- Which cause-and-effect chain is best supported by the passage?
Answer: The cart loosened the plug, so the refrigerator warmed, and unsafe food was replaced.
Cause-and-effect questions ask you to identify which events are connected as triggers and results — and in the correct order. When a passage describes a sequence of events, your job is to trace what caused what, making sure the chain flows logically from beginning to end without skipping steps or reversing the order.
In this passage, the sequence unfolds clearly: a delivery cart pushed the plug partly out of the outlet → the refrigerator lost power and warmed up → food temperatures became unsafe → Malik and the manager discarded the affected items and prepared fresh food. That chain matches B exactly. The cart loosening the plug is the root cause, the warming refrigerator is the direct effect, and replacing the unsafe food is the final result. Every link is accurate and in order.
Answer A reverses the first two events — it claims the refrigerator warmed before the cart struck the outlet, which contradicts the passage. Cause must come before effect. Answer C misidentifies the cause entirely, suggesting that Malik checking temperatures somehow caused the refrigerator to warm. That's backwards — he checked temperatures because the refrigerator was already warm. C also incorrectly states the manager discarded everything, when in fact only the items that failed the temperature check were discarded. Answer D makes two errors: it says the lunch rush loosened the plug (the passage credits the delivery cart, not the rush itself), and it claims Malik served the stored food — he specifically did not do that.
When you see cause-and-effect questions, always ask: "Does each cause actually produce the next effect, and are they in the right order?" Reversals and substitutions are the most common traps.
- Which statement best explains the status of the problem at the end of the passage?
Answer: The leak was temporarily controlled, but the damaged roof still needed permanent repair.
When a reading question asks about the "status" of a problem at the end of a passage, you're being tested on your ability to track what has and hasn't been resolved. The key is to distinguish between temporary fixes and permanent solutions — two very different things.
By the end of the passage, two things are true: the leak has been partially addressed (the temporary sheet on the roof means the bucket is no longer actively needed), but the damaged roof still requires permanent repair — which must wait until the rain stops. That combination — partial control, unfinished solution — is exactly what D captures. It's the only answer that honestly reflects both where things stand and what remains undone.
Answer A is inaccurate because workers did investigate the cause — they inspected the roof and identified the damaged section. The investigation happened; it's the permanent fix that's pending. Answer B contradicts the passage directly: the repair was temporary, not permanent, and the passage explicitly states the bucket was no longer needed. Answer C introduces a detail — the canceled class — that never appears in the passage at all. The class took place that evening (Priya set out the bucket for it), and there's no mention of cancellation.
A useful strategy here: when evaluating each answer choice, mentally check it against the passage like a fact-checker. Ask, "Does the passage actually say this?" Answers that sound reasonable but add or change details are classic distractors on reading comprehension questions. Train yourself to go back and verify each claim before choosing.
- What happened immediately after Jorge discovered that he had switched two digits?
Answer: He destroyed the incorrect check before preparing a replacement check.
Questions like this test your ability to track the sequence of events in a passage — specifically, what happened immediately before or after a key moment. When you see "immediately after," slow down and trace the exact order of steps.
In the passage, Jorge's process unfolds like this: he printed the record, placed it beside the check, entered the amount, compared the two — and then noticed the switched digits. The very next thing the passage tells you is that he destroyed that check and wrote a new one. That makes A the correct answer: destroying the incorrect check came directly after discovering the error, before anything else happened.
Choice B gets the sequence completely backwards — Jorge compared the check before asking his supervisor, and his supervisor approved the correct check, not the original one. Choice C describes something that never happened at all; Jorge certainly didn't seal an incorrect check in an envelope, and he printed the record before any comparing took place. Choice D invents a detail — Jorge never printed a second payment record. He used the original record throughout the entire process.
A useful strategy here is to number the steps mentally as you read a process-based passage. Jot a quick sequence: (1) print record, (2) write check, (3) compare, (4) notice error, (5) destroy check, (6) write new check, (7) compare again, (8) supervisor approval, (9) seal envelope. When a question asks "immediately after" a specific step, you simply look at what's next on your list — no guessing required.
- If the community center's computer had read the flash drive, which later event would most likely have changed?
Answer: Lee would likely have printed the remaining copies instead of emailing the meeting chair.
When a question asks what would have changed if something had gone differently, you're being tested on cause-and-effect reasoning. Your job is to trace the chain of events and identify which later step depended directly on the earlier problem.
In this passage, the flash drive failing to load is the turning point. Because the community center's computer couldn't read it, Lee had no way to print the remaining copies himself — so he emailed the document to the meeting chair instead. That email was a direct response to the flash drive problem. If the flash drive had worked, Lee would have printed those copies himself, and there would have been no need to contact the chair at all. That makes C the correct answer: Lee would likely have printed the remaining copies instead of emailing the meeting chair.
The other choices each break the logical chain in a different way. A is wrong because Lee's promise happened before any of these events — the flash drive problem had no effect on what he agreed to do earlier. B is wrong because the home printer ran out of ink for its own reason (low ink), completely unrelated to whether the flash drive worked later. D is wrong and actually reverses the timeline — Lee saved the document before emailing anyone, so the chair couldn't have emailed it first.
A useful strategy: when you see an "if this had changed" question, mentally rewind to that moment and ask yourself, what was the very next thing that happened because of this problem? That's almost always the answer. Don't reach backward in time or skip steps forward.
- Which sequence shows the events in the order they happened?
Answer: Elena found the notice, stored water, changed her appointment, and left early.
When a question asks you to sequence events, your job is to act like a detective — use time clues in the passage (words like "Monday," "Tuesday evening," "Wednesday morning") to build a timeline before you look at the answer choices.
Here's what the passage tells you: Elena found the notice Monday morning, then Tuesday evening she both filled containers with water and moved her appointment, and Wednesday morning she used the stored water and left for work early. Notice that Tuesday evening lists two actions — storing water and changing the appointment — but which came first? The passage says she "filled several containers... and moved her morning appointment," suggesting storing water is mentioned first. Either way, both happened Tuesday evening, after finding the notice and before leaving Wednesday morning.
Answer B is correct because it follows this exact timeline: found the notice → stored water → changed appointment → left early. This matches the passage's chronological order perfectly.
A is wrong because it places storing water before finding the notice — but Elena had no reason to store water until she read the notice. C is wrong because it puts changing her appointment before storing water, reversing the order the passage describes for those two Tuesday-evening events. D is the most scrambled option, placing changing her appointment first — before Elena even knew about the shutoff — which makes no logical sense.
Strategy tip: Always underline or mentally note time signal words (days, times, "then," "after," "later") as you read. These are your roadmap for sequencing questions, and the wrong answers are usually designed to swap just two events — so slow down and check each step.
- Which event directly caused Nina to need help entering the building?
Answer: She arrived after the building's front doors had been locked.
When a question asks what directly caused something, you're being tested on cause-and-effect reasoning — specifically, the difference between a distant cause and the immediate cause. Think of it like a chain of dominoes: multiple events may contribute, but only one directly triggers the outcome in question.
Here, the outcome is Nina needing help getting inside. Ask yourself: what condition made outside help necessary? The answer is C — she arrived after the front doors were already locked. Because the doors were locked, she couldn't enter on her own, which is exactly why she needed someone to let her in. That locked-door situation is the direct, immediate cause of her needing assistance.
The other choices describe real events in the story, but they play different roles. A is simply background information — Nina's usual bus route has nothing to do with why she needed help that particular night. B describes what caused her to arrive late, which makes it a more distant cause; it set events in motion, but it didn't directly prevent her from entering. D describes what happened after Nina already needed help — her classmate telling the instructor is part of the solution, not the cause of the problem.
A useful strategy: when you see the word directly in a cause-and-effect question, slow down. The passage may describe a chain of events, and wrong answers will often be earlier links in that chain. Always ask, "What is the closest cause to the specific outcome mentioned?" That's your answer.
- How does the information about Tasha's earlier course help organize the narrative?
Answer: It explains her hesitation and shows why the new class features affect her decision.
When a passage includes background information about a character's past, ask yourself: why is this detail here? Good writers include backstory because it directly shapes how or why a character acts in the present. That's the key concept this question is testing — how a past event functions within a narrative's structure.
In this passage, Tasha's earlier bad experience with a computer course explains two things at once: why she almost walked past the notice (hesitation) and why the specific features of the new class — small groups and extra practice time — matter enough to change her mind. Without knowing about the difficult earlier course, her decision to register would seem random. With it, her reasoning becomes clear and believable. That makes A the correct answer — the backstory creates a cause-and-effect chain that organizes the whole narrative.
B is wrong because the passage says nothing about Tasha already knowing the material. She struggled before precisely because the course moved too fast — the opposite of mastery. C gets it backwards: the earlier course detail is not an interruption — it is the central reason the story makes sense. Removing it would leave a gap, not improve the flow. D invents a library requirement that simply doesn't exist anywhere in the passage. When an answer introduces a fact not supported by the text, eliminate it immediately.
Strategy tip: On narrative structure questions, always trace the function of a detail — ask "what work is this doing in the story?" If a detail explains a character's motivation or decision, it's organizing the narrative, not decorating it.
- Which event most logically belongs between reviewing the receipts and finding that the drawer balanced?
Answer: Devon found two ten-dollar bills stuck beneath the removable cash tray.
When a passage describes a sequence of events, questions about "what belongs between" two steps are testing your ability to follow cause and effect. Ask yourself: what action would logically cause the situation to change?
In this passage, Devon finds the drawer is short $20, checks the receipts, and then — somehow — the drawer balances. The missing piece must explain how the shortage was resolved. The only answer that does this is D: discovering two ten-dollar bills stuck beneath the removable tray. Two tens equal exactly twenty dollars, which directly closes the gap Devon found. The sequence becomes airtight — problem, search, discovery, resolution.
Choice A describes Devon opening the store at the beginning of his shift, which happens hours before the closing count. Placing starting cash in the register has no connection to resolving a shortage at closing time. B is logically backward — signing the closing report before knowing the total is correct contradicts the passage, which shows Devon signing only after the drawer balanced. Inserting this step between the receipt review and the balanced drawer creates a contradiction, not a solution. C is implausible and unsupported — there is no mention of a customer transaction error, and asking a customer to pay twice would be dishonest and have no basis in the passage.
A useful strategy: when a question asks what "logically belongs" between two events, the inserted step must cause the second event to happen. Think of it like a bridge — the missing piece has to connect both sides. Eliminate answers that introduce new problems, go backward in time, or contradict what the passage already tells you.
- Which description best matches the structure of the passage?
Answer: It presents a location problem, an unsuccessful choice, and information that leads to a solution.
When a question asks about the "structure" of a passage, you're being asked to identify how the events or ideas are organized — not just what they're about. Think of it like tracing the skeleton of the story: What's the starting situation? What happens next? How does it end?
In this passage, Sam faces a clear problem: the directory and elevator sign give him conflicting floor numbers. He makes an unsuccessful choice by going to the fifth floor first, only to find an empty office. Then he receives helpful information from the security guard, which leads him to the correct floor and a successful outcome. That three-part pattern — problem, failed attempt, information leading to resolution — is exactly what B describes, making it the correct answer.
Choice A is wrong because the passage never compares services between the two floors. The fifth floor is simply empty; there's nothing there to compare. Choice C is wrong because the passage never explains why the company moved or describes any effects on employees — those details simply don't appear in the text. Choice D is wrong because the passage gives no interview instructions and doesn't warn applicants about directories; in fact, Sam succeeds in time despite the confusion.
A useful strategy: when answering structure questions, mentally outline the passage in two or three phrases before reading the choices. That way you're matching the answer to your own understanding, rather than being pulled in by answer choices that sound plausible but introduce details the passage never mentions — a common trap on this exam.
- How was Rosa's problem finally solved?
Answer: She changed the photograph file after learning why the earlier uploads had failed.
When a reading passage tells a story with a problem and solution, your job is to track the sequence of events carefully — specifically, what caused the problem and what change led to the fix.
In this passage, Rosa's uploads failed twice. The key turning point comes when she reads the requirements and discovers the real cause: her file was too large. Only after learning this does she reduce the file size and succeed. That two-step process — identifying the cause, then making the right change — is exactly what choice A describes. She changed the photograph file after learning why the earlier uploads had failed.
Choice B is tempting if you only read partway through the passage. Rosa did try a second computer, but that attempt also failed. The second computer wasn't the solution — it was just another failed attempt before she found the real fix. Choice C misreads the passage entirely; Rosa never uploaded the same unchanged photograph over and over hoping it would eventually work. She made a specific correction. Choice D reverses the actual order of events — Rosa completed the renewal after fixing the photograph, not before. Swapping cause and effect is a classic wrong-answer trap on reading questions.
A useful strategy: on sequence-of-events questions, mentally label each action in the passage as "attempt," "discovery," or "solution." Here, the attempts failed, the discovery was reading the requirements, and the solution was reducing the file size. The correct answer will match that final cause-and-effect link — what changed and why it worked.
