Directions: Passage For Question 1 to 9 Recent years have presented both opportunities and risks for minority-owned businesses in the United States. Activists have long argued that the lack of access to substantial contracts and subcontracts from large companies hinders the establishment of minority businesses. In response to this concern, Congress has mandated that businesses awarded federal contracts over $500,000 make an effort to find minority subcontractors and document their efforts with the government. Some federal and local agencies have even set specific percentage goals for allocating parts of public works contracts to minority enterprises. Corporate response to these initiatives has been significant, with corporate contracts with minority businesses increasing from $77 million to $1.1 billion in 1977. Projections indicate that corporate contracts with minority businesses will surpass $3 billion per year in the early 1980s. While this patronage is promising for minority businesses, it also poses risks. Firstly, small minority firms may risk expanding too quickly and becoming financially overextended. Unlike large businesses, they often need to make substantial investments in infrastructure and staff to fulfill subcontracted work, making them vulnerable to reduced subcontracts and crippling fixed expenses. Secondly, white-owned companies may seek to capitalize on the increased apportionments by forming joint ventures with minority-owned businesses. While legitimate joint ventures can be formed, there is a risk of white backers using minority-owned concerns as fronts to obtain subcontracts. Thirdly, minority enterprises that rely heavily on a single large corporate customer run the danger of becoming dependent. Fierce competition from larger, established companies makes it challenging for small businesses to broaden their customer bases. When these firms have guaranteed orders from a single benefactor, they may become complacent and struggle to seek new opportunities. Q. The primary purpose of the passage is to

present a commonplace idea and its inaccuracies

describe a situation and its potential drawbacks

propose a temporary solution to a problem

analyze a frequent source to a problem

explore the implications of a findings.

Directions: Passage For Question 1 to 9 Recent years have presented both opportunities and risks for minority-owned businesses in the United States. Activists have long argued that the lack of access to substantial contracts and subcontracts from large companies hinders the establishment of minority businesses. In response to this concern, Congress has mandated that businesses awarded federal contracts over $500,000 make an effort to find minority subcontractors and document their efforts with the government. Some federal and local agencies have even set specific percentage goals for allocating parts of public works contracts to minority enterprises. Corporate response to these initiatives has been significant, with corporate contracts with minority businesses increasing from $77 million to $1.1 billion in 1977. Projections indicate that corporate contracts with minority businesses will surpass $3 billion per year in the early 1980s. While this patronage is promising for minority businesses, it also poses risks. Firstly, small minority firms may risk expanding too quickly and becoming financially overextended. Unlike large businesses, they often need to make substantial investments in infrastructure and staff to fulfill subcontracted work, making them vulnerable to reduced subcontracts and crippling fixed expenses. Secondly, white-owned companies may seek to capitalize on the increased apportionments by forming joint ventures with minority-owned businesses. While legitimate joint ventures can be formed, there is a risk of white backers using minority-owned concerns as fronts to obtain subcontracts. Thirdly, minority enterprises that rely heavily on a single large corporate customer run the danger of becoming dependent. Fierce competition from larger, established companies makes it challenging for small businesses to broaden their customer bases. When these firms have guaranteed orders from a single benefactor, they may become complacent and struggle to seek new opportunities. Q. The passage supplies information that would answer which of the following questions?

What federal agencies have set percentage goals for the use of minority owned businesses inpublic works contracts?

To which governments agencies must businesses awarded federal contracts report theirefforts to find minority subcontractors?

How widespread is the use of minority-owned concerns as "fronts; by White backers seekingto obtain subcontracts?

How many more minority owned businesses were there in 1977 than in 1972?

What is one set of conditions under which a small business might find itself financiallyoverextended?

Directions: Passage For Question 1 to 9 Recent years have presented both opportunities and risks for minority-owned businesses in the United States. Activists have long argued that the lack of access to substantial contracts and subcontracts from large companies hinders the establishment of minority businesses. In response to this concern, Congress has mandated that businesses awarded federal contracts over $500,000 make an effort to find minority subcontractors and document their efforts with the government. Some federal and local agencies have even set specific percentage goals for allocating parts of public works contracts to minority enterprises. Corporate response to these initiatives has been significant, with corporate contracts with minority businesses increasing from $77 million to $1.1 billion in 1977. Projections indicate that corporate contracts with minority businesses will surpass $3 billion per year in the early 1980s. While this patronage is promising for minority businesses, it also poses risks. Firstly, small minority firms may risk expanding too quickly and becoming financially overextended. Unlike large businesses, they often need to make substantial investments in infrastructure and staff to fulfill subcontracted work, making them vulnerable to reduced subcontracts and crippling fixed expenses. Secondly, white-owned companies may seek to capitalize on the increased apportionments by forming joint ventures with minority-owned businesses. While legitimate joint ventures can be formed, there is a risk of white backers using minority-owned concerns as fronts to obtain subcontracts. Thirdly, minority enterprises that rely heavily on a single large corporate customer run the danger of becoming dependent. Fierce competition from larger, established companies makes it challenging for small businesses to broaden their customer bases. When these firms have guaranteed orders from a single benefactor, they may become complacent and struggle to seek new opportunities. Q. The author would most likely agree with which of the following statements about corporateresponse to working with minority subcontractors?

Annoyed by the proliferations of "front" organizations, corporates are likely to reduce theirefforts to work with minority owned subcontractors in the near future.

Although corporations showed considerable interest in working with minority businesses inthe 1970's their aversion to government paperwork made them reluctant to pursue manygovernment contracts.

The significant response of corporation in the 1970's is likely to be sustained and conceivablybe increased throughout the 1980's

Although corporations re eager to co-operate with minority owned businesses, a shortage ofcapital in the 1970's made substantial response impossible.

The enormous corporate response has all but eliminated the dangers of over expansion thatused to plague small minority owned businesses.

Directions: Passage For Question 1 to 9 Recent years have presented both opportunities and risks for minority-owned businesses in the United States. Activists have long argued that the lack of access to substantial contracts and subcontracts from large companies hinders the establishment of minority businesses. In response to this concern, Congress has mandated that businesses awarded federal contracts over $500,000 make an effort to find minority subcontractors and document their efforts with the government. Some federal and local agencies have even set specific percentage goals for allocating parts of public works contracts to minority enterprises. Corporate response to these initiatives has been significant, with corporate contracts with minority businesses increasing from $77 million to $1.1 billion in 1977. Projections indicate that corporate contracts with minority businesses will surpass $3 billion per year in the early 1980s. While this patronage is promising for minority businesses, it also poses risks. Firstly, small minority firms may risk expanding too quickly and becoming financially overextended. Unlike large businesses, they often need to make substantial investments in infrastructure and staff to fulfill subcontracted work, making them vulnerable to reduced subcontracts and crippling fixed expenses. Secondly, white-owned companies may seek to capitalize on the increased apportionments by forming joint ventures with minority-owned businesses. While legitimate joint ventures can be formed, there is a risk of white backers using minority-owned concerns as fronts to obtain subcontracts. Thirdly, minority enterprises that rely heavily on a single large corporate customer run the danger of becoming dependent. Fierce competition from larger, established companies makes it challenging for small businesses to broaden their customer bases. When these firms have guaranteed orders from a single benefactor, they may become complacent and struggle to seek new opportunities. Q. The passage most likely appeared in

an encyclopedia of black history to 1945

a dictionary of financial terms

a yearbook of business statistics

Directions: Passage For Question 1 to 9 Recent years have presented both opportunities and risks for minority-owned businesses in the United States. Activists have long argued that the lack of access to substantial contracts and subcontracts from large companies hinders the establishment of minority businesses. In response to this concern, Congress has mandated that businesses awarded federal contracts over $500,000 make an effort to find minority subcontractors and document their efforts with the government. Some federal and local agencies have even set specific percentage goals for allocating parts of public works contracts to minority enterprises. Corporate response to these initiatives has been significant, with corporate contracts with minority businesses increasing from $77 million to $1.1 billion in 1977. Projections indicate that corporate contracts with minority businesses will surpass $3 billion per year in the early 1980s. While this patronage is promising for minority businesses, it also poses risks. Firstly, small minority firms may risk expanding too quickly and becoming financially overextended. Unlike large businesses, they often need to make substantial investments in infrastructure and staff to fulfill subcontracted work, making them vulnerable to reduced subcontracts and crippling fixed expenses. Secondly, white-owned companies may seek to capitalize on the increased apportionments by forming joint ventures with minority-owned businesses. While legitimate joint ventures can be formed, there is a risk of white backers using minority-owned concerns as fronts to obtain subcontracts. Thirdly, minority enterprises that rely heavily on a single large corporate customer run the danger of becoming dependent. Fierce competition from larger, established companies makes it challenging for small businesses to broaden their customer bases. When these firms have guaranteed orders from a single benefactor, they may become complacent and struggle to seek new opportunities. Q. According to the passage, civil rights activists maintain that one disadvantage under whichminority owned businesses have traditionally had to labor is that they have

been specially vulnerable to governmental

been denied bank loans at rates comparable to those afforded larger competitors

not had sufficient opportunity to secure businesses created by large corporations

not been able to advertise in those media that reach large numbers of potential customers

not had adequate representation in the centers of government power.

Directions: Passage For Question 1 to 9 Recent years have presented both opportunities and risks for minority-owned businesses in the United States. Activists have long argued that the lack of access to substantial contracts and subcontracts from large companies hinders the establishment of minority businesses. In response to this concern, Congress has mandated that businesses awarded federal contracts over $500,000 make an effort to find minority subcontractors and document their efforts with the government. Some federal and local agencies have even set specific percentage goals for allocating parts of public works contracts to minority enterprises. Corporate response to these initiatives has been significant, with corporate contracts with minority businesses increasing from $77 million to $1.1 billion in 1977. Projections indicate that corporate contracts with minority businesses will surpass $3 billion per year in the early 1980s. While this patronage is promising for minority businesses, it also poses risks. Firstly, small minority firms may risk expanding too quickly and becoming financially overextended. Unlike large businesses, they often need to make substantial investments in infrastructure and staff to fulfill subcontracted work, making them vulnerable to reduced subcontracts and crippling fixed expenses. Secondly, white-owned companies may seek to capitalize on the increased apportionments by forming joint ventures with minority-owned businesses. While legitimate joint ventures can be formed, there is a risk of white backers using minority-owned concerns as fronts to obtain subcontracts. Thirdly, minority enterprises that rely heavily on a single large corporate customer run the danger of becoming dependent. Fierce competition from larger, established companies makes it challenging for small businesses to broaden their customer bases. When these firms have guaranteed orders from a single benefactor, they may become complacent and struggle to seek new opportunities. Q. The passage suggests that the failure of a large business to have its bids for subcontractsresults quickly in order might cause it to

experience frustrations but not serious financial harm

face potentially crippling fixed expenses

have to record its efforts on forms filed with the government

increase its spending with minority subcontractors

revise its procedure for making bids for federal contracts and subcontracts

Directions: Passage For Question 1 to 9 Recent years have presented both opportunities and risks for minority-owned businesses in the United States. Activists have long argued that the lack of access to substantial contracts and subcontracts from large companies hinders the establishment of minority businesses. In response to this concern, Congress has mandated that businesses awarded federal contracts over $500,000 make an effort to find minority subcontractors and document their efforts with the government. Some federal and local agencies have even set specific percentage goals for allocating parts of public works contracts to minority enterprises. Corporate response to these initiatives has been significant, with corporate contracts with minority businesses increasing from $77 million to $1.1 billion in 1977. Projections indicate that corporate contracts with minority businesses will surpass $3 billion per year in the early 1980s. While this patronage is promising for minority businesses, it also poses risks. Firstly, small minority firms may risk expanding too quickly and becoming financially overextended. Unlike large businesses, they often need to make substantial investments in infrastructure and staff to fulfill subcontracted work, making them vulnerable to reduced subcontracts and crippling fixed expenses. Secondly, white-owned companies may seek to capitalize on the increased apportionments by forming joint ventures with minority-owned businesses. While legitimate joint ventures can be formed, there is a risk of white backers using minority-owned concerns as fronts to obtain subcontracts. Thirdly, minority enterprises that rely heavily on a single large corporate customer run the danger of becoming dependent. Fierce competition from larger, established companies makes it challenging for small businesses to broaden their customer bases. When these firms have guaranteed orders from a single benefactor, they may become complacent and struggle to seek new opportunities. Q. Which of the fol owing if true, would most weaken the author's assertion that, in 1970's,corporate response to federal requirements was substantial?

Corporate contracts with minority owned business totaled about $2 billion in 1979

Between 1970 and 1972, corporate contracts with minority owned businesses declined by 25percent

The figures collected 1977 underrepreented the extent of corporate contracts with minorityowned businesses.

The estimate of corporate spending with minority owned businesses in 1980 is approximately$10 million too high

The $1.1 billion represented the same percentage of total corporate spending in 1977 as did$77 million in 1972.

Directions: Passage For Question 1 to 9 Recent years have presented both opportunities and risks for minority-owned businesses in the United States. Activists have long argued that the lack of access to substantial contracts and subcontracts from large companies hinders the establishment of minority businesses. In response to this concern, Congress has mandated that businesses awarded federal contracts over $500,000 make an effort to find minority subcontractors and document their efforts with the government. Some federal and local agencies have even set specific percentage goals for allocating parts of public works contracts to minority enterprises. Corporate response to these initiatives has been significant, with corporate contracts with minority businesses increasing from $77 million to $1.1 billion in 1977. Projections indicate that corporate contracts with minority businesses will surpass $3 billion per year in the early 1980s. While this patronage is promising for minority businesses, it also poses risks. Firstly, small minority firms may risk expanding too quickly and becoming financially overextended. Unlike large businesses, they often need to make substantial investments in infrastructure and staff to fulfill subcontracted work, making them vulnerable to reduced subcontracts and crippling fixed expenses. Secondly, white-owned companies may seek to capitalize on the increased apportionments by forming joint ventures with minority-owned businesses. While legitimate joint ventures can be formed, there is a risk of white backers using minority-owned concerns as fronts to obtain subcontracts. Thirdly, minority enterprises that rely heavily on a single large corporate customer run the danger of becoming dependent. Fierce competition from larger, established companies makes it challenging for small businesses to broaden their customer bases. When these firms have guaranteed orders from a single benefactor, they may become complacent and struggle to seek new opportunities. Q. It can be inferred from the passage that, compared with the requirements of law, thepercentage goals set by "some federal and local agencies" are

more popular with large corporations

Directions: Passage For Question 1 to 9 Recent years have presented both opportunities and risks for minority-owned businesses in the United States. Activists have long argued that the lack of access to substantial contracts and subcontracts from large companies hinders the establishment of minority businesses. In response to this concern, Congress has mandated that businesses awarded federal contracts over $500,000 make an effort to find minority subcontractors and document their efforts with the government. Some federal and local agencies have even set specific percentage goals for allocating parts of public works contracts to minority enterprises. Corporate response to these initiatives has been significant, with corporate contracts with minority businesses increasing from $77 million to $1.1 billion in 1977. Projections indicate that corporate contracts with minority businesses will surpass $3 billion per year in the early 1980s. While this patronage is promising for minority businesses, it also poses risks. Firstly, small minority firms may risk expanding too quickly and becoming financially overextended. Unlike large businesses, they often need to make substantial investments in infrastructure and staff to fulfill subcontracted work, making them vulnerable to reduced subcontracts and crippling fixed expenses. Secondly, white-owned companies may seek to capitalize on the increased apportionments by forming joint ventures with minority-owned businesses. While legitimate joint ventures can be formed, there is a risk of white backers using minority-owned concerns as fronts to obtain subcontracts. Thirdly, minority enterprises that rely heavily on a single large corporate customer run the danger of becoming dependent. Fierce competition from larger, established companies makes it challenging for small businesses to broaden their customer bases. When these firms have guaranteed orders from a single benefactor, they may become complacent and struggle to seek new opportunities. Q. The authors implied that the minority owned concern that does the greater part of its businesswith one large corporate customer should

avoid competition with the larger, more established concerns by not expanding

concentrate on securing even more business from that corporation

try to expands its customers base to avoid becoming dependent on the corporation

pass on some of the work to be done for the corporation to other minority owned concerns.

use its influence with the other corporation to promote subcontracting with other minorityconcerns.

Directions: Passage For Question 10 to 15 The passage discusses the behavior and characteristics of the indigo bunting, a strongly territorial bird. The main mechanism for securing, defining, and defending a suitable breeding area in this species is through song. Only the strongest males can retain a good territory when population density is high, while the weakest males either do not breed or are forced onto poor or marginal territories. The male indigo bunting sings in his territory during the breeding season, producing melodic and rhythmic songs with distinct figures. These figures are reproduced consistently, with a limited variety despite the large frequency range and rapid changes in sound. The study found that male indigo buntings are capable of singing many more types of figures than they usually do, suggesting that they learn and copy figures from other buntings they hear. The ability to distinguish the songs of their own species from other species is important, as male indigo buntings did not respond to recordings of other bird species. Additionally, the passage explores the role of song figures in interspecies recognition and the importance of specific frequency ranges, duration limits, and intervals between figures. The passage concludes that there is a balance between song stability for species recognition and song variation for individual recognition. Q. According to the passage, the authors played a normal indigo bunting song backwards inorder to determine which of the following?

What are the limits of the frequency range that will provide recognition by the indigo bunting.

What is the time duration necessary for recognition by the indigo bunting?

How specific must a figure shape be for it to be recognized by the indigo bunting?

How does variation in the pacing of song figures?

Is the indigo bunting responding to cues other than those in the song figures?

Directions: Passage For Question 10 to 15 The passage discusses the behavior and characteristics of the indigo bunting, a strongly territorial bird. The main mechanism for securing, defining, and defending a suitable breeding area in this species is through song. Only the strongest males can retain a good territory when population density is high, while the weakest males either do not breed or are forced onto poor or marginal territories. The male indigo bunting sings in his territory during the breeding season, producing melodic and rhythmic songs with distinct figures. These figures are reproduced consistently, with a limited variety despite the large frequency range and rapid changes in sound. The study found that male indigo buntings are capable of singing many more types of figures than they usually do, suggesting that they learn and copy figures from other buntings they hear. The ability to distinguish the songs of their own species from other species is important, as male indigo buntings did not respond to recordings of other bird species. Additionally, the passage explores the role of song figures in interspecies recognition and the importance of specific frequency ranges, duration limits, and intervals between figures. The passage concludes that there is a balance between song stability for species recognition and song variation for individual recognition. Q. According to the passage, which of the following is true about the number and general natureof figures sung by the indigo bunting?

They evolve slowly as the bird learns

They are learned from other indigo buntings.

They develop after the bird has been forced onto marginal breeding areas.

The gradually develop through contact with prospective mates

Directions: Passage For Question 10 to 15 The passage discusses the behavior and characteristics of the indigo bunting, a strongly territorial bird. The main mechanism for securing, defining, and defending a suitable breeding area in this species is through song. Only the strongest males can retain a good territory when population density is high, while the weakest males either do not breed or are forced onto poor or marginal territories. The male indigo bunting sings in his territory during the breeding season, producing melodic and rhythmic songs with distinct figures. These figures are reproduced consistently, with a limited variety despite the large frequency range and rapid changes in sound. The study found that male indigo buntings are capable of singing many more types of figures than they usually do, suggesting that they learn and copy figures from other buntings they hear. The ability to distinguish the songs of their own species from other species is important, as male indigo buntings did not respond to recordings of other bird species. Additionally, the passage explores the role of song figures in interspecies recognition and the importance of specific frequency ranges, duration limits, and intervals between figures. The passage concludes that there is a balance between song stability for species recognition and song variation for individual recognition. Q. It can be inferred from the passage that the existence of only a limited number of indigobunting figures servers primarily to

ensure species survival by increasing competition among the fittest males for the females

increase population density by eliminating ambiguity in the figures to which the females mustrespond

maintain the integrity of the species by restricting the degree of figure variation and change

enhance species recognition by decreasing the number of figure patterns to which the birdmust respond

avoid confusion between species by clearly demarcating the figure patterns of each specials

Directions: Passage For Question 10 to 15 The passage discusses the behavior and characteristics of the indigo bunting, a strongly territorial bird. The main mechanism for securing, defining, and defending a suitable breeding area in this species is through song. Only the strongest males can retain a good territory when population density is high, while the weakest males either do not breed or are forced onto poor or marginal territories. The male indigo bunting sings in his territory during the breeding season, producing melodic and rhythmic songs with distinct figures. These figures are reproduced consistently, with a limited variety despite the large frequency range and rapid changes in sound. The study found that male indigo buntings are capable of singing many more types of figures than they usually do, suggesting that they learn and copy figures from other buntings they hear. The ability to distinguish the songs of their own species from other species is important, as male indigo buntings did not respond to recordings of other bird species. Additionally, the passage explores the role of song figures in interspecies recognition and the importance of specific frequency ranges, duration limits, and intervals between figures. The passage concludes that there is a balance between song stability for species recognition and song variation for individual recognition. Q. It can be inferred that a dummy of a male indigo bunting was placed near the tape recorderthat played the songs of different species in order to try to

simulate the conditions in nature.

Rule out visual cues as a factor in species recognition

Supply an additional clue to species recognition for the indigo bunting

Provide data on the habits of bunting species other than then indigo bunting

Confound the indigo buntings in the experiment

Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills (CARS) - 2 Free MCQ Practice Test with Solutions

EduRev

All Courses

Open App

	MCAT Mock Test Series 2024 45 tests

	MCAT Mock Test Series 2024 45 tests

Important Questions for Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills (CARS) - 2

Find all the important questions for Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills (CARS) - 2 at EduRev.Get fully prepared for Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills (CARS) - 2 with EduRev's comprehensive question bank and test resources. Our platform offers a diverse range of question papers covering various topics within the Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills (CARS) - 2 syllabus. Whether you need to review specific subjects or assess your overall readiness, EduRev has you covered. The questions are designed to challenge you and help you gain confidence in tackling the actual exam. Maximize your chances of success by utilizing EduRev's extensive collection of Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills (CARS) - 2 resources.

Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills (CARS) - 2 MCQs with Answers

Prepare for the Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills (CARS) - 2 within the MCAT exam with comprehensive MCQs and answers at EduRev. Our platform offers a wide range of practice papers, question papers, and mock tests to familiarize you with the exam pattern and syllabus. Access the best books, study materials, and notes curated by toppers to enhance your preparation. Stay updated with the exam date and receive expert preparation tips and paper analysis. Visit EduRev's official website today and access a wealth of videos and coaching resources to excel in your exam.

Online Tests for Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills (CARS) - 2 MCAT Mock Test Series 2024

Practice with a wide array of question papers that follow the exam pattern and syllabus. Our platform offers a user-friendly interface, allowing you to track your progress and identify areas for improvement. Access detailed solutions and explanations for each test to enhance your understanding of concepts. With EduRev's Online Tests, you can build confidence, boost your performance, and ace Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills (CARS) - 2 with ease. Join thousands of successful students who have benefited from our trusted online resources.

Education Revolution