In this example, we need to seek out relevant cues from outside the underlined portion of the sentence to identify what is needed out of the underline. Here, the singular vs. plural nature of the subject, lion vs. lions, is at question. If we continue to the latter portion of the sentence, we find the pronoun “its.” Since “its” refers back to the subject and is singular in nature, the subject, “the lion,” must also be singular. This leaves us with only “the lion rules,” our correct answer, as “lions can be seen ruling,” “lions are able to be seen ruling,” and “lions rule” all utilize the plural subject, “lions.”

In this example, we are being tested on the subject-verb agreement. In order to effectively eliminate wrong answers and arrive at the correct answer, we’ll need to determine the subject by addressing who or what “was/where/are/have been among the casualties. This case is particularly tricky, as it involves subject-verb inversion - where the subject comes after the verb. The subject of the sentence that is referred to as “among the casualties” is “a cluster.” We describe the cluster as “a cluster of farmhouses” to provide additional context, but the subject “a cluster” itself is singular, despite being accompanied by a plural noun in its modifying context. With this in mind, the only answer option that agrees with the singular subject “a cluster” is “was.” “Were,” “are,” and “have been” are all plural verbs that would require a plural subject.

In this example, we are being tested on the subject-verb agreement. In order to effectively eliminate wrong answers and arrive at the correct answer, we’ll need to determine the subject by addressing who or what takes on each of our verbs: “have/has” at the start of our answer choices and “worry/worries” at the end. Using both logic and sentence structure, we can identify that what “have recently arrived on retailers’ shelves” are the products. So, the plural verb “have” is appropriate here, and we can eliminate all options that use the singular “has.”

From here, we’ll want to look at the subject taking on the verb “worry/worries.” If we read past or eliminate the modifying phrase “of the new products that ACME Corporation has developed over the past year and that [have] recently arrived on retailers’ shelves,” the core of the sentence reads “the quality worry.” Since quality is singular, the verb we need is “worries,” and we can eliminate any answer option that uses the plural “worry.” This leaves us with our correct answer: “have recently arrived on retailers’ shelves worries.”

In this example, we are being tested on the subject-verb agreement. In order to effectively eliminate wrong answers and arrive at the correct answer, we’ll need to determine the subject by addressing who or what takes on the verb “have/has/have had/had.” If we break down the construction of the sentence, “of the members of the board” is a modifying phrase referring back to the singular noun, “each.” Since “each” is singular, we need a singular agreement with our verb. Only “has” provides us with the singular agreement, as all other options either use the plural “have” or seem to imply that each member had experience, but does not anymore an illogical construction.

In this example, we are being tested on subject-verb agreement. In order to effectively eliminate wrong answers and arrive at the correct answer, we’ll need to determine the subject by addressing who or what takes on the verb “pose/poses/has posed/has the potential to pose.” In this case, “of a high-sugar diet” is a modifying phrase. The core of the sentence reads “effects poses.” since “effects” are plural, we need the plural verb “pose.” Each of our incorrect answers incorrectly utilizes a singular verb in some form, which does not agree with the plural term “effects.”

In this example, we are being tested on noun-pronoun agreement and parallelism. In order to effectively eliminate wrong answers and arrive at the correct answer, we’ll need to determine the subject by addressing who or what we’re referring to with the pronoun “its/their.” In this case, we have a powerful hint in the non-underlined portion - we already refer to Australia using the pronoun “its.” So, we can see that the collective noun, Australia, is singular. We also need to maintain a parallel structure between what follows “not only” and what follows “but also.” Our correct answer, “but also for its” correctly refers to Australia using the singular possessive pronoun “its,” and introduces the phrase that follows the “but also” with the preposition “for” followed by the possessive pronoun and the object of possession - the same structure that follows the “not only” in the sentence.

In this example, we are being tested on the subject-verb agreement. In order to effectively eliminate wrong answers and arrive at the correct answer, we’ll need to determine the subject by addressing who or what takes on the verb “are increasing,” or its alternative options. Here, “of applicants” and “to top colleges and universities” are both modifying phrases. The subject of the sentence taking on the verb is “the number.” Since “the number” is singular, we need a singular agreement, and only the option “is increasing” provides us with this singular agreement. We can also use logic for much of this question. Is the sentence trying to say that the universities are physically getting bigger? That the applicants are physically growing? Since both of these constructions are illogical, logic can point us to the correct and logical subject “the number.”

Whenever the ACT English section asks you for the best transition between two paragraphs or sentences, read the sentence before and after the transition and determine the relationship between the two sentences. The sentence before in this case states that the original vision of the church was based on Gothic revival churches from Italy. The sentence after the transition word states that this ideal wasn't built. Because of the contrast between the two sentences, you're looking for a word that indicates contrast. The only choice that indicates contrast is, NO CHANGE. Since the other options all indicate that the next sentence should be a continuation, they can all be eliminated.

This question asks you to choose between different transition words and to determine whether you need a transition word at all between these two sentences. As with any question dealing with transitions, you should first look at what each sentence is saying and then determine the relationship between those two sentences. The first sentence states that the archaeologists must present their findings to the members of the project, and the second states that after that they may work with architects and planners to change the plan. These are two separate facts - one does not flow into the other except sequentially. Thus, the best transition is in fact no transition at all, "depending."

Whenever you are asked to choose a transition between two thoughts, you should first consider each thought separately and then how they relate together. The phrase before the transition states that many people have considered the fact that cooking was not science-like to be good. The phrase after the transition states that Kurti and This considered this an "affront to science". The two phrases are meant to contrast with one another and require a transition word that reflects this. Neither "in fact" nor "indeed" indicates a contrast and can be eliminated. "Surprisingly" does indicate a contrast, but the second phrase isn't surprising so it too can be eliminated. "however" is correct.