Test: Reading Comprehensions- 1


15 Questions MCQ Test English Language for SSC CGL | Test: Reading Comprehensions- 1


Description
This mock test of Test: Reading Comprehensions- 1 for Verbal helps you for every Verbal entrance exam. This contains 15 Multiple Choice Questions for Verbal Test: Reading Comprehensions- 1 (mcq) to study with solutions a complete question bank. The solved questions answers in this Test: Reading Comprehensions- 1 quiz give you a good mix of easy questions and tough questions. Verbal students definitely take this Test: Reading Comprehensions- 1 exercise for a better result in the exam. You can find other Test: Reading Comprehensions- 1 extra questions, long questions & short questions for Verbal on EduRev as well by searching above.
QUESTION: 1

Once surrounded and protected by vast wilderness, many of the national parks are adversely affected by activities outside their boundaries. The National Park Organic Act established the national park system and empowered the Secretary of the Interior to manage activities within the parks. Conditions outside park boundaries are not subject to regulation by the Park Service unless they involve the direct use of park resources.

Several approaches to protecting the national parks from external degradation have been proposed, such as one focusing on enacting federal legislation granting the National Park Service broader powers over lands adjacent to the national parks. Legislation addressing external threats to the national parks twice passed the House of Representatives but died without action in the Senate. Also brought to the table as a possible remedy is giving the states bordering the parks a significant and meaningful role in developing federal park management policy.

Because the livelihood of many citizens is linked to the management of national parks, local politicians often encourage state involvement in federal planning. But, state legislatures have not always addressed the fundamental policy issues of whether states should protect park wildlife.

Timber harvesting, ranching and energy exploration compete with wildlife within the local ecosystem. Priorities among different land uses are not generally established by current legislation. Additionally, often no mechanism exists to coordinate planning by the state environmental regulatory agencies. These factors limit the impact of legislation aimed at protecting park wildlife and the larger park ecosystem.

Even if these deficiencies can be overcome, state participation must be consistent with existing federal legislation. States lack jurisdiction within national parks themselves, and therefore state solutions cannot reach activities inside the parks, thus limiting state action to the land adjacent to the national parks. Under the supremacy clause, federal laws and regulations supersede state action if state law conflicts with federal legislation, if Congress precludes local regulation, or if federal regulation is so pervasive that no room remains for state control. Assuming that federal regulations leave open the possibility of state control, state participation in policy making must be harmonized with existing federal legislation.

The residents of states bordering national parks are affected by park management policies. They in turn affect the success of those policies. This interrelationship must be considered in responding to the external threats problem. Local participation is necessary in deciding how to protect park wildlife. Local interests should not, however, dictate national policy, nor should they be used as a pretext to ignore the threats to park regions. 

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q. What is the main purpose of the author in writing the passage? 

Solution:

Mapping the Passage:
Para 1 describes a problem facing national parks: negative effects from the land
surrounding them.
Para 2 describes one approach to dealing with the problem: federal legislation, which
failed.
Para 3 and 4 describe a second approach: giving power to states to cooperate with
adjacent national parks, and describe the problems with it.
Para 5 argues that state participation must be tied to federal regulations.
Para 6 argues that any solution requires a national response with elements of local participation.

If you have mapped the passage correctly you will notice that most of the passage discusses the different approaches that can be taken to solve the problem of degradation of national parks.
C matches best with this.

QUESTION: 2

Once surrounded and protected by vast wilderness, many of the national parks are adversely affected by activities outside their boundaries. The National Park Organic Act established the national park system and empowered the Secretary of the Interior to manage activities within the parks. Conditions outside park boundaries are not subject to regulation by the Park Service unless they involve the direct use of park resources.

Several approaches to protecting the national parks from external degradation have been proposed, such as one focusing on enacting federal legislation granting the National Park Service broader powers over lands adjacent to the national parks. Legislation addressing external threats to the national parks twice passed the House of Representatives but died without action in the Senate. Also brought to the table as a possible remedy is giving the states bordering the parks a significant and meaningful role in developing federal park management policy.

Because the livelihood of many citizens is linked to the management of national parks, local politicians often encourage state involvement in federal planning. But, state legislatures have not always addressed the fundamental policy issues of whether states should protect park wildlife.

Timber harvesting, ranching and energy exploration compete with wildlife within the local ecosystem. Priorities among different land uses are not generally established by current legislation. Additionally, often no mechanism exists to coordinate planning by the state environmental regulatory agencies. These factors limit the impact of legislation aimed at protecting park wildlife and the larger park ecosystem.

Even if these deficiencies can be overcome, state participation must be consistent with existing federal legislation. States lack jurisdiction within national parks themselves, and therefore state solutions cannot reach activities inside the parks, thus limiting state action to the land adjacent to the national parks. Under the supremacy clause, federal laws and regulations supersede state action if state law conflicts with federal legislation, if Congress precludes local regulation, or if federal regulation is so pervasive that no room remains for state control. Assuming that federal regulations leave open the possibility of state control, state participation in policy making must be harmonized with existing federal legislation.

The residents of states bordering national parks are affected by park management policies. They in turn affect the success of those policies. This interrelationship must be considered in responding to the external threats problem. Local participation is necessary in deciding how to protect park wildlife. Local interests should not, however, dictate national policy, nor should they be used as a pretext to ignore the threats to park regions.

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q.The passage provides support for which of the following assertions? 

Solution:

Mapping the Passage:
Para 1 describes a problem facing national parks: negative effects from the land surrounding them.
Para 2 describes one approach to dealing with the problem: federal legislation, which failed.
Para 3 and 4 describe a second approach: giving power to states to cooperate with adjacent national parks, and describe the problems with it.
Para 5 argues that state participation must be tied to federal regulations.
Para 6 argues that any solution requires a national response with elements of local participation.

An Inference question, this one requires students to find that one option which can logically follow from the information in the passage without making any extreme asumptions. Only (C) has support in the passage. The claim is originally made in lines 17-20, and  4 and 5 offer support.

QUESTION: 3

Once surrounded and protected by vast wilderness, many of the national parks are adversely affected by activities outside their boundaries. The National Park Organic Act established the national park system and empowered the Secretary of the Interior to manage activities within the parks. Conditions outside park boundaries are not subject to regulation by the Park Service unless they involve the direct use of park resources.

Several approaches to protecting the national parks from external degradation have been proposed, such as one focusing on enacting federal legislation granting the National Park Service broader powers over lands adjacent to the national parks. Legislation addressing external threats to the national parks twice passed the House of Representatives but died without action in the Senate. Also brought to the table as a possible remedy is giving the states bordering the parks a significant and meaningful role in developing federal park management policy.

Because the livelihood of many citizens is linked to the management of national parks, local politicians often encourage state involvement in federal planning. But, state legislatures have not always addressed the fundamental policy issues of whether states should protect park wildlife.

Timber harvesting, ranching and energy exploration compete with wildlife within the local ecosystem. Priorities among different land uses are not generally established by current legislation. Additionally, often no mechanism exists to coordinate planning by the state environmental regulatory agencies. These factors limit the impact of legislation aimed at protecting park wildlife and the larger park ecosystem.

Even if these deficiencies can be overcome, state participation must be consistent with existing federal legislation. States lack jurisdiction within national parks themselves, and therefore state solutions cannot reach activities inside the parks, thus limiting state action to the land adjacent to the national parks. Under the supremacy clause, federal laws and regulations supersede state action if state law conflicts with federal legislation, if Congress precludes local regulation, or if federal regulation is so pervasive that no room remains for state control. Assuming that federal regulations leave open the possibility of state control, state participation in policy making must be harmonized with existing federal legislation.

The residents of states bordering national parks are affected by park management policies. They in turn affect the success of those policies. This interrelationship must be considered in responding to the external threats problem. Local participation is necessary in deciding how to protect park wildlife. Local interests should not, however, dictate national policy, nor should they be used as a pretext to ignore the threats to park regions. 

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions:
In the context of the passage, the phrase external degradation (lines 8-9) refers to which of the following:  

Solution:

Mapping the Passage:
Para 1 describes a problem facing national parks: negative effects from the land surrounding them.
Para 2 describes one approach to dealing with the problem: federal legislation, which failed.
Para 3 and 4 describe a second approach: giving power to states to cooperate with adjacent national parks, and describe the problems with it.
Para 5 argues that state participation must be tied to federal regulations.
Para 6 argues that any solution requires a national response with elements of local participation.

Go back to the lines before and after the phrase to judge its meaning in context. The phrase refers back to the damage mentioned in Para 1, and is expanded on in the lines below. The author believes that the damage outside park boundaries is supported by state governments, as is argued in Para 3 and 4. (B) summarizes the
nature of the ―external degradation.

QUESTION: 4

Once surrounded and protected by vast wilderness, many of the national parks are adversely affected by activities outside their boundaries. The National Park Organic Act established the national park system and empowered the Secretary of the Interior to manage activities within the parks. Conditions outside park boundaries are not subject to regulation by the Park Service unless they involve the direct use of park resources.

Several approaches to protecting the national parks from external degradation have been proposed, such as one focusing on enacting federal legislation granting the National Park Service broader powers over lands adjacent to the national parks. Legislation addressing external threats to the national parks twice passed the House of Representatives but died without action in the Senate. Also brought to the table as a possible remedy is giving the states bordering the parks a significant and meaningful role in developing federal park management policy.

Because the livelihood of many citizens is linked to the management of national parks, local politicians often encourage state involvement in federal planning. But, state legislatures have not always addressed the fundamental policy issues of whether states should protect park wildlife.

Timber harvesting, ranching and energy exploration compete with wildlife within the local ecosystem. Priorities among different land uses are not generally established by current legislation. Additionally, often no mechanism exists to coordinate planning by the state environmental regulatory agencies. These factors limit the impact of legislation aimed at protecting park wildlife and the larger park ecosystem.

Even if these deficiencies can be overcome, state participation must be consistent with existing federal legislation. States lack jurisdiction within national parks themselves, and therefore state solutions cannot reach activities inside the parks, thus limiting state action to the land adjacent to the national parks. Under the supremacy clause, federal laws and regulations supersede state action if state law conflicts with federal legislation, if Congress precludes local regulation, or if federal regulation is so pervasive that no room remains for state control. Assuming that federal regulations leave open the possibility of state control, state participation in policy making must be harmonized with existing federal legislation.

The residents of states bordering national parks are affected by park management policies. They in turn affect the success of those policies. This interrelationship must be considered in responding to the external threats problem. Local participation is necessary in deciding how to protect park wildlife. Local interests should not, however, dictate national policy, nor should they be used as a pretext to ignore the threats to park regions. 

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q. According to the passage, which of the following developments is most likely if environmental cooperation between the federal government and state governments does not improve? 

Solution:

Mapping the Passage:
Para 1 describes a problem facing national parks: negative effects from the land
surrounding them.
Para 2 describes one approach to dealing with the problem: federal legislation, which failed.
Para 3 and 4 describe a second approach: giving power to states to cooperate with
adjacent national parks, and describe the problems with it.
Para 5 argues that state participation must be tied to federal regulations.
Para 6 argues that any solution requires a national response with elements of local participation.

According to the passage, start to the question tips you off to look for a dnesetail within the passage. Where is the scenario in the question mentioned? Go to the last paragraph, which discusses a combination of national and local responses. It argues that this cooperation is necessary in order to ―protect park wildlife.If this cooperation doesn‘t occur then, wildlife would presumably be harmed.
(D) rewards the careful reading.

QUESTION: 5

Henry Varnum Poor, editor of American Railroad Journal, drew the important elements of the image of the railroad together in 1851, ―Look at the results of this material progress, the vigor, life, and executive energy that followed in its train, rapidly succeeded by wealth, the refinement and intellectual culture of a high civilization. All this is typified, in a degree, by a locomotive. The combination in its construction of nice art and scientific application of power, its speed surpassing that of our proudest courser, and its immense strength, are all characteristic of our age and tendencies. To us, like the telegraph, it is essential, it constitutes a part of our nature, is a condition of our being what we are.

In the third decade of the nineteenth century, Americans began to define their character in light of the new railroads. They liked the idea that it took special people to foresee and capitalize on the promise of science. Railroad promoters, using the steam engine as a metaphor for what they thought Americans were and what they thought Americans were becoming, frequently discussed parallels between the locomotive and national character, pointing out that both possessed youth, power, speed, single-mindedness, and bright prospects.

Poor was, of course, promoting acceptance of railroads and enticing his readers to open their pocketbooks. But his metaphors had their dark side. A locomotive was quite unlike anything Americans had ever seen. It was large, mysterious and dangerous; many thought that it was a monster waiting to devour the unwary. There was a suspicion that a country founded upon Jeffersonian agrarian principles had bought a ticket and boarded a train pulled by some iron monster into the dark recesses of an unknown future.

To ease such public apprehensions, promoters, poets, editors, and writers alike adopted the notion that locomotives were really only ―iron horses, an early metaphor that lingered because it made steam technology ordinary and understandable. Iron horse metaphors assuaged fears about inherent defects in the national character, prompting images of a more secure future, and made an alien technology less frightening, and even comforting and congenial.

Essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson saw the locomotive as an agent of domestic harmony. He observed that ―the locomotive and the steamboat, like enormous shuttles, shoot every day across the thousand various threads of national descent and employment and bind them fast in one web, adding ―an hourly assimilation goes forward, and there is no danger that local peculiarities and hostilities should be preserved. To us Americans, it seems to have fallen as a political aid. We could not else have held the vast North America together, which we now engage to do.

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q.  Which of the following claims would the author of the passage most agree with? 

Solution:

Mapping of Paragraph

Para 1 describes the opinions of one railroad promoter (Poor), who tied the railroad to the progressive nature of American character.
Para 2 describes the American idea of the time that the railroad reflected elements of American character.
Para 3 and 4 discuss the fears associated with the railroad and the metaphors presented to counter them.
Para 5 describes the way that Americans were won over to the railroad by these metaphors (Emerson).

The question stem gives you a big hint—take the statement "at face value" and "objectively." Don't over think! The passage itself is straightforward, so review the author‘s main gist: the railroad reflected American character at the time, and despite a few misgivings, American were generally on board. While three answer choices don‘t fit with what the author argues, (E) fits and is supported extensively
in the last paragraph.

QUESTION: 6

Henry Varnum Poor, editor of American Railroad Journal, drew the important elements of the image of the railroad together in 1851, ―Look at the results of this material progress, the vigor, life, and executive energy that followed in its train, rapidly succeeded by wealth, the refinement and intellectual culture of a high civilization. All this is typified, in a degree, by a locomotive. The combination in its construction of nice art and scientific application of power, its speed surpassing that of our proudest courser, and its immense strength, are all characteristic of our age and tendencies. To us, like the telegraph, it is essential, it constitutes a part of our nature, is a condition of our being what we are.

In the third decade of the nineteenth century, Americans began to define their character in light of the new railroads. They liked the idea that it took special people to foresee and capitalize on the promise of science. Railroad promoters, using the steam engine as a metaphor for what they thought Americans were and what they thought Americans were becoming, frequently discussed parallels between the locomotive and national character, pointing out that both possessed youth, power, speed, single-mindedness, and bright prospects.

Poor was, of course, promoting acceptance of railroads and enticing his readers to open their pocketbooks. But his metaphors had their dark side. A locomotive was quite unlike anything Americans had ever seen. It was large, mysterious and dangerous; many thought that it was a monster waiting to devour the unwary. There was a suspicion that a country founded upon Jeffersonian agrarian principles had bought a ticket and boarded a train pulled by some iron monster into the dark recesses of an unknown future.

To ease such public apprehensions, promoters, poets, editors, and writers alike adopted the notion that locomotives were really only ―iron horses,‖ an early metaphor that lingered because it made steam technology ordinary and understandable. Iron horse metaphors assuaged fears about inherent defects in the national character, prompting images of a more secure future, and made an alien technology less frightening, and even comforting and congenial.

Essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson saw the locomotive as an agent of domestic harmony. He observed that ―the locomotive and the steamboat, like enormous shuttles, shoot every day across the thousand various threads of national descent and employment and bind them fast in one web, "adding ―an hourly assimilation goes forward, and there is no danger that local peculiarities and hostilities should be preserved. To us Americans, it seems to have fallen as a political aid. We could not else have held the vast North America together, which we now engage to do"

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q. The passage is primarily concerned with which of the following? 

Solution:

Mapping the Passage:
Para 1 describes the opinions of one railroad promoter (Poor), who tied the railroad to the progressive nature of American character.
Para 2 describes the American idea of the time that the railroad reflected elements of American character.
Para 3 and 4 discuss the fears associated with the railroad and the metaphors presented to counter them.
Para 5 describes the way that Americans were won over to the railroad by these metaphors (Emerson)

The passage broadly describes the early years of the railroad and its impact on the American character at that time. B fits in very nicely with this.

QUESTION: 7

Henry Varnum Poor, editor of American Railroad Journal, drew the important elements of the image of the railroad together in 1851, ―Look at the results of this material progress, the vigor, life, and executive energy that followed in its train, rapidly succeeded by wealth, the refinement and intellectual culture of a high civilization. All this is typified, in a degree, by a locomotive. The combination in its construction of nice art and scientific application of power, its speed surpassing that of our proudest courser, and its immense strength, are all characteristic of our age and tendencies. To us, like the telegraph, it is essential, it constitutes a part of our nature, is a condition of our being what we are.

In the third decade of the nineteenth century, Americans began to define their character in light of the new railroads. They liked the idea that it took special people to foresee and capitalize on the promise of science. Railroad promoters, using the steam engine as a metaphor for what they thought Americans were and what they thought Americans were becoming, frequently discussed parallels between the locomotive and national character, pointing out that both possessed youth, power, speed, single-mindedness, and bright prospects.

Poor was, of course, promoting acceptance of railroads and enticing his readers to open their pocketbooks. But his metaphors had their dark side. A locomotive was quite unlike anything Americans had ever seen. It was large, mysterious and dangerous; many thought that it was a monster waiting to devour the unwary. There was a suspicion that a country founded upon Jeffersonian agrarian principles had bought a ticket and boarded a train pulled by some iron monster into the dark recesses of an unknown future.

To ease such public apprehensions, promoters, poets, editors, and writers alike adopted the notion that locomotives were really only ―iron horses,‖ an early metaphor that lingered because it made steam technology ordinary and understandable. Iron horse metaphors assuaged fears about inherent defects in the national character, prompting images of a more secure future, and made an alien technology less frightening, and even comforting and congenial.

Essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson saw the locomotive as an agent of domestic harmony. He observed that ―the locomotive and the steamboat, like enormous shuttles, shoot every day across the thousand various threads of national descent and employment and bind them fast in one web,"adding ―an hourly assimilation goes forward, and there is no danger that local peculiarities and hostilities should be preserved. To us Americans, it seems to have fallen as a political aid. We could not else have held the vast North America together, which we now engage to do."

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q.  According to the passage, which of the following is most likely to be true about Ralph Waldo Emerson‘s beliefs? 

Solution:

Mapping the Passage:
Para 1 describes the opinions of one railroad promoter (Poor), who tied the railroad to the progressive nature of American character.
Para 2 describes the American idea of the time that the railroad reflected elements of American character.
Para 3 and 4 discuss the fears associated with the railroad and the metaphors presented to counter them.
Para 5 describes the way that Americans were won over to the railroad by these metaphors (Emerson).

Where is Emerson mentioned? Review the last paragraph: Emerson thought that the locomotive kept the nation together. Look for an answer choice that ties into this unity: (C) does just that.

QUESTION: 8

Henry Varnum Poor, editor of American Railroad Journal, drew the important elements of the image of the railroad together in 1851, ―Look at the results of this material progress, the vigor, life, and executive energy that followed in its train, rapidly succeeded by wealth, the refinement and intellectual culture of a high civilization. All this is typified, in a degree, by a locomotive. The combination in its construction of nice art and scientific application of power, its speed surpassing that of our proudest courser, and its immense strength, are all characteristic of our age and tendencies. To us, like the telegraph, it is essential, it constitutes a part of our nature, is a condition of our being what we are.

In the third decade of the nineteenth century, Americans began to define their character in light of the new railroads. They liked the idea that it took special people to foresee and capitalize on the promise of science. Railroad promoters, using the steam engine as a metaphor for what they thought Americans were and what they thought Americans were becoming, frequently discussed parallels between the locomotive and national character, pointing out that both possessed youth, power, speed, single-mindedness, and bright prospects.

Poor was, of course, promoting acceptance of railroads and enticing his readers to open their pocketbooks. But his metaphors had their dark side. A locomotive was quite unlike anything Americans had ever seen. It was large, mysterious and dangerous; many thought that it was a monster waiting to devour the unwary. There was a suspicion that a country founded upon Jeffersonian agrarian principles had bought a ticket and boarded a train pulled by some iron monster into the dark recesses of an unknown future.

To ease such public apprehensions, promoters, poets, editors, and writers alike adopted the notion that locomotives were really only ―iron horses,‖ an early metaphor that lingered because it made steam technology ordinary and understandable. Iron horse metaphors assuaged fears about inherent defects in the national character, prompting images of a more secure future, and made an alien technology less frightening, and even comforting and congenial.

Essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson saw the locomotive as an agent of domestic harmony. He observed that ―the locomotive and the steamboat, like enormous shuttles, shoot every day across the thousand various threads of national descent and employment and bind them fast in one web,"adding ―an hourly assimilation goes forward, and there is no danger that local peculiarities and hostilities should be preserved. To us Americans, it seems to have fallen as a political aid. We could not else have held the vast North America together, which we now engage to do."

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q. Suppose that an early nineteenth-century American inventor had developed a device that made it easier to construct multi-story building. How would early nineteenth-century Americans be expected to react to this invention?  

Solution:

Mapping the Passage:
Para 1 describes the opinions of one railroad promoter (Poor), who tied the railroad to the progressive nature of American character.
Para 2 describes the American idea of the time that the railroad reflected elements of American character.
Para 3 and 4 discuss the fears associated with the railroad and the metaphors presented to counter them.
Para 5 describes the way that Americans were won over to the railroad by these metaphors (Emerson).

The new situation involves scientific progress much like the railroad, what does the author say about Americans‘ ideas about this? Go back to 2: the author argues that Americans had a special fondness for science and progress. Therefore, they‘d endorse something that furthered these goals. (B) fits.

QUESTION: 9

Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and all government secrets, the media‘s distrust of our government, combined with their limited understanding of the world at large, damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the media rarely imagine.

The leak through which sensitive information flows from the government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their minds.

Must we be content with the restriction of our leaders‘ policy discussions to a handful of people who trust each other, thus limiting the richness and variety of ideas that could be brought forward through a larger group because of the nearly endemic nature of this problem? It is vitally important for the leaders of the United States to know the real state of affairs internationally, and this can occur only if foreign leaders feel free to speak their minds to our diplomats.

Until recently, it looked as if the media had convinced the public that journalists were more reliable than the government; however, this may be changing. With the passage of time, the media have lost lustre. They—having grown large and powerful—provoke the same public skepticism that other large institutions in the society do. A series of media scandals has contributed to this. Many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government, and public opinion surveys reflect much ambivalence about the press.

While leaks are generally defended by media officials on the grounds of the public‘s ―right to know,in reality they are part of the Washington political power game, as well as part of the policy process. The "leaker" may be currying favour with the media, or may be planting information to influence policy. In the first case, he is helping himself by enhancing the prestige of a journalist; in the second, he is using the media as a stage for his preferred policies. In either instance, it closes the circle: the leak begins with a political motive, is advanced by a politicized media, and continues because of politics. Although some of the journalists think they are doing the work, they are more often than not instruments of the process, not prime movers. The media must be held accountable for their activities, just like every other significant institution in our society, and the media must be forced to earn the public‘s trust.

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q. Based on the information in the passage, with which of the following statements would the author most likely agree? 

Solution:

Mapping the Passage
Para 1 argues that the media‘s suspicion of government and lack of knowledge about the world harm government policy.
Para 2 and 3 introduce the concept of the ―leak and explain why it‘s bad for foreign policy.
Para 4 states that the media was trusted by the public until recently, but are now met with skepticism.
Para 5 argues that leaks are usually part of a power grab and that the media is a pawn in the game.

Review the author‘s main arguments before looking for an answer choice that he‘s agree with. (A) recalls the author‘s point in Para 2: ―Leaders often say one thing in public and something quite different in public conversation. The author explains why this occurs—fear of media leaks—and clearly opposes such leaks. Therefore, the author must agree with (A)‘s contention that misinformation is sometimes warranted.

QUESTION: 10

Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and all government secrets, the media‘s distrust of our government, combined with their limited understanding of the world at large, damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the media rarely imagine.

The leak through which sensitive information flows from the government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their minds.

Must we be content with the restriction of our leaders‘ policy discussions to a handful of people who trust each other, thus limiting the richness and variety of ideas that could be brought forward through a larger group because of the nearly endemic nature of this problem? It is vitally important for the leaders of the United States to know the real state of affairs internationally, and this can occur only if foreign leaders feel free to speak their minds to our diplomats.

Until recently, it looked as if the media had convinced the public that journalists were more reliable than the government; however, this may be changing. With the passage of time, the media have lost lustre. They—having grown large and powerful—provoke the same public skepticism that other large institutions in the society do. A series of media scandals has contributed to this. Many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government, and public opinion surveys reflect much ambivalence about the press.

While leaks are generally defended by media officials on the grounds of the public‘s ―right to know, in reality they are part of the Washington political power game, as well as part of the policy process. The "leaker" may be currying favour with the media, or may be planting information to influence policy. In the first case, he is helping himself by enhancing the prestige of a journalist; in the second, he is using the media as a stage for his preferred policies. In either instance, it closes the circle: the leak begins with a political motive, is advanced by a politicized media, and continues because of politics. Although some of the journalists think they are doing the work, they are more often than not instruments of the process, not prime movers. The media must be held accountable for their activities, just like every other significant institution in our society, and the media must be forced to earn the public‘s trust. 

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q. Implicit in the author‘s argument that leaks result in far more limited and unreliable policy discussions with foreign leaders is the idea that:  

Solution:

Mapping the Passage
Para 1 argues that the media‘s suspicion of government and lack of knowledge about the world harm government policy.
Para 2 and 3 introduce the concept of the ―leak and explain why it‘s bad for foreign policy.
Para 4 states that the media was trusted by the public until recently, but are now met with skepticism.
Para 5 argues that leaks are usually part of a power grab and that the media is a pawn in the game.

This question requires students to find the assumption in the lines mentioned. Review the author‘s argument in 2 Para that leaks harm discussions with foreign leaders. What is the author assuming in this argument? The author argues that foreign leaders don‘t want their private thoughts to be made public, he must also therefore assume that leaders have some sort of reason for not wanting their views to be made public. (D) provides a possible reason. If unclear, use the denial test: if leaders didn‘t have this fear, what would be their motivation for hiding their personal views?

QUESTION: 11

Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and all government secrets, the media‘s distrust of our government, combined with their limited understanding of the world at large, damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the media rarely imagine.

The leak through which sensitive information flows from the government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their minds.

Must we be content with the restriction of our leaders‘ policy discussions to a handful of people who trust each other, thus limiting the richness and variety of ideas that could be brought forward through a larger group because of the nearly endemic nature of this problem? It is vitally important for the leaders of the United States to know the real state of affairs internationally, and this can occur only if foreign leaders feel free to speak their minds to our diplomats.

Until recently, it looked as if the media had convinced the public that journalists were more reliable than the government; however, this may be changing. With the passage of time, the media have lost lustre. They—having grown large and powerful—provoke the same public skepticism that other large institutions in the society do. A series of media scandals has contributed to this. Many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government, and public opinion surveys reflect much ambivalence about the press.

While leaks are generally defended by media officials on the grounds of the public‘s ―right to know, in reality they are part of the Washington political power game, as well as part of the policy process. The "leaker" may be currying favour with the media, or may be planting information to influence policy. In the first case, he is helping himself by enhancing the prestige of a journalist; in the second, he is using the media as a stage for his preferred policies. In either instance, it closes the circle: the leak begins with a political motive, is advanced by a politicized media, and continues because of politics. Although some of the journalists think they are doing the work, they are more often than not instruments of the process, not prime movers. The media must be held accountable for their activities, just like every other significant institution in our society, and the media must be forced to earn the public‘s trust. 

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q. What is the main idea of the passage?  

Solution:

Mapping the Passage
Para 1 argues that the media‘s suspicion of government and lack of knowledge about the world harm government policy.
Para 2 and 3 introduce the concept of the ―leak and explain why it‘s bad for foreign policy.
Para 4 states that the media was trusted by the public until recently, but are now met with skepticism.
Para 5 argues that leaks are usually part of a power grab and that the media is a pawn in the game.

C is the most consistent with our passage summary above.

QUESTION: 12

Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and all government secrets, the media‘s distrust of our government, combined with their limited understanding of the world at large, damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the media rarely imagine.

The leak through which sensitive information flows from the government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their minds.

Must we be content with the restriction of our leaders‘ policy discussions to a handful of people who trust each other, thus limiting the richness and variety of ideas that could be brought forward through a larger group because of the nearly endemic nature of this problem? It is vitally important for the leaders of the United States to know the real state of affairs internationally, and this can occur only if foreign leaders feel free to speak their minds to our diplomats.

Until recently, it looked as if the media had convinced the public that journalists were more reliable than the government; however, this may be changing. With the passage of time, the media have lost lustre. They—having grown large and powerful—provoke the same public skepticism that other large institutions in the society do. A series of media scandals has contributed to this. Many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government, and public opinion surveys reflect much ambivalence about the press.

While leaks are generally defended by media officials on the grounds of the public‘s ―right to know, in reality they are part of the Washington political power game, as well as part of the policy process. The "leaker" may be currying favour with the media, or maybe planting information to influence policy. In the first case, he is helping himself by enhancing the prestige of a journalist; in the second, he is using the media as a stage for his preferred policies. In either instance, it closes the circle: the leak begins with a political motive, is advanced by a politicized media, and continues because of politics. Although some of the journalists think they are doing the work, they are more often than not instruments of the process, not prime movers. The media must be held accountable for their activities, just like every other significant institution in our society, and the media must be forced to earn the public‘s trust. 

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q. Based on the passage, when the media now challenge the actions of a public official, the public assumes that:  

Solution:

Mapping the Passage
Para 1 argues that the media‘s suspicion of government and lack of knowledge about the world harm government policy.
Para 2 and 3 introduce the concept of the ―leak and explain why it‘s bad for foreign policy.
Para 4 states that the media was trusted by the public until recently, but are now met with skepticism.
Para 5 argues that leaks are usually part of a power grab and that the media is a pawn in the game.

Go back to Para 4 to review what the public thinks of the media. The author argues that the public is equally skeptical of media and government, saying that in the past, the public always assumed the media was right when it challenged the government, but that ―this may be changing.Therefore, the public might now consider the possibility that the media, rather than the government, is wrong.
While the wrong answer choices distort this, (C) rewards careful and methodical thought.

QUESTION: 13

In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980s.

The first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits.

Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace.

These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies. Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a product‘s total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers‘ wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.

The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products. Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods.

American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach.  The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quick to exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities.

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q. The passage suggests that compared to Japanese workers, American workers are often considered:  

Solution:

Mapping the Passage
Para 1 outlines the decline of American business.
Para 2 and 3 list reasons that analysts have given for the decline and introduce the author‘s own theory for American business problems: incompetent management.
Para 4 lists management‘s problems with labour.
Para 5 explains the problem with America's fixation on high-tech products.
Para 6 uses mergers to show that corporations lack long-range planning.

A quick scan of the answer choices shows that you have to compare the workers of the two nations on two criteria: contentedness and efficiency. Search for a part of the passage that touches on this. Para 3 is the only one that cites Japan, and mentions that analysts consider American workers less productive and less content. (C) it is.

QUESTION: 14

In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980s.

The first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits.

Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace.

These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies. Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a product‘s total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers‘ wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.

The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products. Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods. American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach.

The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quick to exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities. 

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q. With which of the following general statements would the author most likely NOT agree?

Solution:

Mapping the Passage
Para 1 outlines the decline of American business.
Para 2 and 3 list reasons that analysts have given for the decline and introduce the author‘s own theory for American business problems: incompetent management.
Para 4 lists management‘s problems with labour.
Para 5 explains the problem with America's fixation on high-tech products.
Para 6 uses mergers to show that corporations lack long-range planning.

An inference question; make sure that you‘re clear on the main points of the author‘s argument. Remember that the author will agree with four, but will disagree with the correct answer. The three wrong answers could be easily eliminated, leading to (B). However, you can also reason that since management has suffered by cutting labour costs, cost-cutting doesn‘t always result in lowered prices.

QUESTION: 15

In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980s.

The first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits.

Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace.

These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies. Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a product‘s total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers‘ wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.

The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products. Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods. American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach.

The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quick to exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities.

Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions
Q.  Which of the following would most weaken the author‘s argument about the over-concentration on high technology products?  

Solution:

Mapping the Passage
Para 1 outlines the decline of American business
Para 2 and 3 list reasons that analysts have given for the decline and introduce the author‘s own theory for American business problems: incompetent management.
Para 4 lists management‘s problems with labour.
Para 5 explains the problem with America's fixation on high-tech products.
Para 6 uses mergers to show that corporations lack long-range planning.

Paraphrase the author‘s argument about high technology: it‘s better to start out with low-tech, get experience, and then ramp up to high-tech. Search the answer choices for something that would contradict this. (B) clearly does, if the processes are completely different, why start with low-tech.

Similar Content

Related tests