CLAT Practice Test- 41 - CLAT MCQ

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

So apparently, I need to work on pushing my grades up in a few subjects. Okay, okay, I need to push my grades up in all my subjects, but there are some subjects that need a bigger push than others. And no, pushing my grades and subjects off the sides of a cliff into dark, angry waters is not an option. Believe me. I asked.

So, since the grownups decided that Grade VI Maths, Physics and Chemistry were too hard for them to teach, they decided I needed a tutor. I'd just like to point out here that my super old parents who have white hair and life experiences can't manage chem and algebra, but I, an 11-year-old who isn't allowed to have his own phone, am expected to be acing it? Does anyone else see the unfairness here?

First of all, since we live so far away from civilisation, no one wanted to come and take classes for me! My joy was short-lived when K Sir, my math tutor from Grade IV called the parents up and asked how I was doing. Amma believes that it's divine destiny or something, that he somehow sensed I needed help and that's why he called. Like he's some Jedi Math Whiz. Great. I just ruined Star Wars for myself. Anyway, it was decided that K Sir would come for 'extra help', 'doubt clearing' and 'homework assistance'. AKA TUITION! Cue screaming.

Now, I don't hate tuition. But I don't love it either. I mean after seven hours in school, I don't think anyone would want to come home and do more studies. It's like asking grownups to come home after a long day at work and do more work. Okay, okay, I know our parents are always saying that they're on a 'work call' and need to 'check their email', but is it fair I have to suffer too?

When I used this argument on my parents, do you know what they did? DO YOU? They organised my tuitions… FOR THE WEEKEND! What new form of torture was this? Are these people even my parents or are they evil alien parent doppelgängers conducting mind experiments on me?

If after school hours are for brain rest and relaxation, weekend hours are for TV, cricket, swimming and more TV. Not algebra, simple machines and the periodic table. As if a Sunday tuition wasn't bad enough, they fixed it from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m.! That's peak playground time. Who does that? Evil alien parent doppelgängers that's who!

To make this entire situation even worse — if that were possible — the Pesky Brother, academic superstar that he is, gets to go down and play! Smiling, singing and SMUG!

Q. Which of the following, according to the author, best describes the main problem in the given passage?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

So apparently, I need to work on pushing my grades up in a few subjects. Okay, okay, I need to push my grades up in all my subjects, but there are some subjects that need a bigger push than others. And no, pushing my grades and subjects off the sides of a cliff into dark, angry waters is not an option. Believe me. I asked.

So, since the grownups decided that Grade VI Maths, Physics and Chemistry were too hard for them to teach, they decided I needed a tutor. I'd just like to point out here that my super old parents who have white hair and life experiences can't manage chem and algebra, but I, an 11-year-old who isn't allowed to have his own phone, am expected to be acing it? Does anyone else see the unfairness here?

First of all, since we live so far away from civilisation, no one wanted to come and take classes for me! My joy was short-lived when K Sir, my math tutor from Grade IV called the parents up and asked how I was doing. Amma believes that it's divine destiny or something, that he somehow sensed I needed help and that's why he called. Like he's some Jedi Math Whiz. Great. I just ruined Star Wars for myself. Anyway, it was decided that K Sir would come for 'extra help', 'doubt clearing' and 'homework assistance'. AKA TUITION! Cue screaming.

Now, I don't hate tuition. But I don't love it either. I mean after seven hours in school, I don't think anyone would want to come home and do more studies. It's like asking grownups to come home after a long day at work and do more work. Okay, okay, I know our parents are always saying that they're on a 'work call' and need to 'check their email', but is it fair I have to suffer too?

When I used this argument on my parents, do you know what they did? DO YOU? They organised my tuitions… FOR THE WEEKEND! What new form of torture was this? Are these people even my parents or are they evil alien parent doppelgängers conducting mind experiments on me?

If after school hours are for brain rest and relaxation, weekend hours are for TV, cricket, swimming and more TV. Not algebra, simple machines and the periodic table. As if a Sunday tuition wasn't bad enough, they fixed it from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m.! That's peak playground time. Who does that? Evil alien parent doppelgängers that's who!

To make this entire situation even worse — if that were possible — the Pesky Brother, academic superstar that he is, gets to go down and play! Smiling, singing and SMUG!

Q. How did the author's mother feel when K Sir called the author's parents to check on him?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

So apparently, I need to work on pushing my grades up in a few subjects. Okay, okay, I need to push my grades up in all my subjects, but there are some subjects that need a bigger push than others. And no, pushing my grades and subjects off the sides of a cliff into dark, angry waters is not an option. Believe me. I asked.

So, since the grownups decided that Grade VI Maths, Physics and Chemistry were too hard for them to teach, they decided I needed a tutor. I'd just like to point out here that my super old parents who have white hair and life experiences can't manage chem and algebra, but I, an 11-year-old who isn't allowed to have his own phone, am expected to be acing it? Does anyone else see the unfairness here?

First of all, since we live so far away from civilisation, no one wanted to come and take classes for me! My joy was short-lived when K Sir, my math tutor from Grade IV called the parents up and asked how I was doing. Amma believes that it's divine destiny or something, that he somehow sensed I needed help and that's why he called. Like he's some Jedi Math Whiz. Great. I just ruined Star Wars for myself. Anyway, it was decided that K Sir would come for 'extra help', 'doubt clearing' and 'homework assistance'. AKA TUITION! Cue screaming.

Now, I don't hate tuition. But I don't love it either. I mean after seven hours in school, I don't think anyone would want to come home and do more studies. It's like asking grownups to come home after a long day at work and do more work. Okay, okay, I know our parents are always saying that they're on a 'work call' and need to 'check their email', but is it fair I have to suffer too?

When I used this argument on my parents, do you know what they did? DO YOU? They organised my tuitions… FOR THE WEEKEND! What new form of torture was this? Are these people even my parents or are they evil alien parent doppelgängers conducting mind experiments on me?

If after school hours are for brain rest and relaxation, weekend hours are for TV, cricket, swimming and more TV. Not algebra, simple machines and the periodic table. As if a Sunday tuition wasn't bad enough, they fixed it from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m.! That's peak playground time. Who does that? Evil alien parent doppelgängers that's who!

To make this entire situation even worse — if that were possible — the Pesky Brother, academic superstar that he is, gets to go down and play! Smiling, singing and SMUG!

Q. What can be inferred about the timings of the author's tution?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

So apparently, I need to work on pushing my grades up in a few subjects. Okay, okay, I need to push my grades up in all my subjects, but there are some subjects that need a bigger push than others. And no, pushing my grades and subjects off the sides of a cliff into dark, angry waters is not an option. Believe me. I asked.

So, since the grownups decided that Grade VI Maths, Physics and Chemistry were too hard for them to teach, they decided I needed a tutor. I'd just like to point out here that my super old parents who have white hair and life experiences can't manage chem and algebra, but I, an 11-year-old who isn't allowed to have his own phone, am expected to be acing it? Does anyone else see the unfairness here?

First of all, since we live so far away from civilisation, no one wanted to come and take classes for me! My joy was short-lived when K Sir, my math tutor from Grade IV called the parents up and asked how I was doing. Amma believes that it's divine destiny or something, that he somehow sensed I needed help and that's why he called. Like he's some Jedi Math Whiz. Great. I just ruined Star Wars for myself. Anyway, it was decided that K Sir would come for 'extra help', 'doubt clearing' and 'homework assistance'. AKA TUITION! Cue screaming.

Now, I don't hate tuition. But I don't love it either. I mean after seven hours in school, I don't think anyone would want to come home and do more studies. It's like asking grownups to come home after a long day at work and do more work. Okay, okay, I know our parents are always saying that they're on a 'work call' and need to 'check their email', but is it fair I have to suffer too?

When I used this argument on my parents, do you know what they did? DO YOU? They organised my tuitions… FOR THE WEEKEND! What new form of torture was this? Are these people even my parents or are they evil alien parent doppelgängers conducting mind experiments on me?

If after school hours are for brain rest and relaxation, weekend hours are for TV, cricket, swimming and more TV. Not algebra, simple machines and the periodic table. As if a Sunday tuition wasn't bad enough, they fixed it from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m.! That's peak playground time. Who does that? Evil alien parent doppelgängers that's who!

To make this entire situation even worse — if that were possible — the Pesky Brother, academic superstar that he is, gets to go down and play! Smiling, singing and SMUG!

Q. Why, according to the author, is it unfair to expect him to top the subjects he has?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

So apparently, I need to work on pushing my grades up in a few subjects. Okay, okay, I need to push my grades up in all my subjects, but there are some subjects that need a bigger push than others. And no, pushing my grades and subjects off the sides of a cliff into dark, angry waters is not an option. Believe me. I asked.

So, since the grownups decided that Grade VI Maths, Physics and Chemistry were too hard for them to teach, they decided I needed a tutor. I'd just like to point out here that my super old parents who have white hair and life experiences can't manage chem and algebra, but I, an 11-year-old who isn't allowed to have his own phone, am expected to be acing it? Does anyone else see the unfairness here?

First of all, since we live so far away from civilisation, no one wanted to come and take classes for me! My joy was short-lived when K Sir, my math tutor from Grade IV called the parents up and asked how I was doing. Amma believes that it's divine destiny or something, that he somehow sensed I needed help and that's why he called. Like he's some Jedi Math Whiz. Great. I just ruined Star Wars for myself. Anyway, it was decided that K Sir would come for 'extra help', 'doubt clearing' and 'homework assistance'. AKA TUITION! Cue screaming.

Now, I don't hate tuition. But I don't love it either. I mean after seven hours in school, I don't think anyone would want to come home and do more studies. It's like asking grownups to come home after a long day at work and do more work. Okay, okay, I know our parents are always saying that they're on a 'work call' and need to 'check their email', but is it fair I have to suffer too?

When I used this argument on my parents, do you know what they did? DO YOU? They organised my tuitions… FOR THE WEEKEND! What new form of torture was this? Are these people even my parents or are they evil alien parent doppelgängers conducting mind experiments on me?

If after school hours are for brain rest and relaxation, weekend hours are for TV, cricket, swimming and more TV. Not algebra, simple machines and the periodic table. As if a Sunday tuition wasn't bad enough, they fixed it from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m.! That's peak playground time. Who does that? Evil alien parent doppelgängers that's who!

To make this entire situation even worse — if that were possible — the Pesky Brother, academic superstar that he is, gets to go down and play! Smiling, singing and SMUG!

Q. What does the word 'doppelgänger' as used in the passage mean?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

The friendship between India and Bangladesh is historic, evolving over the last 50 years. India's political, diplomatic, military and humanitarian support during Bangladesh's Liberation War played an important role towards Bangladesh's independence.

Post-Independence, the India-Bangladesh relationship has oscillated as Bangladesh passed through different regimes. The relationship remained cordial until the assassination of Bangladesh's founding President Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in August 15, 1975, followed by a period of military rule and the rise of General Ziaur Rahman who became President and also assassinated in 1981. It thawed again between 1982-1991 when a military-led government by General H.M. Ershad ruled the country. Since Bangladesh's return to parliamentary democracy in 1991, relations have gone through highs and lows. However, in the last decade, India-Bangladesh relations have warmed up, entering a new era of cooperation, and moving beyond historical and cultural ties to become more assimilated in the areas of trade, connectivity, energy, and defence.

Bangladesh and India have achieved the rare feat of solving their border issues peacefully by ratifying the historic Land Boundary Agreement in 2015, where enclaves were swapped allowing inhabitants to choose their country of residence and become citizens of either India or Bangladesh. The Bangladesh government led by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has uprooted anti-India insurgency elements from its borders, making the India-Bangladesh border one of the region's most peaceful, and allowing India to make a massive redeployment of resources to its more contentious borders elsewhere.

Bangladesh today is India's biggest trading partner in South Asia with exports to Bangladesh in FY 2018-19 at $9.21 billion and imports at $1.04 billion. Trade could be more balanced if non-tariff barriers from the Indian side could be removed. Bangladeshis make up a large portion of tourists in India, outnumbering all tourists arriving from Western Europe in 2017, with one in every five tourists being a Bangladeshi. Bangladesh accounts for more than 35% of India's international medical patients and contributes more than 50% of India's revenue from medical tourism.

India-Bangladesh relations have been gaining positive momentum over the last decade. As Bangladesh celebrates its 50 years of independence (March 26, 1971), India continues to be one of its most important neighbours and strategic partners. As the larger country, the onus is on India to be generous enough to let the water flow as this issue is constraining positive relations between the two neighbours. These small but important steps can remove long-standing snags in a relationship which otherwise is gradually coming of age in 50 years. To make the recent gains irreversible, both countries need to continue working on the three C's — cooperation, collaboration, and consolidation.

Q. Based on the reading of the passage, what is a bone of contention between India and Bangladesh?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

The friendship between India and Bangladesh is historic, evolving over the last 50 years. India's political, diplomatic, military and humanitarian support during Bangladesh's Liberation War played an important role towards Bangladesh's independence.

Post-Independence, the India-Bangladesh relationship has oscillated as Bangladesh passed through different regimes. The relationship remained cordial until the assassination of Bangladesh's founding President Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in August 15, 1975, followed by a period of military rule and the rise of General Ziaur Rahman who became President and also assassinated in 1981. It thawed again between 1982-1991 when a military-led government by General H.M. Ershad ruled the country. Since Bangladesh's return to parliamentary democracy in 1991, relations have gone through highs and lows. However, in the last decade, India-Bangladesh relations have warmed up, entering a new era of cooperation, and moving beyond historical and cultural ties to become more assimilated in the areas of trade, connectivity, energy, and defence.

Bangladesh and India have achieved the rare feat of solving their border issues peacefully by ratifying the historic Land Boundary Agreement in 2015, where enclaves were swapped allowing inhabitants to choose their country of residence and become citizens of either India or Bangladesh. The Bangladesh government led by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has uprooted anti-India insurgency elements from its borders, making the India-Bangladesh border one of the region's most peaceful, and allowing India to make a massive redeployment of resources to its more contentious borders elsewhere.

Bangladesh today is India's biggest trading partner in South Asia with exports to Bangladesh in FY 2018-19 at $9.21 billion and imports at $1.04 billion. Trade could be more balanced if non-tariff barriers from the Indian side could be removed. Bangladeshis make up a large portion of tourists in India, outnumbering all tourists arriving from Western Europe in 2017, with one in every five tourists being a Bangladeshi. Bangladesh accounts for more than 35% of India's international medical patients and contributes more than 50% of India's revenue from medical tourism.

India-Bangladesh relations have been gaining positive momentum over the last decade. As Bangladesh celebrates its 50 years of independence (March 26, 1971), India continues to be one of its most important neighbours and strategic partners. As the larger country, the onus is on India to be generous enough to let the water flow as this issue is constraining positive relations between the two neighbours. These small but important steps can remove long-standing snags in a relationship which otherwise is gradually coming of age in 50 years. To make the recent gains irreversible, both countries need to continue working on the three C's — cooperation, collaboration, and consolidation.

Q. For reducing the gap between imports and exports between India and Bangladesh, which of the following measure has been suggested by the author?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

Why has India not produced a Google or Twitter or Amazon? It is a question that has been asked a million times, with no convincing answer ever found. Well, all the big digital product companies primarily flourished in the West, which had the right breeding conditions for them. The rest of the world became a consumer and beneficiary of these technologies. India's first defining moment in its new-age technology journey came around the turn of the millennium, when we helped the world deal with the infamous Y2K problem. The next moment came about a decade later when the first-generation digital entrepreneurs started building solutions for local problems. The third moment is now when unicorn is the buzzword. However, the question stayed where it was through this evolution cycle.

India's sweet spot is its leadership in public technology. No one has designed and used technology for the larger good of society as we have. It began with a biometric-based digital identity and a unique identification number called Aadhaar. This, when used to link identities across the bank accounts and mobile phones, has enabled the direct dissemination of public benefits. It is not without its hiccups, but it is a database that allows you to use it as the time and circumstances demand. As cashless payments become our default mode for transactions, the ATMs may find a place in the tech museums. This brings us to another public technology from India famous for its speed of adoption across the board—Unified Payments Interface or UPI. What makes UPI unique is the zero cost for the users. The global domino effect shows when Google pitches for FedNow—a proposed inter-bank settlement system in the US. It has cited its extensive experience with the UPI of the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) and shared learnings from our country that the US should emulate—including no fee for small low-value transactions. The Open Network Digital Commerce (ONDC) is soon to be launched by the commerce and industry ministry. It is an open digital protocol that would allow exchange of products and services. Just like UPI, it will allow people to sell through any ONDC-compatible app or platform using its standard protocols for cataloguing, inventory management and order-cycle processing. It will create a level playing field in digital commerce for small and big players by giving them the power of discoverability while bringing down the monopolies of the big corporations.

Philosophically speaking, this technology leadership embodies the Indian philosophy of Sarvajan hitaay, sarvajan sukhay—for the benefit and good of everyone. Whether these protocols are new-age carriers of philosophy or rooted in them depends on which lens you view them from. So next time when you face the question asked in the beginning, talk about the India stack comprising Aadhaar, UPI, ONDC, etc. and our contribution to the world of technology rooted in the nation's culture.

Q. Which of the following statements CANNOT be inferred from the passage?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

Why has India not produced a Google or Twitter or Amazon? It is a question that has been asked a million times, with no convincing answer ever found. Well, all the big digital product companies primarily flourished in the West, which had the right breeding conditions for them. The rest of the world became a consumer and beneficiary of these technologies. India's first defining moment in its new-age technology journey came around the turn of the millennium, when we helped the world deal with the infamous Y2K problem. The next moment came about a decade later when the first-generation digital entrepreneurs started building solutions for local problems. The third moment is now when unicorn is the buzzword. However, the question stayed where it was through this evolution cycle.

India's sweet spot is its leadership in public technology. No one has designed and used technology for the larger good of society as we have. It began with a biometric-based digital identity and a unique identification number called Aadhaar. This, when used to link identities across the bank accounts and mobile phones, has enabled the direct dissemination of public benefits. It is not without its hiccups, but it is a database that allows you to use it as the time and circumstances demand. As cashless payments become our default mode for transactions, the ATMs may find a place in the tech museums. This brings us to another public technology from India famous for its speed of adoption across the board—Unified Payments Interface or UPI. What makes UPI unique is the zero cost for the users. The global domino effect shows when Google pitches for FedNow—a proposed inter-bank settlement system in the US. It has cited its extensive experience with the UPI of the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) and shared learnings from our country that the US should emulate—including no fee for small low-value transactions. The Open Network Digital Commerce (ONDC) is soon to be launched by the commerce and industry ministry. It is an open digital protocol that would allow exchange of products and services. Just like UPI, it will allow people to sell through any ONDC-compatible app or platform using its standard protocols for cataloguing, inventory management and order-cycle processing. It will create a level playing field in digital commerce for small and big players by giving them the power of discoverability while bringing down the monopolies of the big corporations.

Philosophically speaking, this technology leadership embodies the Indian philosophy of Sarvajan hitaay, sarvajan sukhay—for the benefit and good of everyone. Whether these protocols are new-age carriers of philosophy or rooted in them depends on which lens you view them from. So next time when you face the question asked in the beginning, talk about the India stack comprising Aadhaar, UPI, ONDC, etc. and our contribution to the world of technology rooted in the nation's culture.

Q. Which of the following statements is/are TRUE in context of the passage with regard to India?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

Why has India not produced a Google or Twitter or Amazon? It is a question that has been asked a million times, with no convincing answer ever found. Well, all the big digital product companies primarily flourished in the West, which had the right breeding conditions for them. The rest of the world became a consumer and beneficiary of these technologies. India's first defining moment in its new-age technology journey came around the turn of the millennium, when we helped the world deal with the infamous Y2K problem. The next moment came about a decade later when the first-generation digital entrepreneurs started building solutions for local problems. The third moment is now when unicorn is the buzzword. However, the question stayed where it was through this evolution cycle.

India's sweet spot is its leadership in public technology. No one has designed and used technology for the larger good of society as we have. It began with a biometric-based digital identity and a unique identification number called Aadhaar. This, when used to link identities across the bank accounts and mobile phones, has enabled the direct dissemination of public benefits. It is not without its hiccups, but it is a database that allows you to use it as the time and circumstances demand. As cashless payments become our default mode for transactions, the ATMs may find a place in the tech museums. This brings us to another public technology from India famous for its speed of adoption across the board—Unified Payments Interface or UPI. What makes UPI unique is the zero cost for the users. The global domino effect shows when Google pitches for FedNow—a proposed inter-bank settlement system in the US. It has cited its extensive experience with the UPI of the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) and shared learnings from our country that the US should emulate—including no fee for small low-value transactions. The Open Network Digital Commerce (ONDC) is soon to be launched by the commerce and industry ministry. It is an open digital protocol that would allow exchange of products and services. Just like UPI, it will allow people to sell through any ONDC-compatible app or platform using its standard protocols for cataloguing, inventory management and order-cycle processing. It will create a level playing field in digital commerce for small and big players by giving them the power of discoverability while bringing down the monopolies of the big corporations.

Philosophically speaking, this technology leadership embodies the Indian philosophy of Sarvajan hitaay, sarvajan sukhay—for the benefit and good of everyone. Whether these protocols are new-age carriers of philosophy or rooted in them depends on which lens you view them from. So next time when you face the question asked in the beginning, talk about the India stack comprising Aadhaar, UPI, ONDC, etc. and our contribution to the world of technology rooted in the nation's culture.

Q. Which of the following statements from the passage could function as an answer to the question given below?

"Why has India not produced a Google or Twitter or Amazon?"

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

Why has India not produced a Google or Twitter or Amazon? It is a question that has been asked a million times, with no convincing answer ever found. Well, all the big digital product companies primarily flourished in the West, which had the right breeding conditions for them. The rest of the world became a consumer and beneficiary of these technologies. India's first defining moment in its new-age technology journey came around the turn of the millennium, when we helped the world deal with the infamous Y2K problem. The next moment came about a decade later when the first-generation digital entrepreneurs started building solutions for local problems. The third moment is now when unicorn is the buzzword. However, the question stayed where it was through this evolution cycle.

India's sweet spot is its leadership in public technology. No one has designed and used technology for the larger good of society as we have. It began with a biometric-based digital identity and a unique identification number called Aadhaar. This, when used to link identities across the bank accounts and mobile phones, has enabled the direct dissemination of public benefits. It is not without its hiccups, but it is a database that allows you to use it as the time and circumstances demand. As cashless payments become our default mode for transactions, the ATMs may find a place in the tech museums. This brings us to another public technology from India famous for its speed of adoption across the board—Unified Payments Interface or UPI. What makes UPI unique is the zero cost for the users. The global domino effect shows when Google pitches for FedNow—a proposed inter-bank settlement system in the US. It has cited its extensive experience with the UPI of the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) and shared learnings from our country that the US should emulate—including no fee for small low-value transactions. The Open Network Digital Commerce (ONDC) is soon to be launched by the commerce and industry ministry. It is an open digital protocol that would allow exchange of products and services. Just like UPI, it will allow people to sell through any ONDC-compatible app or platform using its standard protocols for cataloguing, inventory management and order-cycle processing. It will create a level playing field in digital commerce for small and big players by giving them the power of discoverability while bringing down the monopolies of the big corporations.

Philosophically speaking, this technology leadership embodies the Indian philosophy of Sarvajan hitaay, sarvajan sukhay—for the benefit and good of everyone. Whether these protocols are new-age carriers of philosophy or rooted in them depends on which lens you view them from. So next time when you face the question asked in the beginning, talk about the India stack comprising Aadhaar, UPI, ONDC, etc. and our contribution to the world of technology rooted in the nation's culture.

Q. It can be inferred that India's _______ growth has been _______ to the Western growth.

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

After graduation, our 18-year-old (former) students scatter to the four winds. We teach them, we set them loose, and we hope they do well. Yet just because they are no longer in our classrooms doesn't mean we don't wonder about them—what they're up to, how they're doing. Sometimes we get the answer to these questions via social media or some other digital means. And that's great, but not the same as seeing them in person.

Fortunately, sometimes they do come back to visit. They get a job in the area and come by after work. They are home from college for a break. They come to see friends, to see teachers, to help out. It means the world to me when they come back. Here's why.

I work closely with my kids, generally for several years. And then, they are gone. And I miss them. Every year I rework my program, my department, and my life to fill holes that kids leave when they graduate. I have to find someone to do the jobs they did, for me and for the program. Who is going to be the lead technician? Who is going to be the one who welcomes in the new kids? Who is going to be the student voice when I am making decisions? Who is going to be the one who makes us laugh?

Students leave holes, and sometimes we don't have anyone to fill them, especially the kids who have served as emotional caretakers. So when former students come in to say hi and see how things are going, I get them back for a bit!

One of the things I love most about teaching high school is watching my students grow and become adults. Once they graduate, though, I stop getting to see that process. When kids come back, I get to hear about their lives and see how much they've changed.

In my program, we tell stories about former students: the time B ripped his pants on stage during a show and handled it beautifully; the time C started the year in tears because of stage fright and ended the year with two shows under her belt; the way J ran everything and knew where everything was. These kids are the heroes of the department, and when the new kids get to meet them, it continues the tradition of learning from people who have been their shoes.

As someone who gets super focused and uptight, having someone come in who is there just to be happy and enjoy themselves reminds me of the fun parts of my job and to have fun with my students.

Q. Why, according to the author, does the return of a student mean so much to her?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

After graduation, our 18-year-old (former) students scatter to the four winds. We teach them, we set them loose, and we hope they do well. Yet just because they are no longer in our classrooms doesn't mean we don't wonder about them—what they're up to, how they're doing. Sometimes we get the answer to these questions via social media or some other digital means. And that's great, but not the same as seeing them in person.

Fortunately, sometimes they do come back to visit. They get a job in the area and come by after work. They are home from college for a break. They come to see friends, to see teachers, to help out. It means the world to me when they come back. Here's why.

I work closely with my kids, generally for several years. And then, they are gone. And I miss them. Every year I rework my program, my department, and my life to fill holes that kids leave when they graduate. I have to find someone to do the jobs they did, for me and for the program. Who is going to be the lead technician? Who is going to be the one who welcomes in the new kids? Who is going to be the student voice when I am making decisions? Who is going to be the one who makes us laugh?

Students leave holes, and sometimes we don't have anyone to fill them, especially the kids who have served as emotional caretakers. So when former students come in to say hi and see how things are going, I get them back for a bit!

One of the things I love most about teaching high school is watching my students grow and become adults. Once they graduate, though, I stop getting to see that process. When kids come back, I get to hear about their lives and see how much they've changed.

In my program, we tell stories about former students: the time B ripped his pants on stage during a show and handled it beautifully; the time C started the year in tears because of stage fright and ended the year with two shows under her belt; the way J ran everything and knew where everything was. These kids are the heroes of the department, and when the new kids get to meet them, it continues the tradition of learning from people who have been their shoes.

As someone who gets super focused and uptight, having someone come in who is there just to be happy and enjoy themselves reminds me of the fun parts of my job and to have fun with my students.

Q. What, according to the author, gets stopped as a result of students graduating?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

At every level, Indian education is obsessed with the first boys. In the classroom, in society and in the making of public policy.

In each class, the teachers revel in the success of the first boys, and many of these young wonders recollect throughout their lives that they were first boys-no less-in their class. I remember being really struck many years ago when one of the great men India has produced, who was then the Union Minister for Education and would later become the Prime Minister, could still remember-and was able to tell me-the marks he had received in school and college. Even though, I should explain, his marks were excellent (if I am any judge), I was impressed by what could only be described as his immense modesty in remaining so captivated by his student-day grades (similar to those of other brilliant students across the land), even after he had left nearly every Indian behind in the political life of India. No, the 'first boy syndrome' is certainly big in our country, and afflicts even persons of truly exceptional achievement outside the classroom.

For individuals this may, in fact, be no more than an amiable peculiarity which need not distract us from our admiration for the persons involved. But when the first boy syndrome takes over an educational system (as I fear has happened in India), there are reasons to be seriously alarmed. The priorities can get oddly distorted when the focus is so narrow, and the concentration of public policy is so strongly on looking after those blessed with opportunity and success. Not only do the educationally advantaged go, as we would expect, to schools, colleges, universities, and distinguished technological institutes (while hundreds of millions of Indian children do not manage to get primary education), but also the educational establishments they go to are, often enough, very fine, in contrast with the low quality of Indian schools and colleges in general.

We can find a nice chain of actions and reactions here. The system makes sure that some young people, out of a huge pool of the young, manage to get privileged education. The picking is done not through any organised attempt to keep anyone out (indeed, far from it), but through differentiations that are driven by economic and social inequality related to class, gender, location, and social privilege. The privileged, to their credit, by and large do very well-they don't waste opportunities. Their well-earned success comes, first, in the educational establishments themselves, and then in the world at large, impressing Indians and foreigners alike. The country then celebrates with abandon the 'nation's triumphs'.

Q. According to the passage, which of the following can be rightly justified as a first boy?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

At every level, Indian education is obsessed with the first boys. In the classroom, in society and in the making of public policy.

In each class, the teachers revel in the success of the first boys, and many of these young wonders recollect throughout their lives that they were first boys-no less-in their class. I remember being really struck many years ago when one of the great men India has produced, who was then the Union Minister for Education and would later become the Prime Minister, could still remember-and was able to tell me-the marks he had received in school and college. Even though, I should explain, his marks were excellent (if I am any judge), I was impressed by what could only be described as his immense modesty in remaining so captivated by his student-day grades (similar to those of other brilliant students across the land), even after he had left nearly every Indian behind in the political life of India. No, the 'first boy syndrome' is certainly big in our country, and afflicts even persons of truly exceptional achievement outside the classroom.

For individuals this may, in fact, be no more than an amiable peculiarity which need not distract us from our admiration for the persons involved. But when the first boy syndrome takes over an educational system (as I fear has happened in India), there are reasons to be seriously alarmed. The priorities can get oddly distorted when the focus is so narrow, and the concentration of public policy is so strongly on looking after those blessed with opportunity and success. Not only do the educationally advantaged go, as we would expect, to schools, colleges, universities, and distinguished technological institutes (while hundreds of millions of Indian children do not manage to get primary education), but also the educational establishments they go to are, often enough, very fine, in contrast with the low quality of Indian schools and colleges in general.

We can find a nice chain of actions and reactions here. The system makes sure that some young people, out of a huge pool of the young, manage to get privileged education. The picking is done not through any organised attempt to keep anyone out (indeed, far from it), but through differentiations that are driven by economic and social inequality related to class, gender, location, and social privilege. The privileged, to their credit, by and large do very well-they don't waste opportunities. Their well-earned success comes, first, in the educational establishments themselves, and then in the world at large, impressing Indians and foreigners alike. The country then celebrates with abandon the 'nation's triumphs'.

Q. Why, according to the author, are there reasons to be alarmed over the first boy syndrome?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

At every level, Indian education is obsessed with the first boys. In the classroom, in society and in the making of public policy.

In each class, the teachers revel in the success of the first boys, and many of these young wonders recollect throughout their lives that they were first boys-no less-in their class. I remember being really struck many years ago when one of the great men India has produced, who was then the Union Minister for Education and would later become the Prime Minister, could still remember-and was able to tell me-the marks he had received in school and college. Even though, I should explain, his marks were excellent (if I am any judge), I was impressed by what could only be described as his immense modesty in remaining so captivated by his student-day grades (similar to those of other brilliant students across the land), even after he had left nearly every Indian behind in the political life of India. No, the 'first boy syndrome' is certainly big in our country, and afflicts even persons of truly exceptional achievement outside the classroom.

For individuals this may, in fact, be no more than an amiable peculiarity which need not distract us from our admiration for the persons involved. But when the first boy syndrome takes over an educational system (as I fear has happened in India), there are reasons to be seriously alarmed. The priorities can get oddly distorted when the focus is so narrow, and the concentration of public policy is so strongly on looking after those blessed with opportunity and success. Not only do the educationally advantaged go, as we would expect, to schools, colleges, universities, and distinguished technological institutes (while hundreds of millions of Indian children do not manage to get primary education), but also the educational establishments they go to are, often enough, very fine, in contrast with the low quality of Indian schools and colleges in general.

We can find a nice chain of actions and reactions here. The system makes sure that some young people, out of a huge pool of the young, manage to get privileged education. The picking is done not through any organised attempt to keep anyone out (indeed, far from it), but through differentiations that are driven by economic and social inequality related to class, gender, location, and social privilege. The privileged, to their credit, by and large do very well-they don't waste opportunities. Their well-earned success comes, first, in the educational establishments themselves, and then in the world at large, impressing Indians and foreigners alike. The country then celebrates with abandon the 'nation's triumphs'.

Q. What does the word 'amiable' as used in the passage mean?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

At every level, Indian education is obsessed with the first boys. In the classroom, in society and in the making of public policy.

In each class, the teachers revel in the success of the first boys, and many of these young wonders recollect throughout their lives that they were first boys-no less-in their class. I remember being really struck many years ago when one of the great men India has produced, who was then the Union Minister for Education and would later become the Prime Minister, could still remember-and was able to tell me-the marks he had received in school and college. Even though, I should explain, his marks were excellent (if I am any judge), I was impressed by what could only be described as his immense modesty in remaining so captivated by his student-day grades (similar to those of other brilliant students across the land), even after he had left nearly every Indian behind in the political life of India. No, the 'first boy syndrome' is certainly big in our country, and afflicts even persons of truly exceptional achievement outside the classroom.

For individuals this may, in fact, be no more than an amiable peculiarity which need not distract us from our admiration for the persons involved. But when the first boy syndrome takes over an educational system (as I fear has happened in India), there are reasons to be seriously alarmed. The priorities can get oddly distorted when the focus is so narrow, and the concentration of public policy is so strongly on looking after those blessed with opportunity and success. Not only do the educationally advantaged go, as we would expect, to schools, colleges, universities, and distinguished technological institutes (while hundreds of millions of Indian children do not manage to get primary education), but also the educational establishments they go to are, often enough, very fine, in contrast with the low quality of Indian schools and colleges in general.

We can find a nice chain of actions and reactions here. The system makes sure that some young people, out of a huge pool of the young, manage to get privileged education. The picking is done not through any organised attempt to keep anyone out (indeed, far from it), but through differentiations that are driven by economic and social inequality related to class, gender, location, and social privilege. The privileged, to their credit, by and large do very well-they don't waste opportunities. Their well-earned success comes, first, in the educational establishments themselves, and then in the world at large, impressing Indians and foreigners alike. The country then celebrates with abandon the 'nation's triumphs'.

Q. Which of the following can be rightly inferred from the given passage?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

Between two and three o'clock Thursday morning, 5 April 1781, Calcutta

Hicky woke with a start, and stumbled over to his bedroom window. He peered into the blackness, bleary-eyed and confused. He heard yells and screams from below. "[What is] the cause of so much noise?" he opened his window and yelled.

He saw figures running in the dark. Three men were trying to break into his house. Two were Europeans and had cut open the rope that held his back gate shut with curved knives.

He rushed downstairs. But the men had fled before he made it down. He asked his servants who these people were. They said one was Frederick Charles, the owner of a public house in the city, and Messink's assistant at the theatre. Hicky had bad blood with Charles. When he had practised medicine in his first years in Calcutta, Charles had once refused to pay for a surgery he performed. He had to sue Charles to get his money back. Hicky pondered for a second.

Why would these people break into his house deep in the night? Why would they wish to attack him?

Then, everything came together like pieces of a puzzle. Behind Charles, he saw Messink. And behind Messink, he saw Hastings.

He was convinced it was an assassination attempt. Or, if not, at least a threat to silence him. He feared another attempt on his life, so he hired sepoys to guard his home and told his servants not to let anyone in without his express permission.

The warning might have scared some men, but it made him bold. If it was a warning to silence him, then he would do just the opposite. He was not intimidated. He would fight till every muscle in his body failed him rather than surrender his right to print.

He saw himself as the scourge of tyrants, the defender of free speech, and the protector of the people ... In a place where fundamental rights had been overturned and where the people lived in slavery, he believed [that] someone like him, someone with a free Press, might restore the people's rights and redeem their freedoms.

Q. Why was Hicky confused when he peered out of his bedroom window?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

Between two and three o'clock Thursday morning, 5 April 1781, Calcutta

Hicky woke with a start, and stumbled over to his bedroom window. He peered into the blackness, bleary-eyed and confused. He heard yells and screams from below. "[What is] the cause of so much noise?" he opened his window and yelled.

He saw figures running in the dark. Three men were trying to break into his house. Two were Europeans and had cut open the rope that held his back gate shut with curved knives.

He rushed downstairs. But the men had fled before he made it down. He asked his servants who these people were. They said one was Frederick Charles, the owner of a public house in the city, and Messink's assistant at the theatre. Hicky had bad blood with Charles. When he had practised medicine in his first years in Calcutta, Charles had once refused to pay for a surgery he performed. He had to sue Charles to get his money back. Hicky pondered for a second.

Why would these people break into his house deep in the night? Why would they wish to attack him?

Then, everything came together like pieces of a puzzle. Behind Charles, he saw Messink. And behind Messink, he saw Hastings.

He was convinced it was an assassination attempt. Or, if not, at least a threat to silence him. He feared another attempt on his life, so he hired sepoys to guard his home and told his servants not to let anyone in without his express permission.

The warning might have scared some men, but it made him bold. If it was a warning to silence him, then he would do just the opposite. He was not intimidated. He would fight till every muscle in his body failed him rather than surrender his right to print.

He saw himself as the scourge of tyrants, the defender of free speech, and the protector of the people ... In a place where fundamental rights had been overturned and where the people lived in slavery, he believed [that] someone like him, someone with a free Press, might restore the people's rights and redeem their freedoms.

Q. What does the word 'scourge' as used in the passage mean?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

Between two and three o'clock Thursday morning, 5 April 1781, Calcutta

Hicky woke with a start, and stumbled over to his bedroom window. He peered into the blackness, bleary-eyed and confused. He heard yells and screams from below. "[What is] the cause of so much noise?" he opened his window and yelled.

He saw figures running in the dark. Three men were trying to break into his house. Two were Europeans and had cut open the rope that held his back gate shut with curved knives.

He rushed downstairs. But the men had fled before he made it down. He asked his servants who these people were. They said one was Frederick Charles, the owner of a public house in the city, and Messink's assistant at the theatre. Hicky had bad blood with Charles. When he had practised medicine in his first years in Calcutta, Charles had once refused to pay for a surgery he performed. He had to sue Charles to get his money back. Hicky pondered for a second.

Why would these people break into his house deep in the night? Why would they wish to attack him?

Then, everything came together like pieces of a puzzle. Behind Charles, he saw Messink. And behind Messink, he saw Hastings.

He was convinced it was an assassination attempt. Or, if not, at least a threat to silence him. He feared another attempt on his life, so he hired sepoys to guard his home and told his servants not to let anyone in without his express permission.

The warning might have scared some men, but it made him bold. If it was a warning to silence him, then he would do just the opposite. He was not intimidated. He would fight till every muscle in his body failed him rather than surrender his right to print.

He saw himself as the scourge of tyrants, the defender of free speech, and the protector of the people ... In a place where fundamental rights had been overturned and where the people lived in slavery, he believed [that] someone like him, someone with a free Press, might restore the people's rights and redeem their freedoms.

Q. Why would Hicky initially believe the trio of men would attack him?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.

Between two and three o'clock Thursday morning, 5 April 1781, Calcutta

Hicky woke with a start, and stumbled over to his bedroom window. He peered into the blackness, bleary-eyed and confused. He heard yells and screams from below. "[What is] the cause of so much noise?" he opened his window and yelled.

He saw figures running in the dark. Three men were trying to break into his house. Two were Europeans and had cut open the rope that held his back gate shut with curved knives.

He rushed downstairs. But the men had fled before he made it down. He asked his servants who these people were. They said one was Frederick Charles, the owner of a public house in the city, and Messink's assistant at the theatre. Hicky had bad blood with Charles. When he had practised medicine in his first years in Calcutta, Charles had once refused to pay for a surgery he performed. He had to sue Charles to get his money back. Hicky pondered for a second.

Why would these people break into his house deep in the night? Why would they wish to attack him?

Then, everything came together like pieces of a puzzle. Behind Charles, he saw Messink. And behind Messink, he saw Hastings.

He was convinced it was an assassination attempt. Or, if not, at least a threat to silence him. He feared another attempt on his life, so he hired sepoys to guard his home and told his servants not to let anyone in without his express permission.

The warning might have scared some men, but it made him bold. If it was a warning to silence him, then he would do just the opposite. He was not intimidated. He would fight till every muscle in his body failed him rather than surrender his right to print.

He saw himself as the scourge of tyrants, the defender of free speech, and the protector of the people ... In a place where fundamental rights had been overturned and where the people lived in slavery, he believed [that] someone like him, someone with a free Press, might restore the people's rights and redeem their freedoms.

Q. Based on information from the given passage, what can be inferred about Hastings and the attack?