principle is uplifted and
illuminated, and from this central light, rays
innumerable stream all around.
Human beings have rights, because they are moral
beings: the rights of all men grow out of their moral
nature; and as all men have the same moral nature,
they have essentially the same rights. These rights
may be wrested from the slave, but they cannot be
alienated: his title to himself is as perfect now, as is
that of Lyman Beecher:1 it is stamped on his moral
being, and is, like it, imperishable. Now if rights are
founded in the nature of our moral being, then the
mere circumstance of sex does not give to man higher
rights and responsibilities, than to woman. To
suppose that it does, would be to deny the
self-evident truth, that the “physical constitution is
the mere instrument of the moral nature.” To
suppose that it does, would be to break up utterly the
relations, of the two natures, and to reverse their
functions, exalting the animal nature into a monarch,
and humbling the moral into a slave; making the
former a proprietor, and the latter its property.
When human beings are regarded as moral
beings, sex, instead of being enthroned upon the
summit, administering upon rights and
responsibilities, sinks into insignificance and
nothingness. My doctrine then is, that whatever it is
morally right for man to do, it is morally right for
woman to do. Our duties originate, not from
difference of sex, but from the diversity of our
relations in life, the various gifts and talents
committed to our care, and the different eras in
which we live.
Question 15:
As used in line 12, “peculiar” most nearly means
A) eccentric.
B) surprising.
C) distinctive.
D) infrequent.
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_5-question_15 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Catharine Beecher, Essay on
Slavery and Abolitionism. Originally published in 1837.
Passage 2 is adapted from Angelina E. Grimké, Letters to
Catharine Beecher. Originally published in 1838. Grimké
encouraged Southern women to oppose slavery publicly.
Passage 1 is Beecher’s response to Grimké’s views.
Passage 2 is Grimké’s response to Beecher.
Passage 1
Heaven has appointed to one sex the superior,
and to the other the subordinate station, and this
without any reference to the character or conduct of
either. It is therefore as much for the dignity as it is
for the interest of females, in all respects to conform
to the duties of this relation. . . . But while woman
holds a subordinate relation in society to the other
sex, it is not because it was designed that her duties
or her influence should be any the less important, or
all-pervading. But it was designed that the mode of
gaining influence and of exercising power should be
altogether different and peculiar....
A man may act on society by the collision of
intellect, in public debate; he may urge his measures
by a sense of shame, by fear and by personal interest;
he may coerce by the combination of public
sentiment; he may drive by physical force, and he
does not outstep the boundaries of his sphere. But all
the power, and all the conquests that are lawful to
woman, are those only which appeal to the kindly,
generous, peaceful and benevolent principles.
Woman is to win every thing by peace and love;
by making herself so much respected, esteemed and
loved, that to yield to her opinions and to gratify her
wishes, will be the free-will offering of the heart. But
this is to be all accomplished in the domestic and
social circle. There let every woman become so
cultivated and refined in intellect, that her taste and
judgment will be respected; so benevolent in feeling
and action; that her motives will be reverenced;—so
unassuming and unambitious, that collision and
competition will be banished;—so “gentle and easy to
be entreated,” as that every heart will repose in her
presence; then, the fathers, the husbands, and the
sons, will find an influence thrown around them,
to which they will yield not only willingly but
proudly....
A woman may seek the aid of co-operation and
combination among her own sex, to assist her in her
appropriate offices of piety, charity, maternal and
domestic duty; but whatever, in any measure, throws
a woman into the attitude of a combatant, either for
herself or others—whatever binds her in a party
conflict—whatever obliges her in any way to exert
coercive influences, throws her out of her
appropriate sphere. If these general principles are
correct, they are entirely opposed to the plan of
arraying females in any Abolition movement.
Passage 2
The investigation of the rights of the slave has led
me to a better understanding of my own. I have
found the Anti-Slavery cause to be the high school of
morals in our land—the school in which human
rights are more fully investigated, and better
understood and taught, than in any other. Here a
great fundamental principle is uplifted and
illuminated, and from this central light, rays
innumerable stream all around.
Human beings have rights, because they are moral
beings: the rights of all men grow out of their moral
nature; and as all men have the same moral nature,
they have essentially the same rights. These rights
may be wrested from the slave, but they cannot be
alienated: his title to himself is as perfect now, as is
that of Lyman Beecher:1 it is stamped on his moral
being, and is, like it, imperishable. Now if rights are
founded in the nature of our moral being, then the
mere circumstance of sex does not give to man higher
rights and responsibilities, than to woman. To
suppose that it does, would be to deny the
self-evident truth, that the “physical constitution is
the mere instrument of the moral nature.” To
suppose that it does, would be to break up utterly the
relations, of the two natures, and to reverse their
functions, exalting the animal nature into a monarch,
and humbling the moral into a slave; making the
former a proprietor, and the latter its property.
When human beings are regarded as moral
beings, sex, instead of being enthroned upon the
summit, administering upon rights and
responsibilities, sinks into insignificance and
nothingness. My doctrine then is, that whatever it is
morally right for man to do, it is morally right for
woman to do. Our duties originate, not from
difference of sex, but from the diversity of our
relations in life, the various gifts and talents
committed to our care, and the different eras in
which we live.
Question 20:
Based on the passages, both authors would agree with which of the following claims?
A) Women have moral duties and responsibilities.
B) Men often work selflessly for political change.
C) The ethical obligations of women are often undervalued.
D) Political activism is as important for women as it is for men.
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_5-question_20 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Catharine Beecher, Essay on
Slavery and Abolitionism. Originally published in 1837.
Passage 2 is adapted from Angelina E. Grimké, Letters to
Catharine Beecher. Originally published in 1838. Grimké
encouraged Southern women to oppose slavery publicly.
Passage 1 is Beecher’s response to Grimké’s views.
Passage 2 is Grimké’s response to Beecher.
Passage 1
Heaven has appointed to one sex the superior,
and to the other the subordinate station, and this
without any reference to the character or conduct of
either. It is therefore as much for the dignity as it is
for the interest of females, in all respects to conform
to the duties of this relation. . . . But while woman
holds a subordinate relation in society to the other
sex, it is not because it was designed that her duties
or her influence should be any the less important, or
all-pervading. But it was designed that the mode of
gaining influence and of exercising power should be
altogether different and peculiar....
A man may act on society by the collision of
intellect, in public debate; he may urge his measures
by a sense of shame, by fear and by personal interest;
he may coerce by the combination of public
sentiment; he may drive by physical force, and he
does not outstep the boundaries of his sphere. But all
the power, and all the conquests that are lawful to
woman, are those only which appeal to the kindly,
generous, peaceful and benevolent principles.
Woman is to win every thing by peace and love;
by making herself so much respected, esteemed and
loved, that to yield to her opinions and to gratify her
wishes, will be the free-will offering of the heart. But
this is to be all accomplished in the domestic and
social circle. There let every woman become so
cultivated and refined in intellect, that her taste and
judgment will be respected; so benevolent in feeling
and action; that her motives will be reverenced;—so
unassuming and unambitious, that collision and
competition will be banished;—so “gentle and easy to
be entreated,” as that every heart will repose in her
presence; then, the fathers, the husbands, and the
sons, will find an influence thrown around them,
to which they will yield not only willingly but
proudly....
A woman may seek the aid of co-operation and
combination among her own sex, to assist her in her
appropriate offices of piety, charity, maternal and
domestic duty; but whatever, in any measure, throws
a woman into the attitude of a combatant, either for
herself or others—whatever binds her in a party
conflict—whatever obliges her in any way to exert
coercive influences, throws her out of her
appropriate sphere. If these general principles are
correct, they are entirely opposed to the plan of
arraying females in any Abolition movement.
Passage 2
The investigation of the rights of the slave has led
me to a better understanding of my own. I have
found the Anti-Slavery cause to be the high school of
morals in our land—the school in which human
rights are more fully investigated, and better
understood and taught, than in any other. Here a
great fundamental principle is uplifted and
illuminated, and from this central light, rays
innumerable stream all around.
Human beings have rights, because they are moral
beings: the rights of all men grow out of their moral
nature; and as all men have the same moral nature,
they have essentially the same rights. These rights
may be wrested from the slave, but they cannot be
alienated: his title to himself is as perfect now, as is
that of Lyman Beecher:1 it is stamped on his moral
being, and is, like it, imperishable. Now if rights are
founded in the nature of our moral being, then the
mere circumstance of sex does not give to man higher
rights and responsibilities, than to woman. To
suppose that it does, would be to deny the
self-evident truth, that the “physical constitution is
the mere instrument of the moral nature.” To
suppose that it does, would be to break up utterly the
relations, of the two natures, and to reverse their
functions, exalting the animal nature into a monarch,
and humbling the moral into a slave; making the
former a proprietor, and the latter its property.
When human beings are regarded as moral
beings, sex, instead of being enthroned upon the
summit, administering upon rights and
responsibilities, sinks into insignificance and
nothingness. My doctrine then is, that whatever it is
morally right for man to do, it is morally right for
woman to do. Our duties originate, not from
difference of sex, but from the diversity of our
relations in life, the various gifts and talents
committed to our care, and the different eras in
which we live.
Question 21:
Beecher would most likely have reacted to lines 65-68 (“Now... woman”) of Passage 2 with
A) sympathy, because she feels that human beings owe each other a debt to work together in the world.
B) agreement, because she feels that human responsibilities are a natural product of human rights.
C) dismay, because she feels that women actually have a more difficult role to play in society than men do.
D) disagreement, because she feels that the natures of men and women are fundamentally different.
Answer: | D | true | sat-practice_5-question_21 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Catharine Beecher, Essay on
Slavery and Abolitionism. Originally published in 1837.
Passage 2 is adapted from Angelina E. Grimké, Letters to
Catharine Beecher. Originally published in 1838. Grimké
encouraged Southern women to oppose slavery publicly.
Passage 1 is Beecher’s response to Grimké’s views.
Passage 2 is Grimké’s response to Beecher.
Passage 1
Heaven has appointed to one sex the superior,
and to the other the subordinate station, and this
without any reference to the character or conduct of
either. It is therefore as much for the dignity as it is
for the interest of females, in all respects to conform
to the duties of this relation. . . . But while woman
holds a subordinate relation in society to the other
sex, it is not because it was designed that her duties
or her influence should be any the less important, or
all-pervading. But it was designed that the mode of
gaining influence and of exercising power should be
altogether different and peculiar....
A man may act on society by the collision of
intellect, in public debate; he may urge his measures
by a sense of shame, by fear and by personal interest;
he may coerce by the combination of public
sentiment; he may drive by physical force, and he
does not outstep the boundaries of his sphere. But all
the power, and all the conquests that are lawful to
woman, are those only which appeal to the kindly,
generous, peaceful and benevolent principles.
Woman is to win every thing by peace and love;
by making herself so much respected, esteemed and
loved, that to yield to her opinions and to gratify her
wishes, will be the free-will offering of the heart. But
this is to be all accomplished in the domestic and
social circle. There let every woman become so
cultivated and refined in intellect, that her taste and
judgment will be respected; so benevolent in feeling
and action; that her motives will be reverenced;—so
unassuming and unambitious, that collision and
competition will be banished;—so “gentle and easy to
be entreated,” as that every heart will repose in her
presence; then, the fathers, the husbands, and the
sons, will find an influence thrown around them,
to which they will yield not only willingly but
proudly....
A woman may seek the aid of co-operation and
combination among her own sex, to assist her in her
appropriate offices of piety, charity, maternal and
domestic duty; but whatever, in any measure, throws
a woman into the attitude of a combatant, either for
herself or others—whatever binds her in a party
conflict—whatever obliges her in any way to exert
coercive influences, throws her out of her
appropriate sphere. If these general principles are
correct, they are entirely opposed to the plan of
arraying females in any Abolition movement.
Passage 2
The investigation of the rights of the slave has led
me to a better understanding of my own. I have
found the Anti-Slavery cause to be the high school of
morals in our land—the school in which human
rights are more fully investigated, and better
understood and taught, than in any other. Here a
great fundamental principle is uplifted and
illuminated, and from this central light, rays
innumerable stream all around.
Human beings have rights, because they are moral
beings: the rights of all men grow out of their moral
nature; and as all men have the same moral nature,
they have essentially the same rights. These rights
may be wrested from the slave, but they cannot be
alienated: his title to himself is as perfect now, as is
that of Lyman Beecher:1 it is stamped on his moral
being, and is, like it, imperishable. Now if rights are
founded in the nature of our moral being, then the
mere circumstance of sex does not give to man higher
rights and responsibilities, than to woman. To
suppose that it does, would be to deny the
self-evident truth, that the “physical constitution is
the mere instrument of the moral nature.” To
suppose that it does, would be to break up utterly the
relations, of the two natures, and to reverse their
functions, exalting the animal nature into a monarch,
and humbling the moral into a slave; making the
former a proprietor, and the latter its property.
When human beings are regarded as moral
beings, sex, instead of being enthroned upon the
summit, administering upon rights and
responsibilities, sinks into insignificance and
nothingness. My doctrine then is, that whatever it is
morally right for man to do, it is morally right for
woman to do. Our duties originate, not from
difference of sex, but from the diversity of our
relations in life, the various gifts and talents
committed to our care, and the different eras in
which we live.
Question 17:
In Passage 2, Grimké makes which point about human rights?
A) They are viewed differently in various cultures around the world.
B) They retain their moral authority regardless of whether they are recognized by law.
C) They are sometimes at odds with moral responsibilities.
D) They have become more advanced and refined throughout history.
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_5-question_17 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Catharine Beecher, Essay on
Slavery and Abolitionism. Originally published in 1837.
Passage 2 is adapted from Angelina E. Grimké, Letters to
Catharine Beecher. Originally published in 1838. Grimké
encouraged Southern women to oppose slavery publicly.
Passage 1 is Beecher’s response to Grimké’s views.
Passage 2 is Grimké’s response to Beecher.
Passage 1
Heaven has appointed to one sex the superior,
and to the other the subordinate station, and this
without any reference to the character or conduct of
either. It is therefore as much for the dignity as it is
for the interest of females, in all respects to conform
to the duties of this relation. . . . But while woman
holds a subordinate relation in society to the other
sex, it is not because it was designed that her duties
or her influence should be any the less important, or
all-pervading. But it was designed that the mode of
gaining influence and of exercising power should be
altogether different and peculiar....
A man may act on society by the collision of
intellect, in public debate; he may urge his measures
by a sense of shame, by fear and by personal interest;
he may coerce by the combination of public
sentiment; he may drive by physical force, and he
does not outstep the boundaries of his sphere. But all
the power, and all the conquests that are lawful to
woman, are those only which appeal to the kindly,
generous, peaceful and benevolent principles.
Woman is to win every thing by peace and love;
by making herself so much respected, esteemed and
loved, that to yield to her opinions and to gratify her
wishes, will be the free-will offering of the heart. But
this is to be all accomplished in the domestic and
social circle. There let every woman become so
cultivated and refined in intellect, that her taste and
judgment will be respected; so benevolent in feeling
and action; that her motives will be reverenced;—so
unassuming and unambitious, that collision and
competition will be banished;—so “gentle and easy to
be entreated,” as that every heart will repose in her
presence; then, the fathers, the husbands, and the
sons, will find an influence thrown around them,
to which they will yield not only willingly but
proudly....
A woman may seek the aid of co-operation and
combination among her own sex, to assist her in her
appropriate offices of piety, charity, maternal and
domestic duty; but whatever, in any measure, throws
a woman into the attitude of a combatant, either for
herself or others—whatever binds her in a party
conflict—whatever obliges her in any way to exert
coercive influences, throws her out of her
appropriate sphere. If these general principles are
correct, they are entirely opposed to the plan of
arraying females in any Abolition movement.
Passage 2
The investigation of the rights of the slave has led
me to a better understanding of my own. I have
found the Anti-Slavery cause to be the high school of
morals in our land—the school in which human
rights are more fully investigated, and better
understood and taught, than in any other. Here a
great fundamental principle is uplifted and
illuminated, and from this central light, rays
innumerable stream all around.
Human beings have rights, because they are moral
beings: the rights of all men grow out of their moral
nature; and as all men have the same moral nature,
they have essentially the same rights. These rights
may be wrested from the slave, but they cannot be
alienated: his title to himself is as perfect now, as is
that of Lyman Beecher:1 it is stamped on his moral
being, and is, like it, imperishable. Now if rights are
founded in the nature of our moral being, then the
mere circumstance of sex does not give to man higher
rights and responsibilities, than to woman. To
suppose that it does, would be to deny the
self-evident truth, that the “physical constitution is
the mere instrument of the moral nature.” To
suppose that it does, would be to break up utterly the
relations, of the two natures, and to reverse their
functions, exalting the animal nature into a monarch,
and humbling the moral into a slave; making the
former a proprietor, and the latter its property.
When human beings are regarded as moral
beings, sex, instead of being enthroned upon the
summit, administering upon rights and
responsibilities, sinks into insignificance and
nothingness. My doctrine then is, that whatever it is
morally right for man to do, it is morally right for
woman to do. Our duties originate, not from
difference of sex, but from the diversity of our
relations in life, the various gifts and talents
committed to our care, and the different eras in
which we live.
Question 11:
In Passage 1, Beecher makes which point about the status of women relative to that of men?
A) Women depend on men for their safety and security, but men are largely independent of women.
B) Women are inferior to men, but women play a role as significant as that played by men.
C) Women have fewer rights than men do, but women also have fewer responsibilities.
D) Women are superior to men, but tradition requires women to obey men.
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_5-question_11 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Catharine Beecher, Essay on
Slavery and Abolitionism. Originally published in 1837.
Passage 2 is adapted from Angelina E. Grimké, Letters to
Catharine Beecher. Originally published in 1838. Grimké
encouraged Southern women to oppose slavery publicly.
Passage 1 is Beecher’s response to Grimké’s views.
Passage 2 is Grimké’s response to Beecher.
Passage 1
Heaven has appointed to one sex the superior,
and to the other the subordinate station, and this
without any reference to the character or conduct of
either. It is therefore as much for the dignity as it is
for the interest of females, in all respects to conform
to the duties of this relation. . . . But while woman
holds a subordinate relation in society to the other
sex, it is not because it was designed that her duties
or her influence should be any the less important, or
all-pervading. But it was designed that the mode of
gaining influence and of exercising power should be
altogether different and peculiar....
A man may act on society by the collision of
intellect, in public debate; he may urge his measures
by a sense of shame, by fear and by personal interest;
he may coerce by the combination of public
sentiment; he may drive by physical force, and he
does not outstep the boundaries of his sphere. But all
the power, and all the conquests that are lawful to
woman, are those only which appeal to the kindly,
generous, peaceful and benevolent principles.
Woman is to win every thing by peace and love;
by making herself so much respected, esteemed and
loved, that to yield to her opinions and to gratify her
wishes, will be the free-will offering of the heart. But
this is to be all accomplished in the domestic and
social circle. There let every woman become so
cultivated and refined in intellect, that her taste and
judgment will be respected; so benevolent in feeling
and action; that her motives will be reverenced;—so
unassuming and unambitious, that collision and
competition will be banished;—so “gentle and easy to
be entreated,” as that every heart will repose in her
presence; then, the fathers, the husbands, and the
sons, will find an influence thrown around them,
to which they will yield not only willingly but
proudly....
A woman may seek the aid of co-operation and
combination among her own sex, to assist her in her
appropriate offices of piety, charity, maternal and
domestic duty; but whatever, in any measure, throws
a woman into the attitude of a combatant, either for
herself or others—whatever binds her in a party
conflict—whatever obliges her in any way to exert
coercive influences, throws her out of her
appropriate sphere. If these general principles are
correct, they are entirely opposed to the plan of
arraying females in any Abolition movement.
Passage 2
The investigation of the rights of the slave has led
me to a better understanding of my own. I have
found the Anti-Slavery cause to be the high school of
morals in our land—the school in which human
rights are more fully investigated, and better
understood and taught, than in any other. Here a
great fundamental principle is uplifted and
illuminated, and from this central light, rays
innumerable stream all around.
Human beings have rights, because they are moral
beings: the rights of all men grow out of their moral
nature; and as all men have the same moral nature,
they have essentially the same rights. These rights
may be wrested from the slave, but they cannot be
alienated: his title to himself is as perfect now, as is
that of Lyman Beecher:1 it is stamped on his moral
being, and is, like it, imperishable. Now if rights are
founded in the nature of our moral being, then the
mere circumstance of sex does not give to man higher
rights and responsibilities, than to woman. To
suppose that it does, would be to deny the
self-evident truth, that the “physical constitution is
the mere instrument of the moral nature.” To
suppose that it does, would be to break up utterly the
relations, of the two natures, and to reverse their
functions, exalting the animal nature into a monarch,
and humbling the moral into a slave; making the
former a proprietor, and the latter its property.
When human beings are regarded as moral
beings, sex, instead of being enthroned upon the
summit, administering upon rights and
responsibilities, sinks into insignificance and
nothingness. My doctrine then is, that whatever it is
morally right for man to do, it is morally right for
woman to do. Our duties originate, not from
difference of sex, but from the diversity of our
relations in life, the various gifts and talents
committed to our care, and the different eras in
which we live.
Question 13:
In Passage 1, Beecher implies that women’s effect on public life is largely
A) overlooked, because few men are interested in women’s thoughts about politics.
B) indirect, because women exert their influence within the home and family life.
C) unnecessary, because men are able to govern society themselves.
D) symbolic, because women tend to be more idealistic about politics than men are.
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_5-question_13 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
Passage 1 is adapted from Catharine Beecher, Essay on
Slavery and Abolitionism. Originally published in 1837.
Passage 2 is adapted from Angelina E. Grimké, Letters to
Catharine Beecher. Originally published in 1838. Grimké
encouraged Southern women to oppose slavery publicly.
Passage 1 is Beecher’s response to Grimké’s views.
Passage 2 is Grimké’s response to Beecher.
Passage 1
Heaven has appointed to one sex the superior,
and to the other the subordinate station, and this
without any reference to the character or conduct of
either. It is therefore as much for the dignity as it is
for the interest of females, in all respects to conform
to the duties of this relation. . . . But while woman
holds a subordinate relation in society to the other
sex, it is not because it was designed that her duties
or her influence should be any the less important, or
all-pervading. But it was designed that the mode of
gaining influence and of exercising power should be
altogether different and peculiar....
A man may act on society by the collision of
intellect, in public debate; he may urge his measures
by a sense of shame, by fear and by personal interest;
he may coerce by the combination of public
sentiment; he may drive by physical force, and he
does not outstep the boundaries of his sphere. But all
the power, and all the conquests that are lawful to
woman, are those only which appeal to the kindly,
generous, peaceful and benevolent principles.
Woman is to win every thing by peace and love;
by making herself so much respected, esteemed and
loved, that to yield to her opinions and to gratify her
wishes, will be the free-will offering of the heart. But
this is to be all accomplished in the domestic and
social circle. There let every woman become so
cultivated and refined in intellect, that her taste and
judgment will be respected; so benevolent in feeling
and action; that her motives will be reverenced;—so
unassuming and unambitious, that collision and
competition will be banished;—so “gentle and easy to
be entreated,” as that every heart will repose in her
presence; then, the fathers, the husbands, and the
sons, will find an influence thrown around them,
to which they will yield not only willingly but
proudly....
A woman may seek the aid of co-operation and
combination among her own sex, to assist her in her
appropriate offices of piety, charity, maternal and
domestic duty; but whatever, in any measure, throws
a woman into the attitude of a combatant, either for
herself or others—whatever binds her in a party
conflict—whatever obliges her in any way to exert
coercive influences, throws her out of her
appropriate sphere. If these general principles are
correct, they are entirely opposed to the plan of
arraying females in any Abolition movement.
Passage 2
The investigation of the rights of the slave has led
me to a better understanding of my own. I have
found the Anti-Slavery cause to be the high school of
morals in our land—the school in which human
rights are more fully investigated, and better
understood and taught, than in any other. Here a
great fundamental principle is uplifted and
illuminated, and from this central light, rays
innumerable stream all around.
Human beings have rights, because they are moral
beings: the rights of all men grow out of their moral
nature; and as all men have the same moral nature,
they have essentially the same rights. These rights
may be wrested from the slave, but they cannot be
alienated: his title to himself is as perfect now, as is
that of Lyman Beecher:1 it is stamped on his moral
being, and is, like it, imperishable. Now if rights are
founded in the nature of our moral being, then the
mere circumstance of sex does not give to man higher
rights and responsibilities, than to woman. To
suppose that it does, would be to deny the
self-evident truth, that the “physical constitution is
the mere instrument of the moral nature.” To
suppose that it does, would be to break up utterly the
relations, of the two natures, and to reverse their
functions, exalting the animal nature into a monarch,
and humbling the moral into a slave; making the
former a proprietor, and the latter its property.
When human beings are regarded as moral
beings, sex, instead of being enthroned upon the
summit, administering upon rights and
responsibilities, sinks into insignificance and
nothingness. My doctrine then is, that whatever it is
morally right for man to do, it is morally right for
woman to do. Our duties originate, not from
difference of sex, but from the diversity of our
relations in life, the various gifts and talents
committed to our care, and the different eras in
which we live.
Question 19:
Which choice best states the relationship between the two passages?
A) Passage 2 illustrates the practical difficulties of a proposal made in Passage 1.
B) Passage 2 takes issue with the primary argument of Passage 1.
C) Passage 2 provides a historical context for the perspective offered in Passage 1.
D) Passage 2 elaborates upon several ideas implied in Passage 1.
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_5-question_19 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Bryan Walsh, “Whole Food
Blues: Why Organic Agriculture May Not Be So Sustainable.”
©2012 by Time Inc.
When it comes to energy, everyone loves
efficiency. Cutting energy waste is one of those goals
that both sides of the political divide can agree on,
even if they sometimes diverge on how best to get
there. Energy efficiency allows us to get more out of
our given resources, which is good for the economy
and (mostly) good for the environment as well. In
an increasingly hot and crowded world, the only
sustainable way to live is to get more out of less.
Every environmentalist would agree.
But change the conversation to food, and
suddenly efficiency doesn’t look so good.
Conventional industrial agriculture has become
incredibly efficient on a simple land to food basis.
Thanks to fertilizers, mechanization and irrigation,
each American farmer feeds over 155 people
worldwide. Conventional farming gets more and
more crop per square foot of cultivated land—
over 170 bushels of corn per acre in Iowa, for
example—which can mean less territory needs to
be converted from wilderness to farmland.
And since a third of the planet is already used for
agriculture—destroying forests and other wild
habitats along the way—anything that could help us
produce more food on less land would seem to be
good for the environment.
Of course, that’s not how most environmentalists
regard their arugula [a leafy green]. They have
embraced organic food as better for the planet—and
healthier and tastier, too—than the stuff produced by
agricultural corporations. Environmentalists disdain
the enormous amounts of energy needed and waste
created by conventional farming, while organic
practices—forgoing artificial fertilizers and chemical
pesticides—are considered far more sustainable.
Sales of organic food rose 7.7% in 2010, up to $26.7
billion—and people are making those purchases for
their consciences as much as their taste buds.
Yet a new meta-analysis in Nature does the math
and comes to a hard conclusion: organic farming
yields 25% fewer crops on average than conventional
agriculture. More land is therefore needed to
produce fewer crops—and that means organic
farming may not be as good for the planet as
we think.
In the Nature analysis, scientists from McGill
University in Montreal and the University of
Minnesota performed an analysis of 66 studies
comparing conventional and organic methods across
34 different crop species, from fruits to grains to
legumes. They found that organic farming delivered
a lower yield for every crop type, though the disparity
varied widely. For rain-watered legume crops like
beans or perennial crops like fruit trees, organic
trailed conventional agriculture by just 5%. Yet for
major cereal crops like corn or wheat, as well as most
vegetables—all of which provide the bulk of the
world’s calories—conventional agriculture
outperformed organics by more than 25%.
The main difference is nitrogen, the chemical key
to plant growth. Conventional agriculture makes use
of 171 million metric tons of synthetic fertilizer each
year, and all that nitrogen enables much faster plant
growth than the slower release of nitrogen from the
compost or cover crops used in organic farming.
When we talk about a Green Revolution, we really
mean a nitrogen revolution—along with a lot
of water.
But not all the nitrogen used in conventional
fertilizer ends up in crops—much of it ends up
running off the soil and into the oceans, creating vast
polluted dead zones. We’re already putting more
nitrogen into the soil than the planet can stand over
the long term. And conventional agriculture also
depends heavily on chemical pesticides, which can
have unintended side effects.
What that means is that while conventional
agriculture is more efficient—sometimes much more
efficient—than organic farming, there are trade-offs
with each. So an ideal global agriculture system, in
the views of the study’s authors, may borrow the best
from both systems, as Jonathan Foley of the
University of Minnesota explained:
The bottom line? Today’s organic farming
practices are probably best deployed in fruit and
vegetable farms, where growing nutrition (not
just bulk calories) is the primary goal. But for
delivering sheer calories, especially in our staple
crops of wheat, rice, maize, soybeans and so on,
conventional farms have the advantage right
now.
Looking forward, I think we will need to deploy
different kinds of practices (especially new,
mixed approaches that take the best of organic
and conventional farming systems) where they
are best suited—geographically, economically,
socially, etc.
Question 22:
As used in line 14, “simple” most nearly means
A) straightforward.
B) modest.
C) unadorned.
D) easy.
Answer: | A | true | sat-practice_5-question_22 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Bryan Walsh, “Whole Food
Blues: Why Organic Agriculture May Not Be So Sustainable.”
©2012 by Time Inc.
When it comes to energy, everyone loves
efficiency. Cutting energy waste is one of those goals
that both sides of the political divide can agree on,
even if they sometimes diverge on how best to get
there. Energy efficiency allows us to get more out of
our given resources, which is good for the economy
and (mostly) good for the environment as well. In
an increasingly hot and crowded world, the only
sustainable way to live is to get more out of less.
Every environmentalist would agree.
But change the conversation to food, and
suddenly efficiency doesn’t look so good.
Conventional industrial agriculture has become
incredibly efficient on a simple land to food basis.
Thanks to fertilizers, mechanization and irrigation,
each American farmer feeds over 155 people
worldwide. Conventional farming gets more and
more crop per square foot of cultivated land—
over 170 bushels of corn per acre in Iowa, for
example—which can mean less territory needs to
be converted from wilderness to farmland.
And since a third of the planet is already used for
agriculture—destroying forests and other wild
habitats along the way—anything that could help us
produce more food on less land would seem to be
good for the environment.
Of course, that’s not how most environmentalists
regard their arugula [a leafy green]. They have
embraced organic food as better for the planet—and
healthier and tastier, too—than the stuff produced by
agricultural corporations. Environmentalists disdain
the enormous amounts of energy needed and waste
created by conventional farming, while organic
practices—forgoing artificial fertilizers and chemical
pesticides—are considered far more sustainable.
Sales of organic food rose 7.7% in 2010, up to $26.7
billion—and people are making those purchases for
their consciences as much as their taste buds.
Yet a new meta-analysis in Nature does the math
and comes to a hard conclusion: organic farming
yields 25% fewer crops on average than conventional
agriculture. More land is therefore needed to
produce fewer crops—and that means organic
farming may not be as good for the planet as
we think.
In the Nature analysis, scientists from McGill
University in Montreal and the University of
Minnesota performed an analysis of 66 studies
comparing conventional and organic methods across
34 different crop species, from fruits to grains to
legumes. They found that organic farming delivered
a lower yield for every crop type, though the disparity
varied widely. For rain-watered legume crops like
beans or perennial crops like fruit trees, organic
trailed conventional agriculture by just 5%. Yet for
major cereal crops like corn or wheat, as well as most
vegetables—all of which provide the bulk of the
world’s calories—conventional agriculture
outperformed organics by more than 25%.
The main difference is nitrogen, the chemical key
to plant growth. Conventional agriculture makes use
of 171 million metric tons of synthetic fertilizer each
year, and all that nitrogen enables much faster plant
growth than the slower release of nitrogen from the
compost or cover crops used in organic farming.
When we talk about a Green Revolution, we really
mean a nitrogen revolution—along with a lot
of water.
But not all the nitrogen used in conventional
fertilizer ends up in crops—much of it ends up
running off the soil and into the oceans, creating vast
polluted dead zones. We’re already putting more
nitrogen into the soil than the planet can stand over
the long term. And conventional agriculture also
depends heavily on chemical pesticides, which can
have unintended side effects.
What that means is that while conventional
agriculture is more efficient—sometimes much more
efficient—than organic farming, there are trade-offs
with each. So an ideal global agriculture system, in
the views of the study’s authors, may borrow the best
from both systems, as Jonathan Foley of the
University of Minnesota explained:
The bottom line? Today’s organic farming
practices are probably best deployed in fruit and
vegetable farms, where growing nutrition (not
just bulk calories) is the primary goal. But for
delivering sheer calories, especially in our staple
crops of wheat, rice, maize, soybeans and so on,
conventional farms have the advantage right
now.
Looking forward, I think we will need to deploy
different kinds of practices (especially new,
mixed approaches that take the best of organic
and conventional farming systems) where they
are best suited—geographically, economically,
socially, etc.
Question 23:
According to the passage, a significant attribute of conventional agriculture is its ability to
A) produce a wide variety of fruits and vegetables.
B) maximize the output of cultivated land.
C) satisfy the dietary needs of the world’s population.
D) lessen the necessity of nitrogen in plant growth.
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_5-question_23 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Bryan Walsh, “Whole Food
Blues: Why Organic Agriculture May Not Be So Sustainable.”
©2012 by Time Inc.
When it comes to energy, everyone loves
efficiency. Cutting energy waste is one of those goals
that both sides of the political divide can agree on,
even if they sometimes diverge on how best to get
there. Energy efficiency allows us to get more out of
our given resources, which is good for the economy
and (mostly) good for the environment as well. In
an increasingly hot and crowded world, the only
sustainable way to live is to get more out of less.
Every environmentalist would agree.
But change the conversation to food, and
suddenly efficiency doesn’t look so good.
Conventional industrial agriculture has become
incredibly efficient on a simple land to food basis.
Thanks to fertilizers, mechanization and irrigation,
each American farmer feeds over 155 people
worldwide. Conventional farming gets more and
more crop per square foot of cultivated land—
over 170 bushels of corn per acre in Iowa, for
example—which can mean less territory needs to
be converted from wilderness to farmland.
And since a third of the planet is already used for
agriculture—destroying forests and other wild
habitats along the way—anything that could help us
produce more food on less land would seem to be
good for the environment.
Of course, that’s not how most environmentalists
regard their arugula [a leafy green]. They have
embraced organic food as better for the planet—and
healthier and tastier, too—than the stuff produced by
agricultural corporations. Environmentalists disdain
the enormous amounts of energy needed and waste
created by conventional farming, while organic
practices—forgoing artificial fertilizers and chemical
pesticides—are considered far more sustainable.
Sales of organic food rose 7.7% in 2010, up to $26.7
billion—and people are making those purchases for
their consciences as much as their taste buds.
Yet a new meta-analysis in Nature does the math
and comes to a hard conclusion: organic farming
yields 25% fewer crops on average than conventional
agriculture. More land is therefore needed to
produce fewer crops—and that means organic
farming may not be as good for the planet as
we think.
In the Nature analysis, scientists from McGill
University in Montreal and the University of
Minnesota performed an analysis of 66 studies
comparing conventional and organic methods across
34 different crop species, from fruits to grains to
legumes. They found that organic farming delivered
a lower yield for every crop type, though the disparity
varied widely. For rain-watered legume crops like
beans or perennial crops like fruit trees, organic
trailed conventional agriculture by just 5%. Yet for
major cereal crops like corn or wheat, as well as most
vegetables—all of which provide the bulk of the
world’s calories—conventional agriculture
outperformed organics by more than 25%.
The main difference is nitrogen, the chemical key
to plant growth. Conventional agriculture makes use
of 171 million metric tons of synthetic fertilizer each
year, and all that nitrogen enables much faster plant
growth than the slower release of nitrogen from the
compost or cover crops used in organic farming.
When we talk about a Green Revolution, we really
mean a nitrogen revolution—along with a lot
of water.
But not all the nitrogen used in conventional
fertilizer ends up in crops—much of it ends up
running off the soil and into the oceans, creating vast
polluted dead zones. We’re already putting more
nitrogen into the soil than the planet can stand over
the long term. And conventional agriculture also
depends heavily on chemical pesticides, which can
have unintended side effects.
What that means is that while conventional
agriculture is more efficient—sometimes much more
efficient—than organic farming, there are trade-offs
with each. So an ideal global agriculture system, in
the views of the study’s authors, may borrow the best
from both systems, as Jonathan Foley of the
University of Minnesota explained:
The bottom line? Today’s organic farming
practices are probably best deployed in fruit and
vegetable farms, where growing nutrition (not
just bulk calories) is the primary goal. But for
delivering sheer calories, especially in our staple
crops of wheat, rice, maize, soybeans and so on,
conventional farms have the advantage right
now.
Looking forward, I think we will need to deploy
different kinds of practices (especially new,
mixed approaches that take the best of organic
and conventional farming systems) where they
are best suited—geographically, economically,
socially, etc.
Question 29:
In line 88, “sheer” most nearly means
A) transparent.
B) abrupt.
C) steep.
D) pure.
Answer: | D | true | sat-practice_5-question_29 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Bryan Walsh, “Whole Food
Blues: Why Organic Agriculture May Not Be So Sustainable.”
©2012 by Time Inc.
When it comes to energy, everyone loves
efficiency. Cutting energy waste is one of those goals
that both sides of the political divide can agree on,
even if they sometimes diverge on how best to get
there. Energy efficiency allows us to get more out of
our given resources, which is good for the economy
and (mostly) good for the environment as well. In
an increasingly hot and crowded world, the only
sustainable way to live is to get more out of less.
Every environmentalist would agree.
But change the conversation to food, and
suddenly efficiency doesn’t look so good.
Conventional industrial agriculture has become
incredibly efficient on a simple land to food basis.
Thanks to fertilizers, mechanization and irrigation,
each American farmer feeds over 155 people
worldwide. Conventional farming gets more and
more crop per square foot of cultivated land—
over 170 bushels of corn per acre in Iowa, for
example—which can mean less territory needs to
be converted from wilderness to farmland.
And since a third of the planet is already used for
agriculture—destroying forests and other wild
habitats along the way—anything that could help us
produce more food on less land would seem to be
good for the environment.
Of course, that’s not how most environmentalists
regard their arugula [a leafy green]. They have
embraced organic food as better for the planet—and
healthier and tastier, too—than the stuff produced by
agricultural corporations. Environmentalists disdain
the enormous amounts of energy needed and waste
created by conventional farming, while organic
practices—forgoing artificial fertilizers and chemical
pesticides—are considered far more sustainable.
Sales of organic food rose 7.7% in 2010, up to $26.7
billion—and people are making those purchases for
their consciences as much as their taste buds.
Yet a new meta-analysis in Nature does the math
and comes to a hard conclusion: organic farming
yields 25% fewer crops on average than conventional
agriculture. More land is therefore needed to
produce fewer crops—and that means organic
farming may not be as good for the planet as
we think.
In the Nature analysis, scientists from McGill
University in Montreal and the University of
Minnesota performed an analysis of 66 studies
comparing conventional and organic methods across
34 different crop species, from fruits to grains to
legumes. They found that organic farming delivered
a lower yield for every crop type, though the disparity
varied widely. For rain-watered legume crops like
beans or perennial crops like fruit trees, organic
trailed conventional agriculture by just 5%. Yet for
major cereal crops like corn or wheat, as well as most
vegetables—all of which provide the bulk of the
world’s calories—conventional agriculture
outperformed organics by more than 25%.
The main difference is nitrogen, the chemical key
to plant growth. Conventional agriculture makes use
of 171 million metric tons of synthetic fertilizer each
year, and all that nitrogen enables much faster plant
growth than the slower release of nitrogen from the
compost or cover crops used in organic farming.
When we talk about a Green Revolution, we really
mean a nitrogen revolution—along with a lot
of water.
But not all the nitrogen used in conventional
fertilizer ends up in crops—much of it ends up
running off the soil and into the oceans, creating vast
polluted dead zones. We’re already putting more
nitrogen into the soil than the planet can stand over
the long term. And conventional agriculture also
depends heavily on chemical pesticides, which can
have unintended side effects.
What that means is that while conventional
agriculture is more efficient—sometimes much more
efficient—than organic farming, there are trade-offs
with each. So an ideal global agriculture system, in
the views of the study’s authors, may borrow the best
from both systems, as Jonathan Foley of the
University of Minnesota explained:
The bottom line? Today’s organic farming
practices are probably best deployed in fruit and
vegetable farms, where growing nutrition (not
just bulk calories) is the primary goal. But for
delivering sheer calories, especially in our staple
crops of wheat, rice, maize, soybeans and so on,
conventional farms have the advantage right
now.
Looking forward, I think we will need to deploy
different kinds of practices (especially new,
mixed approaches that take the best of organic
and conventional farming systems) where they
are best suited—geographically, economically,
socially, etc.
Question 28:
According to Foley, an “ideal global agriculture system” (line 80)
A) focuses primarily on yield percentages and global markets.
B) considers multiple factors in the selection of farming techniques.
C) weighs the economic interests of farmers against the needs of consumers.
D) puts the nutritional value of produce first and foremost.
Answer: | B | true | sat-practice_5-question_28 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Bryan Walsh, “Whole Food
Blues: Why Organic Agriculture May Not Be So Sustainable.”
©2012 by Time Inc.
When it comes to energy, everyone loves
efficiency. Cutting energy waste is one of those goals
that both sides of the political divide can agree on,
even if they sometimes diverge on how best to get
there. Energy efficiency allows us to get more out of
our given resources, which is good for the economy
and (mostly) good for the environment as well. In
an increasingly hot and crowded world, the only
sustainable way to live is to get more out of less.
Every environmentalist would agree.
But change the conversation to food, and
suddenly efficiency doesn’t look so good.
Conventional industrial agriculture has become
incredibly efficient on a simple land to food basis.
Thanks to fertilizers, mechanization and irrigation,
each American farmer feeds over 155 people
worldwide. Conventional farming gets more and
more crop per square foot of cultivated land—
over 170 bushels of corn per acre in Iowa, for
example—which can mean less territory needs to
be converted from wilderness to farmland.
And since a third of the planet is already used for
agriculture—destroying forests and other wild
habitats along the way—anything that could help us
produce more food on less land would seem to be
good for the environment.
Of course, that’s not how most environmentalists
regard their arugula [a leafy green]. They have
embraced organic food as better for the planet—and
healthier and tastier, too—than the stuff produced by
agricultural corporations. Environmentalists disdain
the enormous amounts of energy needed and waste
created by conventional farming, while organic
practices—forgoing artificial fertilizers and chemical
pesticides—are considered far more sustainable.
Sales of organic food rose 7.7% in 2010, up to $26.7
billion—and people are making those purchases for
their consciences as much as their taste buds.
Yet a new meta-analysis in Nature does the math
and comes to a hard conclusion: organic farming
yields 25% fewer crops on average than conventional
agriculture. More land is therefore needed to
produce fewer crops—and that means organic
farming may not be as good for the planet as
we think.
In the Nature analysis, scientists from McGill
University in Montreal and the University of
Minnesota performed an analysis of 66 studies
comparing conventional and organic methods across
34 different crop species, from fruits to grains to
legumes. They found that organic farming delivered
a lower yield for every crop type, though the disparity
varied widely. For rain-watered legume crops like
beans or perennial crops like fruit trees, organic
trailed conventional agriculture by just 5%. Yet for
major cereal crops like corn or wheat, as well as most
vegetables—all of which provide the bulk of the
world’s calories—conventional agriculture
outperformed organics by more than 25%.
The main difference is nitrogen, the chemical key
to plant growth. Conventional agriculture makes use
of 171 million metric tons of synthetic fertilizer each
year, and all that nitrogen enables much faster plant
growth than the slower release of nitrogen from the
compost or cover crops used in organic farming.
When we talk about a Green Revolution, we really
mean a nitrogen revolution—along with a lot
of water.
But not all the nitrogen used in conventional
fertilizer ends up in crops—much of it ends up
running off the soil and into the oceans, creating vast
polluted dead zones. We’re already putting more
nitrogen into the soil than the planet can stand over
the long term. And conventional agriculture also
depends heavily on chemical pesticides, which can
have unintended side effects.
What that means is that while conventional
agriculture is more efficient—sometimes much more
efficient—than organic farming, there are trade-offs
with each. So an ideal global agriculture system, in
the views of the study’s authors, may borrow the best
from both systems, as Jonathan Foley of the
University of Minnesota explained:
The bottom line? Today’s organic farming
practices are probably best deployed in fruit and
vegetable farms, where growing nutrition (not
just bulk calories) is the primary goal. But for
delivering sheer calories, especially in our staple
crops of wheat, rice, maize, soybeans and so on,
conventional farms have the advantage right
now.
Looking forward, I think we will need to deploy
different kinds of practices (especially new,
mixed approaches that take the best of organic
and conventional farming systems) where they
are best suited—geographically, economically,
socially, etc.
Question 26:
Which statement best expresses a relationship between organic farming and conventional farming that is presented in the passage?
A) Both are equally sustainable, but they differ dramatically in the amount of land they require to produce equivalent yields.
B) Both rely on artificial chemicals for pest control, but organic farmers use the chemicals sparingly in conjunction with natural remedies.
C) Both use nitrogen to encourage plant growth, but the nitrogen used in conventional farming comes from synthetic sources.
D) Both create a substantial amount of nitrogen runoff, but only the type of nitrogen found in fertilizers used in conventional farming can be dangerous.
Answer: | C | false | sat-practice_5-question_26 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Bryan Walsh, “Whole Food
Blues: Why Organic Agriculture May Not Be So Sustainable.”
©2012 by Time Inc.
When it comes to energy, everyone loves
efficiency. Cutting energy waste is one of those goals
that both sides of the political divide can agree on,
even if they sometimes diverge on how best to get
there. Energy efficiency allows us to get more out of
our given resources, which is good for the economy
and (mostly) good for the environment as well. In
an increasingly hot and crowded world, the only
sustainable way to live is to get more out of less.
Every environmentalist would agree.
But change the conversation to food, and
suddenly efficiency doesn’t look so good.
Conventional industrial agriculture has become
incredibly efficient on a simple land to food basis.
Thanks to fertilizers, mechanization and irrigation,
each American farmer feeds over 155 people
worldwide. Conventional farming gets more and
more crop per square foot of cultivated land—
over 170 bushels of corn per acre in Iowa, for
example—which can mean less territory needs to
be converted from wilderness to farmland.
And since a third of the planet is already used for
agriculture—destroying forests and other wild
habitats along the way—anything that could help us
produce more food on less land would seem to be
good for the environment.
Of course, that’s not how most environmentalists
regard their arugula [a leafy green]. They have
embraced organic food as better for the planet—and
healthier and tastier, too—than the stuff produced by
agricultural corporations. Environmentalists disdain
the enormous amounts of energy needed and waste
created by conventional farming, while organic
practices—forgoing artificial fertilizers and chemical
pesticides—are considered far more sustainable.
Sales of organic food rose 7.7% in 2010, up to $26.7
billion—and people are making those purchases for
their consciences as much as their taste buds.
Yet a new meta-analysis in Nature does the math
and comes to a hard conclusion: organic farming
yields 25% fewer crops on average than conventional
agriculture. More land is therefore needed to
produce fewer crops—and that means organic
farming may not be as good for the planet as
we think.
In the Nature analysis, scientists from McGill
University in Montreal and the University of
Minnesota performed an analysis of 66 studies
comparing conventional and organic methods across
34 different crop species, from fruits to grains to
legumes. They found that organic farming delivered
a lower yield for every crop type, though the disparity
varied widely. For rain-watered legume crops like
beans or perennial crops like fruit trees, organic
trailed conventional agriculture by just 5%. Yet for
major cereal crops like corn or wheat, as well as most
vegetables—all of which provide the bulk of the
world’s calories—conventional agriculture
outperformed organics by more than 25%.
The main difference is nitrogen, the chemical key
to plant growth. Conventional agriculture makes use
of 171 million metric tons of synthetic fertilizer each
year, and all that nitrogen enables much faster plant
growth than the slower release of nitrogen from the
compost or cover crops used in organic farming.
When we talk about a Green Revolution, we really
mean a nitrogen revolution—along with a lot
of water.
But not all the nitrogen used in conventional
fertilizer ends up in crops—much of it ends up
running off the soil and into the oceans, creating vast
polluted dead zones. We’re already putting more
nitrogen into the soil than the planet can stand over
the long term. And conventional agriculture also
depends heavily on chemical pesticides, which can
have unintended side effects.
What that means is that while conventional
agriculture is more efficient—sometimes much more
efficient—than organic farming, there are trade-offs
with each. So an ideal global agriculture system, in
the views of the study’s authors, may borrow the best
from both systems, as Jonathan Foley of the
University of Minnesota explained:
The bottom line? Today’s organic farming
practices are probably best deployed in fruit and
vegetable farms, where growing nutrition (not
just bulk calories) is the primary goal. But for
delivering sheer calories, especially in our staple
crops of wheat, rice, maize, soybeans and so on,
conventional farms have the advantage right
now.
Looking forward, I think we will need to deploy
different kinds of practices (especially new,
mixed approaches that take the best of organic
and conventional farming systems) where they
are best suited—geographically, economically,
socially, etc.
Question 24:
Which choice best reflects the perspective of the “environmentalists” (line 27) on conventional agriculture?
A) It produces inferior fruits and vegetables and is detrimental to the environment.
B) It is energy efficient and reduces the need to convert wilderness to farmland.
C) It is good for the environment only in the short run.
D) It depletes critical resources but protects wildlife habitats.
Answer: | A | true | sat-practice_5-question_24 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from John Bohannon, “Why You
Shouldn’t Trust Internet Comments.” ©2013 by American
Association for the Advancement of Science.
The “wisdom of crowds” has become a mantra of
the Internet age. Need to choose a new vacuum
cleaner? Check out the reviews on online merchant
Amazon. But a new study suggests that such online
scores don’t always reveal the best choice. A massive
controlled experiment of Web users finds that such
ratings are highly susceptible to irrational “herd
behavior”—and that the herd can be manipulated.
Sometimes the crowd really is wiser than you. The
classic examples are guessing the weight of a bull or
the number of gumballs in a jar. Your guess is
probably going to be far from the mark, whereas the
average of many people’s choices is remarkably close
to the true number.
But what happens when the goal is to judge
something less tangible, such as the quality or worth
of a product? According to one theory, the wisdom
of the crowd still holds—measuring the aggregate of
people’s opinions produces a stable, reliable
value. Skeptics, however, argue that people’s
opinions are easily swayed by those of others. So
nudging a crowd early on by presenting contrary
opinions—for example, exposing them to some very
good or very bad attitudes—will steer the crowd in a
different direction. To test which hypothesis is true,
you would need to manipulate huge numbers of
people, exposing them to false information and
determining how it affects their opinions.
A team led by Sinan Aral, a network scientist at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in
Cambridge, did exactly that. Aral has been secretly
working with a popular website that aggregates news
stories. The website allows users to make comments
about news stories and vote each other’s comments
up or down. The vote tallies are visible as a number
next to each comment, and the position of the
comments is chronological. (Stories on the site get an
average of about ten comments and about three votes
per comment.) It’s a follow-up to his experiment
using people’s ratings of movies to measure how
much individual people influence each other online
(answer: a lot). This time, he wanted to know how
much the crowd influences the individual, and
whether it can be controlled from outside.
For five months, every comment submitted by a
user randomly received an “up” vote (positive); a
“down” vote (negative); or as a control, no vote at all.
The team then observed how users rated those
comments. The users generated more than
100,000 comments that were viewed more than
10 million times and rated more than 300,000 times
by other users.
At least when it comes to comments on news
sites, the crowd is more herdlike than wise.
Comments that received fake positive votes from the
researchers were 32% more likely to receive more
positive votes compared with a control, the team
reports. And those comments were no more likely
than the control to be down-voted by the next viewer
to see them. By the end of the study, positively
manipulated comments got an overall boost of about
25%. However, the same did not hold true for
negative manipulation. The ratings of comments that
got a fake down vote were usually negated by an up
vote by the next user to see them.
“Our experiment does not reveal the psychology
behind people’s decisions,” Aral says, “but an
intuitive explanation is that people are more
skeptical of negative social influence. They’re more
willing to go along with positive opinions from other
people.”
Duncan Watts, a network scientist at Microsoft
Research in New York City, agrees with that
conclusion. “[But] one question is whether the
positive [herding] bias is specific to this site” or true
in general, Watts says. He points out that the
category of the news items in the experiment had a
strong effect on how much people could be
manipulated. “I would have thought that ‘business’ is
pretty similar to ‘economics,’ yet they find a much
stronger effect (almost 50% stronger) for the former
than the latter. What explains this difference? If we’re
going to apply these findings in the real world, we’ll
need to know the answers.”
Will companies be able to boost their products by
manipulating online ratings on a massive scale?
“That is easier said than done,” Watts says. If people
detect—or learn—that comments on a website are
being manipulated, the herd may spook and leave
entirely.
Question 36:
Which action would best address a question Watts raises about the study?
A) Providing fewer fake positive comments
B) Using multiple websites to collect ratings
C) Requiring users to register on the website before voting
D) Informing users that voting data are being analyzed
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_5-question_36 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from John Bohannon, “Why You
Shouldn’t Trust Internet Comments.” ©2013 by American
Association for the Advancement of Science.
The “wisdom of crowds” has become a mantra of
the Internet age. Need to choose a new vacuum
cleaner? Check out the reviews on online merchant
Amazon. But a new study suggests that such online
scores don’t always reveal the best choice. A massive
controlled experiment of Web users finds that such
ratings are highly susceptible to irrational “herd
behavior”—and that the herd can be manipulated.
Sometimes the crowd really is wiser than you. The
classic examples are guessing the weight of a bull or
the number of gumballs in a jar. Your guess is
probably going to be far from the mark, whereas the
average of many people’s choices is remarkably close
to the true number.
But what happens when the goal is to judge
something less tangible, such as the quality or worth
of a product? According to one theory, the wisdom
of the crowd still holds—measuring the aggregate of
people’s opinions produces a stable, reliable
value. Skeptics, however, argue that people’s
opinions are easily swayed by those of others. So
nudging a crowd early on by presenting contrary
opinions—for example, exposing them to some very
good or very bad attitudes—will steer the crowd in a
different direction. To test which hypothesis is true,
you would need to manipulate huge numbers of
people, exposing them to false information and
determining how it affects their opinions.
A team led by Sinan Aral, a network scientist at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in
Cambridge, did exactly that. Aral has been secretly
working with a popular website that aggregates news
stories. The website allows users to make comments
about news stories and vote each other’s comments
up or down. The vote tallies are visible as a number
next to each comment, and the position of the
comments is chronological. (Stories on the site get an
average of about ten comments and about three votes
per comment.) It’s a follow-up to his experiment
using people’s ratings of movies to measure how
much individual people influence each other online
(answer: a lot). This time, he wanted to know how
much the crowd influences the individual, and
whether it can be controlled from outside.
For five months, every comment submitted by a
user randomly received an “up” vote (positive); a
“down” vote (negative); or as a control, no vote at all.
The team then observed how users rated those
comments. The users generated more than
100,000 comments that were viewed more than
10 million times and rated more than 300,000 times
by other users.
At least when it comes to comments on news
sites, the crowd is more herdlike than wise.
Comments that received fake positive votes from the
researchers were 32% more likely to receive more
positive votes compared with a control, the team
reports. And those comments were no more likely
than the control to be down-voted by the next viewer
to see them. By the end of the study, positively
manipulated comments got an overall boost of about
25%. However, the same did not hold true for
negative manipulation. The ratings of comments that
got a fake down vote were usually negated by an up
vote by the next user to see them.
“Our experiment does not reveal the psychology
behind people’s decisions,” Aral says, “but an
intuitive explanation is that people are more
skeptical of negative social influence. They’re more
willing to go along with positive opinions from other
people.”
Duncan Watts, a network scientist at Microsoft
Research in New York City, agrees with that
conclusion. “[But] one question is whether the
positive [herding] bias is specific to this site” or true
in general, Watts says. He points out that the
category of the news items in the experiment had a
strong effect on how much people could be
manipulated. “I would have thought that ‘business’ is
pretty similar to ‘economics,’ yet they find a much
stronger effect (almost 50% stronger) for the former
than the latter. What explains this difference? If we’re
going to apply these findings in the real world, we’ll
need to know the answers.”
Will companies be able to boost their products by
manipulating online ratings on a massive scale?
“That is easier said than done,” Watts says. If people
detect—or learn—that comments on a website are
being manipulated, the herd may spook and leave
entirely.
Question 35:
Which choice best supports the view of the “skeptics” (line 20)?
A) Lines 55-58 (“Comments... reports”)
B) Lines 58-60 (“And... them”)
C) Lines 63-65 (“The ratings... them”)
D) Lines 76-79 (“He... manipulated”)
Answer: | A | true | sat-practice_5-question_35 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from John Bohannon, “Why You
Shouldn’t Trust Internet Comments.” ©2013 by American
Association for the Advancement of Science.
The “wisdom of crowds” has become a mantra of
the Internet age. Need to choose a new vacuum
cleaner? Check out the reviews on online merchant
Amazon. But a new study suggests that such online
scores don’t always reveal the best choice. A massive
controlled experiment of Web users finds that such
ratings are highly susceptible to irrational “herd
behavior”—and that the herd can be manipulated.
Sometimes the crowd really is wiser than you. The
classic examples are guessing the weight of a bull or
the number of gumballs in a jar. Your guess is
probably going to be far from the mark, whereas the
average of many people’s choices is remarkably close
to the true number.
But what happens when the goal is to judge
something less tangible, such as the quality or worth
of a product? According to one theory, the wisdom
of the crowd still holds—measuring the aggregate of
people’s opinions produces a stable, reliable
value. Skeptics, however, argue that people’s
opinions are easily swayed by those of others. So
nudging a crowd early on by presenting contrary
opinions—for example, exposing them to some very
good or very bad attitudes—will steer the crowd in a
different direction. To test which hypothesis is true,
you would need to manipulate huge numbers of
people, exposing them to false information and
determining how it affects their opinions.
A team led by Sinan Aral, a network scientist at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in
Cambridge, did exactly that. Aral has been secretly
working with a popular website that aggregates news
stories. The website allows users to make comments
about news stories and vote each other’s comments
up or down. The vote tallies are visible as a number
next to each comment, and the position of the
comments is chronological. (Stories on the site get an
average of about ten comments and about three votes
per comment.) It’s a follow-up to his experiment
using people’s ratings of movies to measure how
much individual people influence each other online
(answer: a lot). This time, he wanted to know how
much the crowd influences the individual, and
whether it can be controlled from outside.
For five months, every comment submitted by a
user randomly received an “up” vote (positive); a
“down” vote (negative); or as a control, no vote at all.
The team then observed how users rated those
comments. The users generated more than
100,000 comments that were viewed more than
10 million times and rated more than 300,000 times
by other users.
At least when it comes to comments on news
sites, the crowd is more herdlike than wise.
Comments that received fake positive votes from the
researchers were 32% more likely to receive more
positive votes compared with a control, the team
reports. And those comments were no more likely
than the control to be down-voted by the next viewer
to see them. By the end of the study, positively
manipulated comments got an overall boost of about
25%. However, the same did not hold true for
negative manipulation. The ratings of comments that
got a fake down vote were usually negated by an up
vote by the next user to see them.
“Our experiment does not reveal the psychology
behind people’s decisions,” Aral says, “but an
intuitive explanation is that people are more
skeptical of negative social influence. They’re more
willing to go along with positive opinions from other
people.”
Duncan Watts, a network scientist at Microsoft
Research in New York City, agrees with that
conclusion. “[But] one question is whether the
positive [herding] bias is specific to this site” or true
in general, Watts says. He points out that the
category of the news items in the experiment had a
strong effect on how much people could be
manipulated. “I would have thought that ‘business’ is
pretty similar to ‘economics,’ yet they find a much
stronger effect (almost 50% stronger) for the former
than the latter. What explains this difference? If we’re
going to apply these findings in the real world, we’ll
need to know the answers.”
Will companies be able to boost their products by
manipulating online ratings on a massive scale?
“That is easier said than done,” Watts says. If people
detect—or learn—that comments on a website are
being manipulated, the herd may spook and leave
entirely.
Question 33:
The author of the passage suggests that crowds may be more effective at
A) creating controversy than examining an issue in depth.
B) reinforcing members’ ideas than challenging those ideas.
C) arriving at accurate quantitative answers than producing valid qualitative judgments.
D) ranking others’ opinions than developing genuinely original positions.
Answer: | C | false | sat-practice_5-question_33 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from John Bohannon, “Why You
Shouldn’t Trust Internet Comments.” ©2013 by American
Association for the Advancement of Science.
The “wisdom of crowds” has become a mantra of
the Internet age. Need to choose a new vacuum
cleaner? Check out the reviews on online merchant
Amazon. But a new study suggests that such online
scores don’t always reveal the best choice. A massive
controlled experiment of Web users finds that such
ratings are highly susceptible to irrational “herd
behavior”—and that the herd can be manipulated.
Sometimes the crowd really is wiser than you. The
classic examples are guessing the weight of a bull or
the number of gumballs in a jar. Your guess is
probably going to be far from the mark, whereas the
average of many people’s choices is remarkably close
to the true number.
But what happens when the goal is to judge
something less tangible, such as the quality or worth
of a product? According to one theory, the wisdom
of the crowd still holds—measuring the aggregate of
people’s opinions produces a stable, reliable
value. Skeptics, however, argue that people’s
opinions are easily swayed by those of others. So
nudging a crowd early on by presenting contrary
opinions—for example, exposing them to some very
good or very bad attitudes—will steer the crowd in a
different direction. To test which hypothesis is true,
you would need to manipulate huge numbers of
people, exposing them to false information and
determining how it affects their opinions.
A team led by Sinan Aral, a network scientist at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in
Cambridge, did exactly that. Aral has been secretly
working with a popular website that aggregates news
stories. The website allows users to make comments
about news stories and vote each other’s comments
up or down. The vote tallies are visible as a number
next to each comment, and the position of the
comments is chronological. (Stories on the site get an
average of about ten comments and about three votes
per comment.) It’s a follow-up to his experiment
using people’s ratings of movies to measure how
much individual people influence each other online
(answer: a lot). This time, he wanted to know how
much the crowd influences the individual, and
whether it can be controlled from outside.
For five months, every comment submitted by a
user randomly received an “up” vote (positive); a
“down” vote (negative); or as a control, no vote at all.
The team then observed how users rated those
comments. The users generated more than
100,000 comments that were viewed more than
10 million times and rated more than 300,000 times
by other users.
At least when it comes to comments on news
sites, the crowd is more herdlike than wise.
Comments that received fake positive votes from the
researchers were 32% more likely to receive more
positive votes compared with a control, the team
reports. And those comments were no more likely
than the control to be down-voted by the next viewer
to see them. By the end of the study, positively
manipulated comments got an overall boost of about
25%. However, the same did not hold true for
negative manipulation. The ratings of comments that
got a fake down vote were usually negated by an up
vote by the next user to see them.
“Our experiment does not reveal the psychology
behind people’s decisions,” Aral says, “but an
intuitive explanation is that people are more
skeptical of negative social influence. They’re more
willing to go along with positive opinions from other
people.”
Duncan Watts, a network scientist at Microsoft
Research in New York City, agrees with that
conclusion. “[But] one question is whether the
positive [herding] bias is specific to this site” or true
in general, Watts says. He points out that the
category of the news items in the experiment had a
strong effect on how much people could be
manipulated. “I would have thought that ‘business’ is
pretty similar to ‘economics,’ yet they find a much
stronger effect (almost 50% stronger) for the former
than the latter. What explains this difference? If we’re
going to apply these findings in the real world, we’ll
need to know the answers.”
Will companies be able to boost their products by
manipulating online ratings on a massive scale?
“That is easier said than done,” Watts says. If people
detect—or learn—that comments on a website are
being manipulated, the herd may spook and leave
entirely.
Question 37:
As used in line 85, “boost” most nearly means
A) increase.
B) accelerate.
C) promote.
D) protect.
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_5-question_37 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from John Bohannon, “Why You
Shouldn’t Trust Internet Comments.” ©2013 by American
Association for the Advancement of Science.
The “wisdom of crowds” has become a mantra of
the Internet age. Need to choose a new vacuum
cleaner? Check out the reviews on online merchant
Amazon. But a new study suggests that such online
scores don’t always reveal the best choice. A massive
controlled experiment of Web users finds that such
ratings are highly susceptible to irrational “herd
behavior”—and that the herd can be manipulated.
Sometimes the crowd really is wiser than you. The
classic examples are guessing the weight of a bull or
the number of gumballs in a jar. Your guess is
probably going to be far from the mark, whereas the
average of many people’s choices is remarkably close
to the true number.
But what happens when the goal is to judge
something less tangible, such as the quality or worth
of a product? According to one theory, the wisdom
of the crowd still holds—measuring the aggregate of
people’s opinions produces a stable, reliable
value. Skeptics, however, argue that people’s
opinions are easily swayed by those of others. So
nudging a crowd early on by presenting contrary
opinions—for example, exposing them to some very
good or very bad attitudes—will steer the crowd in a
different direction. To test which hypothesis is true,
you would need to manipulate huge numbers of
people, exposing them to false information and
determining how it affects their opinions.
A team led by Sinan Aral, a network scientist at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in
Cambridge, did exactly that. Aral has been secretly
working with a popular website that aggregates news
stories. The website allows users to make comments
about news stories and vote each other’s comments
up or down. The vote tallies are visible as a number
next to each comment, and the position of the
comments is chronological. (Stories on the site get an
average of about ten comments and about three votes
per comment.) It’s a follow-up to his experiment
using people’s ratings of movies to measure how
much individual people influence each other online
(answer: a lot). This time, he wanted to know how
much the crowd influences the individual, and
whether it can be controlled from outside.
For five months, every comment submitted by a
user randomly received an “up” vote (positive); a
“down” vote (negative); or as a control, no vote at all.
The team then observed how users rated those
comments. The users generated more than
100,000 comments that were viewed more than
10 million times and rated more than 300,000 times
by other users.
At least when it comes to comments on news
sites, the crowd is more herdlike than wise.
Comments that received fake positive votes from the
researchers were 32% more likely to receive more
positive votes compared with a control, the team
reports. And those comments were no more likely
than the control to be down-voted by the next viewer
to see them. By the end of the study, positively
manipulated comments got an overall boost of about
25%. However, the same did not hold true for
negative manipulation. The ratings of comments that
got a fake down vote were usually negated by an up
vote by the next user to see them.
“Our experiment does not reveal the psychology
behind people’s decisions,” Aral says, “but an
intuitive explanation is that people are more
skeptical of negative social influence. They’re more
willing to go along with positive opinions from other
people.”
Duncan Watts, a network scientist at Microsoft
Research in New York City, agrees with that
conclusion. “[But] one question is whether the
positive [herding] bias is specific to this site” or true
in general, Watts says. He points out that the
category of the news items in the experiment had a
strong effect on how much people could be
manipulated. “I would have thought that ‘business’ is
pretty similar to ‘economics,’ yet they find a much
stronger effect (almost 50% stronger) for the former
than the latter. What explains this difference? If we’re
going to apply these findings in the real world, we’ll
need to know the answers.”
Will companies be able to boost their products by
manipulating online ratings on a massive scale?
“That is easier said than done,” Watts says. If people
detect—or learn—that comments on a website are
being manipulated, the herd may spook and leave
entirely.
Question 38:
As used in line 86, “scale” most nearly means
A) level.
B) wage.
C) interval.
D) scheme.
Answer: | A | true | sat-practice_5-question_38 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from John Bohannon, “Why You
Shouldn’t Trust Internet Comments.” ©2013 by American
Association for the Advancement of Science.
The “wisdom of crowds” has become a mantra of
the Internet age. Need to choose a new vacuum
cleaner? Check out the reviews on online merchant
Amazon. But a new study suggests that such online
scores don’t always reveal the best choice. A massive
controlled experiment of Web users finds that such
ratings are highly susceptible to irrational “herd
behavior”—and that the herd can be manipulated.
Sometimes the crowd really is wiser than you. The
classic examples are guessing the weight of a bull or
the number of gumballs in a jar. Your guess is
probably going to be far from the mark, whereas the
average of many people’s choices is remarkably close
to the true number.
But what happens when the goal is to judge
something less tangible, such as the quality or worth
of a product? According to one theory, the wisdom
of the crowd still holds—measuring the aggregate of
people’s opinions produces a stable, reliable
value. Skeptics, however, argue that people’s
opinions are easily swayed by those of others. So
nudging a crowd early on by presenting contrary
opinions—for example, exposing them to some very
good or very bad attitudes—will steer the crowd in a
different direction. To test which hypothesis is true,
you would need to manipulate huge numbers of
people, exposing them to false information and
determining how it affects their opinions.
A team led by Sinan Aral, a network scientist at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in
Cambridge, did exactly that. Aral has been secretly
working with a popular website that aggregates news
stories. The website allows users to make comments
about news stories and vote each other’s comments
up or down. The vote tallies are visible as a number
next to each comment, and the position of the
comments is chronological. (Stories on the site get an
average of about ten comments and about three votes
per comment.) It’s a follow-up to his experiment
using people’s ratings of movies to measure how
much individual people influence each other online
(answer: a lot). This time, he wanted to know how
much the crowd influences the individual, and
whether it can be controlled from outside.
For five months, every comment submitted by a
user randomly received an “up” vote (positive); a
“down” vote (negative); or as a control, no vote at all.
The team then observed how users rated those
comments. The users generated more than
100,000 comments that were viewed more than
10 million times and rated more than 300,000 times
by other users.
At least when it comes to comments on news
sites, the crowd is more herdlike than wise.
Comments that received fake positive votes from the
researchers were 32% more likely to receive more
positive votes compared with a control, the team
reports. And those comments were no more likely
than the control to be down-voted by the next viewer
to see them. By the end of the study, positively
manipulated comments got an overall boost of about
25%. However, the same did not hold true for
negative manipulation. The ratings of comments that
got a fake down vote were usually negated by an up
vote by the next user to see them.
“Our experiment does not reveal the psychology
behind people’s decisions,” Aral says, “but an
intuitive explanation is that people are more
skeptical of negative social influence. They’re more
willing to go along with positive opinions from other
people.”
Duncan Watts, a network scientist at Microsoft
Research in New York City, agrees with that
conclusion. “[But] one question is whether the
positive [herding] bias is specific to this site” or true
in general, Watts says. He points out that the
category of the news items in the experiment had a
strong effect on how much people could be
manipulated. “I would have thought that ‘business’ is
pretty similar to ‘economics,’ yet they find a much
stronger effect (almost 50% stronger) for the former
than the latter. What explains this difference? If we’re
going to apply these findings in the real world, we’ll
need to know the answers.”
Will companies be able to boost their products by
manipulating online ratings on a massive scale?
“That is easier said than done,” Watts says. If people
detect—or learn—that comments on a website are
being manipulated, the herd may spook and leave
entirely.
Question 32:
Over the course of the passage, the main focus shifts from a discussion of an experiment and its results to
A) an explanation of the practical applications of the results.
B) a consideration of the questions prompted by the results.
C) an analysis of the defects undermining the results.
D) a conversation with a scientist who disputes theresults.
Answer: | B | false | sat-practice_5-question_32 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Joshua Foer, Moonwalking
with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything.
©2011 by Joshua Foer.
In 2000, a neuroscientist at University College
London named Eleanor Maguire wanted to find out
what effect, if any, all that driving around the
labyrinthine streets of London might have on
cabbies’ brains. When she brought sixteen taxi
drivers into her lab and examined their brains in an
MRI scanner, she found one surprising and
important difference. The right posterior
hippocampus, a part of the brain known to be
involved in spatial navigation, was 7 percent larger
than normal in the cabbies—a small but very
significant difference. Maguire concluded that all of
that way-finding around London had physically
altered the gross structure of their brains. The more
years a cabbie had been on the road, the more
pronounced the effect.
The brain is a mutable organ, capable—within
limits—of reorganizing itself and readapting to new
kinds of sensory input, a phenomenon known as
neuroplasticity. It had long been thought that the
adult brain was incapable of spawning new
neurons—that while learning caused synapses to
rearrange themselves and new links between brain
cells to form, the brain’s basic anatomical structure
was more or less static. Maguire’s study suggested the
old inherited wisdom was simply not true.
After her groundbreaking study of London
cabbies, Maguire decided to turn her attention to
mental athletes. She teamed up with Elizabeth
Valentine and John Wilding, authors of the academic
monograph Superior Memory, to study ten
individuals who had finished near the top of the
World Memory Championship. They wanted to find
out if the memorizers’ brains were—like the London
cabbies’—structurally different from the rest of ours,
or if they were somehow just making better use of
memory abilities that we all possess.
The researchers put both the mental athletes and a
group of matched control subjects into MRI scanners
and asked them to memorize three-digit numbers,
black-and-white photographs of people’s faces, and
magnified images of snowflakes, while their brains
were being scanned. Maguire and her team thought it
was possible that they might discover anatomical
differences in the brains of the memory champs,
evidence that their brains had somehow reorganized
themselves in the process of doing all that intensive
remembering. But when the researchers reviewed the
imaging data, not a single significant structural
difference turned up. The brains of the mental
athletes appeared to be indistinguishable from those
of the control subjects. What’s more, on every single
test of general cognitive ability, the mental athletes’
scores came back well within the normal range. The
memory champs weren’t smarter, and they didn’t
have special brains.
But there was one telling difference between the
brains of the mental athletes and the control subjects:
When the researchers looked at which parts of the
brain were lighting up when the mental athletes were
memorizing, they found that they were activating
entirely different circuitry. According to the
functional MRIs [fMRIs], regions of the brain that
were less active in the control subjects seemed to be
working in overdrive for the mental athletes.
Surprisingly, when the mental athletes were
learning new information, they were engaging
several regions of the brain known to be involved in
two specific tasks: visual memory and spatial
navigation, including the same right posterior
hippocampal region that the London cabbies had
enlarged with all their daily way-finding. At first
glance, this wouldn’t seem to make any sense.
Why would mental athletes be conjuring images in
their mind’s eye when they were trying to learn
three-digit numbers? Why should they be navigating
like London cabbies when they’re supposed to be
remembering the shapes of snowflakes?
Maguire and her team asked the mental athletes
to describe exactly what was going through their
minds as they memorized. The mental athletes said
they were consciously converting the information
they were being asked to memorize into images, and
distributing those images along familiar spatial
journeys. They weren’t doing this automatically, or
because it was an inborn talent they’d nurtured since
childhood. Rather, the unexpected patterns of neural
activity that Maguire’s fMRIs turned up were the
result of training and practice.
Question 45:
Which question was Maguire’s study of mental athletes primarily intended to answer?
A) Does the act of memorization make use of different brain structures than does the act of navigation?
B) Do mental athletes inherit their unusual brain structures, or do the structures develop as a result of specific activities?
C) Does heightened memorization ability reflect abnormal brain structure or an unusual use of normal brain structure?
D) What is the relationship between general cognitive ability and the unusual brain structures of mental athletes?
Answer: | C | false | sat-practice_5-question_45 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Joshua Foer, Moonwalking
with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything.
©2011 by Joshua Foer.
In 2000, a neuroscientist at University College
London named Eleanor Maguire wanted to find out
what effect, if any, all that driving around the
labyrinthine streets of London might have on
cabbies’ brains. When she brought sixteen taxi
drivers into her lab and examined their brains in an
MRI scanner, she found one surprising and
important difference. The right posterior
hippocampus, a part of the brain known to be
involved in spatial navigation, was 7 percent larger
than normal in the cabbies—a small but very
significant difference. Maguire concluded that all of
that way-finding around London had physically
altered the gross structure of their brains. The more
years a cabbie had been on the road, the more
pronounced the effect.
The brain is a mutable organ, capable—within
limits—of reorganizing itself and readapting to new
kinds of sensory input, a phenomenon known as
neuroplasticity. It had long been thought that the
adult brain was incapable of spawning new
neurons—that while learning caused synapses to
rearrange themselves and new links between brain
cells to form, the brain’s basic anatomical structure
was more or less static. Maguire’s study suggested the
old inherited wisdom was simply not true.
After her groundbreaking study of London
cabbies, Maguire decided to turn her attention to
mental athletes. She teamed up with Elizabeth
Valentine and John Wilding, authors of the academic
monograph Superior Memory, to study ten
individuals who had finished near the top of the
World Memory Championship. They wanted to find
out if the memorizers’ brains were—like the London
cabbies’—structurally different from the rest of ours,
or if they were somehow just making better use of
memory abilities that we all possess.
The researchers put both the mental athletes and a
group of matched control subjects into MRI scanners
and asked them to memorize three-digit numbers,
black-and-white photographs of people’s faces, and
magnified images of snowflakes, while their brains
were being scanned. Maguire and her team thought it
was possible that they might discover anatomical
differences in the brains of the memory champs,
evidence that their brains had somehow reorganized
themselves in the process of doing all that intensive
remembering. But when the researchers reviewed the
imaging data, not a single significant structural
difference turned up. The brains of the mental
athletes appeared to be indistinguishable from those
of the control subjects. What’s more, on every single
test of general cognitive ability, the mental athletes’
scores came back well within the normal range. The
memory champs weren’t smarter, and they didn’t
have special brains.
But there was one telling difference between the
brains of the mental athletes and the control subjects:
When the researchers looked at which parts of the
brain were lighting up when the mental athletes were
memorizing, they found that they were activating
entirely different circuitry. According to the
functional MRIs [fMRIs], regions of the brain that
were less active in the control subjects seemed to be
working in overdrive for the mental athletes.
Surprisingly, when the mental athletes were
learning new information, they were engaging
several regions of the brain known to be involved in
two specific tasks: visual memory and spatial
navigation, including the same right posterior
hippocampal region that the London cabbies had
enlarged with all their daily way-finding. At first
glance, this wouldn’t seem to make any sense.
Why would mental athletes be conjuring images in
their mind’s eye when they were trying to learn
three-digit numbers? Why should they be navigating
like London cabbies when they’re supposed to be
remembering the shapes of snowflakes?
Maguire and her team asked the mental athletes
to describe exactly what was going through their
minds as they memorized. The mental athletes said
they were consciously converting the information
they were being asked to memorize into images, and
distributing those images along familiar spatial
journeys. They weren’t doing this automatically, or
because it was an inborn talent they’d nurtured since
childhood. Rather, the unexpected patterns of neural
activity that Maguire’s fMRIs turned up were the
result of training and practice.
Question 49:
According to the passage, when compared to mental athletes, the individuals in the control group in Maguire’s second study
A) showed less brain activity overall.
B) demonstrated a wider range of cognitive ability.
C) exhibited different patterns of brain activity.
D) displayed noticeably smaller hippocampal regions.
Answer: | C | false | sat-practice_5-question_49 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Joshua Foer, Moonwalking
with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything.
©2011 by Joshua Foer.
In 2000, a neuroscientist at University College
London named Eleanor Maguire wanted to find out
what effect, if any, all that driving around the
labyrinthine streets of London might have on
cabbies’ brains. When she brought sixteen taxi
drivers into her lab and examined their brains in an
MRI scanner, she found one surprising and
important difference. The right posterior
hippocampus, a part of the brain known to be
involved in spatial navigation, was 7 percent larger
than normal in the cabbies—a small but very
significant difference. Maguire concluded that all of
that way-finding around London had physically
altered the gross structure of their brains. The more
years a cabbie had been on the road, the more
pronounced the effect.
The brain is a mutable organ, capable—within
limits—of reorganizing itself and readapting to new
kinds of sensory input, a phenomenon known as
neuroplasticity. It had long been thought that the
adult brain was incapable of spawning new
neurons—that while learning caused synapses to
rearrange themselves and new links between brain
cells to form, the brain’s basic anatomical structure
was more or less static. Maguire’s study suggested the
old inherited wisdom was simply not true.
After her groundbreaking study of London
cabbies, Maguire decided to turn her attention to
mental athletes. She teamed up with Elizabeth
Valentine and John Wilding, authors of the academic
monograph Superior Memory, to study ten
individuals who had finished near the top of the
World Memory Championship. They wanted to find
out if the memorizers’ brains were—like the London
cabbies’—structurally different from the rest of ours,
or if they were somehow just making better use of
memory abilities that we all possess.
The researchers put both the mental athletes and a
group of matched control subjects into MRI scanners
and asked them to memorize three-digit numbers,
black-and-white photographs of people’s faces, and
magnified images of snowflakes, while their brains
were being scanned. Maguire and her team thought it
was possible that they might discover anatomical
differences in the brains of the memory champs,
evidence that their brains had somehow reorganized
themselves in the process of doing all that intensive
remembering. But when the researchers reviewed the
imaging data, not a single significant structural
difference turned up. The brains of the mental
athletes appeared to be indistinguishable from those
of the control subjects. What’s more, on every single
test of general cognitive ability, the mental athletes’
scores came back well within the normal range. The
memory champs weren’t smarter, and they didn’t
have special brains.
But there was one telling difference between the
brains of the mental athletes and the control subjects:
When the researchers looked at which parts of the
brain were lighting up when the mental athletes were
memorizing, they found that they were activating
entirely different circuitry. According to the
functional MRIs [fMRIs], regions of the brain that
were less active in the control subjects seemed to be
working in overdrive for the mental athletes.
Surprisingly, when the mental athletes were
learning new information, they were engaging
several regions of the brain known to be involved in
two specific tasks: visual memory and spatial
navigation, including the same right posterior
hippocampal region that the London cabbies had
enlarged with all their daily way-finding. At first
glance, this wouldn’t seem to make any sense.
Why would mental athletes be conjuring images in
their mind’s eye when they were trying to learn
three-digit numbers? Why should they be navigating
like London cabbies when they’re supposed to be
remembering the shapes of snowflakes?
Maguire and her team asked the mental athletes
to describe exactly what was going through their
minds as they memorized. The mental athletes said
they were consciously converting the information
they were being asked to memorize into images, and
distributing those images along familiar spatial
journeys. They weren’t doing this automatically, or
because it was an inborn talent they’d nurtured since
childhood. Rather, the unexpected patterns of neural
activity that Maguire’s fMRIs turned up were the
result of training and practice.
Question 47:
As used in line 39, “matched” most nearly means
A) comparable.
B) identical.
C) distinguishable.
D) competing.
Answer: | A | true | sat-practice_5-question_47 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Joshua Foer, Moonwalking
with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything.
©2011 by Joshua Foer.
In 2000, a neuroscientist at University College
London named Eleanor Maguire wanted to find out
what effect, if any, all that driving around the
labyrinthine streets of London might have on
cabbies’ brains. When she brought sixteen taxi
drivers into her lab and examined their brains in an
MRI scanner, she found one surprising and
important difference. The right posterior
hippocampus, a part of the brain known to be
involved in spatial navigation, was 7 percent larger
than normal in the cabbies—a small but very
significant difference. Maguire concluded that all of
that way-finding around London had physically
altered the gross structure of their brains. The more
years a cabbie had been on the road, the more
pronounced the effect.
The brain is a mutable organ, capable—within
limits—of reorganizing itself and readapting to new
kinds of sensory input, a phenomenon known as
neuroplasticity. It had long been thought that the
adult brain was incapable of spawning new
neurons—that while learning caused synapses to
rearrange themselves and new links between brain
cells to form, the brain’s basic anatomical structure
was more or less static. Maguire’s study suggested the
old inherited wisdom was simply not true.
After her groundbreaking study of London
cabbies, Maguire decided to turn her attention to
mental athletes. She teamed up with Elizabeth
Valentine and John Wilding, authors of the academic
monograph Superior Memory, to study ten
individuals who had finished near the top of the
World Memory Championship. They wanted to find
out if the memorizers’ brains were—like the London
cabbies’—structurally different from the rest of ours,
or if they were somehow just making better use of
memory abilities that we all possess.
The researchers put both the mental athletes and a
group of matched control subjects into MRI scanners
and asked them to memorize three-digit numbers,
black-and-white photographs of people’s faces, and
magnified images of snowflakes, while their brains
were being scanned. Maguire and her team thought it
was possible that they might discover anatomical
differences in the brains of the memory champs,
evidence that their brains had somehow reorganized
themselves in the process of doing all that intensive
remembering. But when the researchers reviewed the
imaging data, not a single significant structural
difference turned up. The brains of the mental
athletes appeared to be indistinguishable from those
of the control subjects. What’s more, on every single
test of general cognitive ability, the mental athletes’
scores came back well within the normal range. The
memory champs weren’t smarter, and they didn’t
have special brains.
But there was one telling difference between the
brains of the mental athletes and the control subjects:
When the researchers looked at which parts of the
brain were lighting up when the mental athletes were
memorizing, they found that they were activating
entirely different circuitry. According to the
functional MRIs [fMRIs], regions of the brain that
were less active in the control subjects seemed to be
working in overdrive for the mental athletes.
Surprisingly, when the mental athletes were
learning new information, they were engaging
several regions of the brain known to be involved in
two specific tasks: visual memory and spatial
navigation, including the same right posterior
hippocampal region that the London cabbies had
enlarged with all their daily way-finding. At first
glance, this wouldn’t seem to make any sense.
Why would mental athletes be conjuring images in
their mind’s eye when they were trying to learn
three-digit numbers? Why should they be navigating
like London cabbies when they’re supposed to be
remembering the shapes of snowflakes?
Maguire and her team asked the mental athletes
to describe exactly what was going through their
minds as they memorized. The mental athletes said
they were consciously converting the information
they were being asked to memorize into images, and
distributing those images along familiar spatial
journeys. They weren’t doing this automatically, or
because it was an inborn talent they’d nurtured since
childhood. Rather, the unexpected patterns of neural
activity that Maguire’s fMRIs turned up were the
result of training and practice.
Question 42:
According to the passage, Maguire’s findings regarding taxi drivers are significant because they
A) demonstrate the validity of a new method.
B) provide evidence for a popular viewpoint.
C) call into question an earlier consensus.
D) challenge the authenticity of previous data.
Answer: | C | false | sat-practice_5-question_42 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Joshua Foer, Moonwalking
with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything.
©2011 by Joshua Foer.
In 2000, a neuroscientist at University College
London named Eleanor Maguire wanted to find out
what effect, if any, all that driving around the
labyrinthine streets of London might have on
cabbies’ brains. When she brought sixteen taxi
drivers into her lab and examined their brains in an
MRI scanner, she found one surprising and
important difference. The right posterior
hippocampus, a part of the brain known to be
involved in spatial navigation, was 7 percent larger
than normal in the cabbies—a small but very
significant difference. Maguire concluded that all of
that way-finding around London had physically
altered the gross structure of their brains. The more
years a cabbie had been on the road, the more
pronounced the effect.
The brain is a mutable organ, capable—within
limits—of reorganizing itself and readapting to new
kinds of sensory input, a phenomenon known as
neuroplasticity. It had long been thought that the
adult brain was incapable of spawning new
neurons—that while learning caused synapses to
rearrange themselves and new links between brain
cells to form, the brain’s basic anatomical structure
was more or less static. Maguire’s study suggested the
old inherited wisdom was simply not true.
After her groundbreaking study of London
cabbies, Maguire decided to turn her attention to
mental athletes. She teamed up with Elizabeth
Valentine and John Wilding, authors of the academic
monograph Superior Memory, to study ten
individuals who had finished near the top of the
World Memory Championship. They wanted to find
out if the memorizers’ brains were—like the London
cabbies’—structurally different from the rest of ours,
or if they were somehow just making better use of
memory abilities that we all possess.
The researchers put both the mental athletes and a
group of matched control subjects into MRI scanners
and asked them to memorize three-digit numbers,
black-and-white photographs of people’s faces, and
magnified images of snowflakes, while their brains
were being scanned. Maguire and her team thought it
was possible that they might discover anatomical
differences in the brains of the memory champs,
evidence that their brains had somehow reorganized
themselves in the process of doing all that intensive
remembering. But when the researchers reviewed the
imaging data, not a single significant structural
difference turned up. The brains of the mental
athletes appeared to be indistinguishable from those
of the control subjects. What’s more, on every single
test of general cognitive ability, the mental athletes’
scores came back well within the normal range. The
memory champs weren’t smarter, and they didn’t
have special brains.
But there was one telling difference between the
brains of the mental athletes and the control subjects:
When the researchers looked at which parts of the
brain were lighting up when the mental athletes were
memorizing, they found that they were activating
entirely different circuitry. According to the
functional MRIs [fMRIs], regions of the brain that
were less active in the control subjects seemed to be
working in overdrive for the mental athletes.
Surprisingly, when the mental athletes were
learning new information, they were engaging
several regions of the brain known to be involved in
two specific tasks: visual memory and spatial
navigation, including the same right posterior
hippocampal region that the London cabbies had
enlarged with all their daily way-finding. At first
glance, this wouldn’t seem to make any sense.
Why would mental athletes be conjuring images in
their mind’s eye when they were trying to learn
three-digit numbers? Why should they be navigating
like London cabbies when they’re supposed to be
remembering the shapes of snowflakes?
Maguire and her team asked the mental athletes
to describe exactly what was going through their
minds as they memorized. The mental athletes said
they were consciously converting the information
they were being asked to memorize into images, and
distributing those images along familiar spatial
journeys. They weren’t doing this automatically, or
because it was an inborn talent they’d nurtured since
childhood. Rather, the unexpected patterns of neural
activity that Maguire’s fMRIs turned up were the
result of training and practice.
Question 44:
As used in line 24, “basic” most nearly means
A) initial.
B) simple.
C) necessary.
D) fundamental.
Answer: | D | true | sat-practice_5-question_44 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Joshua Foer, Moonwalking
with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything.
©2011 by Joshua Foer.
In 2000, a neuroscientist at University College
London named Eleanor Maguire wanted to find out
what effect, if any, all that driving around the
labyrinthine streets of London might have on
cabbies’ brains. When she brought sixteen taxi
drivers into her lab and examined their brains in an
MRI scanner, she found one surprising and
important difference. The right posterior
hippocampus, a part of the brain known to be
involved in spatial navigation, was 7 percent larger
than normal in the cabbies—a small but very
significant difference. Maguire concluded that all of
that way-finding around London had physically
altered the gross structure of their brains. The more
years a cabbie had been on the road, the more
pronounced the effect.
The brain is a mutable organ, capable—within
limits—of reorganizing itself and readapting to new
kinds of sensory input, a phenomenon known as
neuroplasticity. It had long been thought that the
adult brain was incapable of spawning new
neurons—that while learning caused synapses to
rearrange themselves and new links between brain
cells to form, the brain’s basic anatomical structure
was more or less static. Maguire’s study suggested the
old inherited wisdom was simply not true.
After her groundbreaking study of London
cabbies, Maguire decided to turn her attention to
mental athletes. She teamed up with Elizabeth
Valentine and John Wilding, authors of the academic
monograph Superior Memory, to study ten
individuals who had finished near the top of the
World Memory Championship. They wanted to find
out if the memorizers’ brains were—like the London
cabbies’—structurally different from the rest of ours,
or if they were somehow just making better use of
memory abilities that we all possess.
The researchers put both the mental athletes and a
group of matched control subjects into MRI scanners
and asked them to memorize three-digit numbers,
black-and-white photographs of people’s faces, and
magnified images of snowflakes, while their brains
were being scanned. Maguire and her team thought it
was possible that they might discover anatomical
differences in the brains of the memory champs,
evidence that their brains had somehow reorganized
themselves in the process of doing all that intensive
remembering. But when the researchers reviewed the
imaging data, not a single significant structural
difference turned up. The brains of the mental
athletes appeared to be indistinguishable from those
of the control subjects. What’s more, on every single
test of general cognitive ability, the mental athletes’
scores came back well within the normal range. The
memory champs weren’t smarter, and they didn’t
have special brains.
But there was one telling difference between the
brains of the mental athletes and the control subjects:
When the researchers looked at which parts of the
brain were lighting up when the mental athletes were
memorizing, they found that they were activating
entirely different circuitry. According to the
functional MRIs [fMRIs], regions of the brain that
were less active in the control subjects seemed to be
working in overdrive for the mental athletes.
Surprisingly, when the mental athletes were
learning new information, they were engaging
several regions of the brain known to be involved in
two specific tasks: visual memory and spatial
navigation, including the same right posterior
hippocampal region that the London cabbies had
enlarged with all their daily way-finding. At first
glance, this wouldn’t seem to make any sense.
Why would mental athletes be conjuring images in
their mind’s eye when they were trying to learn
three-digit numbers? Why should they be navigating
like London cabbies when they’re supposed to be
remembering the shapes of snowflakes?
Maguire and her team asked the mental athletes
to describe exactly what was going through their
minds as they memorized. The mental athletes said
they were consciously converting the information
they were being asked to memorize into images, and
distributing those images along familiar spatial
journeys. They weren’t doing this automatically, or
because it was an inborn talent they’d nurtured since
childhood. Rather, the unexpected patterns of neural
activity that Maguire’s fMRIs turned up were the
result of training and practice.
Question 52:
The questions in lines 74-78 primarily serve to
A) raise doubts about the reliability of the conclusions reached by Maguire.
B) emphasize and elaborate on an initially puzzling result of Maguire’s study of mental athletes.
C) imply that Maguire’s findings undermine earlier studies of the same phenomenon.
D) introduce and explain a connection between Maguire’s two studies and her earlier work.
Answer: | B | true | sat-practice_5-question_52 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Joshua Foer, Moonwalking
with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything.
©2011 by Joshua Foer.
In 2000, a neuroscientist at University College
London named Eleanor Maguire wanted to find out
what effect, if any, all that driving around the
labyrinthine streets of London might have on
cabbies’ brains. When she brought sixteen taxi
drivers into her lab and examined their brains in an
MRI scanner, she found one surprising and
important difference. The right posterior
hippocampus, a part of the brain known to be
involved in spatial navigation, was 7 percent larger
than normal in the cabbies—a small but very
significant difference. Maguire concluded that all of
that way-finding around London had physically
altered the gross structure of their brains. The more
years a cabbie had been on the road, the more
pronounced the effect.
The brain is a mutable organ, capable—within
limits—of reorganizing itself and readapting to new
kinds of sensory input, a phenomenon known as
neuroplasticity. It had long been thought that the
adult brain was incapable of spawning new
neurons—that while learning caused synapses to
rearrange themselves and new links between brain
cells to form, the brain’s basic anatomical structure
was more or less static. Maguire’s study suggested the
old inherited wisdom was simply not true.
After her groundbreaking study of London
cabbies, Maguire decided to turn her attention to
mental athletes. She teamed up with Elizabeth
Valentine and John Wilding, authors of the academic
monograph Superior Memory, to study ten
individuals who had finished near the top of the
World Memory Championship. They wanted to find
out if the memorizers’ brains were—like the London
cabbies’—structurally different from the rest of ours,
or if they were somehow just making better use of
memory abilities that we all possess.
The researchers put both the mental athletes and a
group of matched control subjects into MRI scanners
and asked them to memorize three-digit numbers,
black-and-white photographs of people’s faces, and
magnified images of snowflakes, while their brains
were being scanned. Maguire and her team thought it
was possible that they might discover anatomical
differences in the brains of the memory champs,
evidence that their brains had somehow reorganized
themselves in the process of doing all that intensive
remembering. But when the researchers reviewed the
imaging data, not a single significant structural
difference turned up. The brains of the mental
athletes appeared to be indistinguishable from those
of the control subjects. What’s more, on every single
test of general cognitive ability, the mental athletes’
scores came back well within the normal range. The
memory champs weren’t smarter, and they didn’t
have special brains.
But there was one telling difference between the
brains of the mental athletes and the control subjects:
When the researchers looked at which parts of the
brain were lighting up when the mental athletes were
memorizing, they found that they were activating
entirely different circuitry. According to the
functional MRIs [fMRIs], regions of the brain that
were less active in the control subjects seemed to be
working in overdrive for the mental athletes.
Surprisingly, when the mental athletes were
learning new information, they were engaging
several regions of the brain known to be involved in
two specific tasks: visual memory and spatial
navigation, including the same right posterior
hippocampal region that the London cabbies had
enlarged with all their daily way-finding. At first
glance, this wouldn’t seem to make any sense.
Why would mental athletes be conjuring images in
their mind’s eye when they were trying to learn
three-digit numbers? Why should they be navigating
like London cabbies when they’re supposed to be
remembering the shapes of snowflakes?
Maguire and her team asked the mental athletes
to describe exactly what was going through their
minds as they memorized. The mental athletes said
they were consciously converting the information
they were being asked to memorize into images, and
distributing those images along familiar spatial
journeys. They weren’t doing this automatically, or
because it was an inborn talent they’d nurtured since
childhood. Rather, the unexpected patterns of neural
activity that Maguire’s fMRIs turned up were the
result of training and practice.
Question 48:
The main purpose of the fifth paragraph (lines 57-65) is to
A) relate Maguire’s study of mental athletes to her study of taxi drivers.
B) speculate on the reason for Maguire’s unexpected results.
C) identify an important finding of Maguire’s study of mental athletes.
D) transition from a summary of Maguire’s findings to a description of her methods.
Answer: | C | true | sat-practice_5-question_48 |
SAT READING COMPREHENSION TEST
This passage is adapted from Joshua Foer, Moonwalking
with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything.
©2011 by Joshua Foer.
In 2000, a neuroscientist at University College
London named Eleanor Maguire wanted to find out
what effect, if any, all that driving around the
labyrinthine streets of London might have on
cabbies’ brains. When she brought sixteen taxi
drivers into her lab and examined their brains in an
MRI scanner, she found one surprising and
important difference. The right posterior
hippocampus, a part of the brain known to be
involved in spatial navigation, was 7 percent larger
than normal in the cabbies—a small but very
significant difference. Maguire concluded that all of
that way-finding around London had physically
altered the gross structure of their brains. The more
years a cabbie had been on the road, the more
pronounced the effect.
The brain is a mutable organ, capable—within
limits—of reorganizing itself and readapting to new
kinds of sensory input, a phenomenon known as
neuroplasticity. It had long been thought that the
adult brain was incapable of spawning new
neurons—that while learning caused synapses to
rearrange themselves and new links between brain
cells to form, the brain’s basic anatomical structure
was more or less static. Maguire’s study suggested the
old inherited wisdom was simply not true.
After her groundbreaking study of London
cabbies, Maguire decided to turn her attention to
mental athletes. She teamed up with Elizabeth
Valentine and John Wilding, authors of the academic
monograph Superior Memory, to study ten
individuals who had finished near the top of the
World Memory Championship. They wanted to find
out if the memorizers’ brains were—like the London
cabbies’—structurally different from the rest of ours,
or if they were somehow just making better use of
memory abilities that we all possess.
The researchers put both the mental athletes and a
group of matched control subjects into MRI scanners
and asked them to memorize three-digit numbers,
black-and-white photographs of people’s faces, and
magnified images of snowflakes, while their brains
were being scanned. Maguire and her team thought it
was possible that they might discover anatomical
differences in the brains of the memory champs,
evidence that their brains had somehow reorganized
themselves in the process of doing all that intensive
remembering. But when the researchers reviewed the
imaging data, not a single significant structural
difference turned up. The brains of the mental
athletes appeared to be indistinguishable from those
of the control subjects. What’s more, on every single
test of general cognitive ability, the mental athletes’
scores came back well within the normal range. The
memory champs weren’t smarter, and they didn’t
have special brains.
But there was one telling difference between the
brains of the mental athletes and the control subjects:
When the researchers looked at which parts of the
brain were lighting up when the mental athletes were
memorizing, they found that they were activating
entirely different circuitry. According to the
functional MRIs [fMRIs], regions of the brain that
were less active in the control subjects seemed to be
working in overdrive for the mental athletes.
Surprisingly, when the mental athletes were
learning new information, they were engaging
several regions of the brain known to be involved in
two specific tasks: visual memory and spatial
navigation, including the same right posterior
hippocampal region that the London cabbies had
enlarged with all their daily way-finding. At first
glance, this wouldn’t seem to make any sense.
Why would mental athletes be conjuring images in
their mind’s eye when they were trying to learn
three-digit numbers? Why should they be navigating
like London cabbies when they’re supposed to be
remembering the shapes of snowflakes?
Maguire and her team asked the mental athletes
to describe exactly what was going through their
minds as they memorized. The mental athletes said
they were consciously converting the information
they were being asked to memorize into images, and
distributing those images along familiar spatial
journeys. They weren’t doing this automatically, or
because it was an inborn talent they’d nurtured since
childhood. Rather, the unexpected patterns of neural
activity that Maguire’s fMRIs turned up were the
result of training and practice.
Question 50:
The passage most strongly suggests that mental athletes are successful at memorization because they
A) exploit parts of the brain not normally used in routine memorization.
B) convert information they are trying to memorize into abstract symbols.
C) organize information into numerical lists prior to memorization.
D) exercise their brains regularly through puzzles and other mental challenges.
Answer: | A | false | sat-practice_5-question_50 |