At an early meeting of the British Sociological Association's "Activism in Sociology Forum" members met to discuss how we might play a more campaigning role in the world outside the academy. Pragmatically, academics tend to work long hours. We are faced with multiple and competing demands: teaching, administration, publishing, marketing, research, grant-bidding, and so on. The REF has ramped up the requirement to demonstrate the efficacy of our research in "the real world" (our impact upon society, economy, and culture rather than upon knowledge per se, or upon the academic discipline). Maybe here I suggested, as my contribution to the meeting was a chance for those of us interested in progressing social justice to lever officially sanctioned space, in our busy day-to-day lives, to do more of this sort of work? Maybe we should welcome the REF impact agenda? I learned afterwards that eminent British sociologists, whom I respect enormously, regarded such a viewpoint as "naive" and "embarrassing". Indeed, critics interpret REF as just one mode of the heightened, neoliberal, managerial control that is degrading academic life and infesting universities. So, how should we think about the REF impact agenda? Because of its obvious connections with social improvement and reform through policy action, social policy is regarded as one disciplinary area that is well-placed to meet and benefit from the impact agenda. Yet there has been surprisingly little concerted discussion amongst scholars about REF and impact. This is despite the fact that many millions of pounds of public funding accrue to the proposed or claimed impact of research (with monies channelled through research councils to individual projects or via regular, six-yearly centralised assessments of the quality of research in university departments). In addition, there is substantial funding directed toward the "impact industry"; the consultants, think tanks, PR firms, funding schemes, new software programmes, impact managers, specialist impact case study... Question: The meeting probably lasted about Options: A. a few hours B. a few months C. a few weeks D. not enough information === The correct answer is
A

WHITE HOUSE U.S. President Donald Trump told a group of Republican lawmakers at a meeting Tuesday he backs a pair of their immigration bills under consideration in the House of Representatives. The meeting came as criticism continued over the Trump administration's policy of separating children from their parents and other adults at the southern border with Mexico as they illegally enter the United States. In his remarks to lawmakers, according to White House principal deputy press secretary Raj Shah, Trump "endorsed both House immigration bills that build the wall, close legal loopholes, cancel the visa lottery, curb so-called "chain migration," and solve the border crisis and family separation issue by allowing for family detention and removal." Republican Rep. Mark Meadows said Trump told the lawmakers they need to get something done on immigration "right away." House Homeland Security chairman Michael McCaul described the meeting with Trump as excellent, and confirmed that the president embraced the bill he and Congressman Bob Goodlatte are pushing. "The president is a thousand percent behind it," McCaul said. Asked whether the legislation would end the family separations, he responded, "They will not be separated if the bill passes," which he explained includes $18 billion for a border wall Trump desires. The House is set to vote later in the week on the two bills. It is not clear that either piece of legislation has enough votes to win passage. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday "all of the members of the Republican conference support a plan that keeps families together," adding he intends to ask Democrats to support the measure. In a Reuters/Ipsos poll released Tuesday, 28 percent of people said they support the policy, while 57 percent opposed it and the other 15 percent said they did not know. Trump administration officials have defended the policy. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen pushed back at the negative media coverage in a Monday briefing, asserting... Question: What is the percent that support the policy? Options: A. not enough information B. 57 C. 28 D. 15 === The correct answer is
C

Q: The air exploded in a flash of bone and steel and blood. The clash of metal rang through the forest. An arrow pierced through the darkness, its barbed head tearing through flesh and muscle. A roar echoed off of the mountains far to the west. A cry broke through soon after. Then silence. Char stood over a pile of black fur and red blood. He held a curved sword, jagged half way down the wide blade and hilted in bone. He held a large thick bow in the other. Lorfel and Ranur stood behind him, panting. Lorfel, a short man of twenty six held a large axe in both hands and still prepared to swing it hard. Ranur, the largest of the three held a pike in one hand, its tip hanging low towards the ground. He buried his other hand in his gray tunic. "Did it get either of you?" Char's voice rasped low in the silence of the night. "No" Lorfel said. He planted his axe head on the ground with a thud and leaned on the tall handle. There was a pause. Char turned towards Ranur. "Are you hurt?" "Mm...My hand." Ranur took his hand out of his tunic. Moonlight gleamed red off of the ragged wound. Char thought he saw a glimmer of bone. "Did he claw you or bite you?" Char's voice held an urgency that set both Lorfel and Ranur on edge. Ranur paused and then spoke low. "He bit me." Char picked Lorfel and Ranur as his hunting partners for their speed and sharpness in battle. They had hunted beasts of the deep woods all of their lives. They hunted the beasts that hunted men. They all knew the risks of battling such creatures. The old man dropped his curved sword, drew his bow, and fired. The arrow hammered into Ranur's chest, burying itself in his heart. Lorfel saw the gleaming arrow head sticking almost a foot out of his companion's back. Ranur fell face first to the ground. Question: Ranur probably died: Options: A. not enough information B. a month later C. instantly D. a year later === The correct answer is
A: C