- In a city council memo about downtown safety, an urban policy analyst argues that the city's "most effective safety investments are the unglamorous ones that keep public space busy and predictable." The memo notes that after the city extended library hours until 9 p.m. and added two evening youth programs, pedestrian counts on the adjacent block rose 18% between 6–9 p.m., while reported incidents on that block fell from 22 to 14 over the same three-month period. The analyst adds that police staffing downtown did not change, and that the city's most expensive proposal—installing a network of "smart" surveillance cameras—was delayed and therefore not operating during the period measured. The analyst's claim is that the city should prioritize "activity-based" interventions over high-tech monitoring.
The author uses the fact that pedestrian counts rose 18% while incidents fell from 22 to 14, even though police staffing did not change and the camera network was not operating to suggest that…
Answer: increased foot traffic and structured evening programming can reduce opportunities for harm even without adding enforcement or new surveillance technology
This question assesses the skill of explaining how evidence supports a claim. The evidence that pedestrian counts rose 18% and incidents fell from 22 to 14, despite unchanged police staffing and non-operational cameras, directly supports the analyst's claim by demonstrating that activity-based interventions like extended library hours and youth programs can enhance safety without relying on enforcement or surveillance. This logical connection shows that increased foot traffic and structured programming create a 'busy and predictable' public space, reducing opportunities for harm as more people occupy the area during evening hours. By isolating these changes from other factors like police or cameras, the evidence strengthens the argument for prioritizing low-tech, activity-focused strategies over expensive high-tech options. A common distractor, such as choice B, misinterprets the evidence by overgeneralizing the effect to automatic crime elimination across the entire downtown, ignoring the specific block and conditions described. A transferable strategy is to identify how evidence isolates key variables to support a claim while evaluating whether alternatives exaggerate or distort the scope.
- Read the following embedded passage and answer the question.
A department chair argues that allowing students to revise major essays leads to stronger writing rather than grade inflation. She cites a semester-long pilot in which students submitted an initial draft, received feedback, and revised once. In that pilot, the average rubric score for "use of evidence" rose from 2.6 to 3.4 (on a 4-point scale) between drafts, while the average final course grade increased only 0.07 points on a 4.0 scale. She also notes that the number of plagiarism referrals fell from 11 to 4 compared with the previous semester. Skeptics say students are just "gaming" the system for higher grades, but the chair emphasizes that the measurable improvement is concentrated in specific skills.
The evidence supports the author's claim by…
the average rubric score for "use of evidence" rose from 2.6 to 3.4 (on a 4-point scale) between drafts
Answer: indicating that revision improves a targeted writing skill, suggesting students are producing stronger work rather than merely receiving inflated grades
This question requires explaining how evidence supports a claim about revision improving writing rather than inflating grades. The evidence shows rubric scores for "use of evidence" rose from 2.6 to 3.4, indicating measurable improvement in a specific writing skill. This targeted improvement supports the chair's claim that revision leads to stronger writing—students are demonstrating better use of evidence, not just receiving higher grades. The minimal change in overall course grades (only 0.07 points) further supports that this isn't grade inflation. Choice B incorrectly assumes perfect grades, while C misattributes the improvement to lenient grading. When evaluating educational interventions, distinguish between skill improvement and grade changes.
- In an essay on agriculture and water use, an environmental historian claims that "scarcity is often produced by policy choices that reward the wrong crops in the wrong places." The essay describes a river basin where alfalfa and almonds—two water-intensive crops—expanded after a subsidy program tied payments to acreage planted rather than to water efficiency. Over ten years, irrigated acreage grew 19%, while the basin's measured groundwater level fell an average of 11 feet. The historian adds that during the same decade, average rainfall was near the long-term mean, and the region's population growth was modest.
The author uses the 19% expansion of irrigated acreage alongside an 11-foot average groundwater decline despite near-average rainfall to suggest that…
Answer: institutional incentives can drive water-intensive expansion that depletes groundwater even without an unusual drought, making scarcity a policy outcome
This question assesses the skill of explaining how evidence supports a claim. The evidence of 19% irrigated acreage growth and 11-foot groundwater decline despite average rainfall supports the historian's claim by linking subsidies to water-intensive expansion, producing scarcity through policy. This tie illustrates how incentives tied to acreage, not efficiency, drive unsustainable choices in vulnerable areas. Modest population growth and normal rainfall isolate policy as the depletion cause. Choice B distracts by absolutizing decline everywhere, ignoring evidence that policy influences outcomes. A key strategy is to connect evidence to policy mechanisms and avoid choices that dismiss contextual factors.
- A technology critic argues that "the real cost of 'free' apps is not money but attention, and the design choices that monetize distraction are measurable." The critic points to an internal analytics report leaked from a mid-sized social media company. After the company introduced an auto-play feature and increased notification prompts, average daily time-in-app rose from 38 minutes to 51 minutes, but the percentage of users reporting they felt "satisfied" after a session fell from 42% to 29% in the same quarter. The report also notes that ad revenue per user increased 14%.
The author uses the rise in time-in-app from 38 to 51 minutes alongside the drop in satisfaction from 42% to 29% after auto-play and more notifications to suggest that…
Answer: design features can increase engagement by capturing attention even as they make the experience feel less rewarding to users
This question assesses the skill of explaining how evidence supports a claim. The evidence of time-in-app rising from 38 to 51 minutes while satisfaction fell from 42% to 29% after auto-play and notifications supports the critic's claim by showing how design features boost engagement metrics at the expense of user well-being. This link demonstrates that monetizing attention through distractions increases usage but diminishes perceived value, as seen in the revenue uptick. By pairing quantitative increases with qualitative declines, the evidence illustrates the hidden costs of such designs. Choice B distracts by misinterpreting higher usage as improved well-being, inverting the evidence's implication of trade-offs. A transferable approach is to analyze how evidence contrasts metrics to reveal tensions in a claim and evaluate choices for reversed interpretations.
- Read the following embedded passage and answer the question.
A high school principal claims that later start times improve learning more than they disrupt after-school activities. After shifting the first bell from 7:20 to 8:10, the school found that first-period tardies dropped from an average of 38 per day to 14 per day, and the nurse logged 22% fewer visits for headaches and fatigue during morning classes. The principal also reports that the percentage of students earning D's or F's in first-period courses fell from 19% to 11%, while coaches report only minor scheduling adjustments. A few parents complain that students are simply staying up later, but the principal argues that the reduction in fatigue-related nurse visits suggests otherwise.
The evidence supports the author's claim by…
first-period tardies dropped from an average of 38 per day to 14 per day
Answer: showing that students are arriving more consistently when the day begins later, implying the schedule change reduces barriers to attendance and supports improved learning conditions
This question requires explaining how evidence supports a claim about later school start times improving learning. The evidence that first-period tardies dropped from 38 to 14 per day supports the principal's claim by showing students are arriving more consistently when school starts later. This improved attendance creates better learning conditions—students who are present can actually benefit from instruction. The connection between reduced tardiness and improved learning is logical: students must be present to learn effectively. Choice B makes an unsupported leap to guaranteed test scores, while C misidentifies the primary goal. When examining how evidence supports educational claims, consider how the data connects to the learning environment and student readiness to learn.
- In a column about consumer decision-making, an economist claims that "people don't primarily overspend because they can't do math; they overspend because pricing is engineered to hide comparisons." The column describes a grocery chain that replaced unit-price labels (e.g., cost per ounce) with larger "sale" tags emphasizing percent-off. In the eight weeks after the change, shoppers bought 23% more items sold in multi-pack bundles, even though the average per-unit cost of those bundles was 6% higher than comparable single items. A follow-up survey found that shoppers were no more likely than before to correctly identify the cheaper per-unit option.
The author uses the 23% increase in multi-pack purchases despite bundles being 6% higher per unit and shoppers not improving at identifying the cheaper option to suggest that…
Answer: when comparative information is obscured, consumers rely on attention-grabbing cues like "sale" framing and make less cost-effective choices
This question assesses the skill of explaining how evidence supports a claim. The evidence of a 23% increase in multi-pack purchases, despite 6% higher per-unit costs and no improvement in identifying cheaper options, supports the economist's claim by showing that obscuring unit pricing leads to reliance on misleading cues like 'sale' tags. This connection explains how engineered pricing hides comparisons, prompting less cost-effective decisions without mathematical inability. The follow-up survey reinforces that the change impaired informed choices, isolating label removal as the cause. Choice B misinterprets by claiming all shoppers can't understand unit pricing, exaggerating to dismiss labels entirely instead of addressing hidden comparisons. To use this skill effectively, trace how evidence links behavioral changes to specific manipulations and spot distractors that overstate incapacity.
- Read the following embedded passage and answer the question.
A housing advocate claims that "application fees" can function like hidden rent increases. She notes that in one metro area, the typical renter applies to multiple units because of competition; in a survey of recent movers, the median household reported paying $180 in application fees in a single month, and one in four reported paying over $300. She adds that many property managers keep the fee even when the unit is filled before all applications are reviewed, meaning the payment does not reliably purchase consideration. The advocate concedes that landlords cite screening costs, but she argues that shifting costs onto applicants—especially when repeated across several attempts—extracts money in a way that resembles higher housing prices. Her claim is that fees materially raise the cost of securing a home.
The author uses this evidence to suggest that…
Answer: the survey's reported totals imply that repeated fees add substantial up-front costs, supporting the idea that fees operate like a price increase for renters
This question tests your ability to explain how evidence supports a claim about application fees functioning as hidden rent increases. The advocate presents evidence that renters paid a median of $180 (with 25% paying over $300) in application fees during their housing search, often without guaranteed consideration. These cumulative costs across multiple applications create a substantial financial burden that effectively raises the cost of securing housing, similar to a rent increase. Choice B correctly explains how the survey totals imply that repeated fees add substantial up-front costs, supporting the hidden rent increase claim. Choice D merely restates the statistics without connecting them to the broader cost argument. When analyzing evidence about fees or costs, consider how repeated small charges can accumulate into significant financial barriers.
- Read the following embedded passage and answer the question.
A workplace analyst argues that remote work can increase productivity when paired with clear expectations. She describes a customer-support team that shifted to remote work three days a week and adopted standardized response templates. After two months, average first-response time to customer tickets fell from 3.8 hours to 2.1 hours, while customer satisfaction scores rose from 4.2 to 4.5 (out of 5). The analyst notes that managers also reported fewer "status meetings," but insisted on daily written check-ins. Some executives claim the improvement must be temporary, yet the analyst points out that the metrics improved after the new routines stabilized.
The evidence supports the author's claim by…
average first-response time to customer tickets fell from 3.8 hours to 2.1 hours
Answer: showing faster service after the shift and new procedures, implying that remote work with structure can improve output rather than slow it down
This question requires explaining how evidence supports a claim about remote work increasing productivity. The evidence that first-response time fell from 3.8 to 2.1 hours demonstrates faster service, directly supporting the analyst's claim that remote work can increase productivity when paired with clear expectations (like standardized templates and daily check-ins). This improvement in a key performance metric shows that the structured remote arrangement enhanced rather than hindered output. Choice B incorrectly focuses on hours worked rather than productivity, while C misidentifies the metric. When evaluating workplace changes, examine how performance metrics relate to the specific claim about productivity.
- Read the following embedded passage and answer the question.
A columnist argues that a company's "unlimited vacation" policy can discourage time off. She points to internal HR data showing that after the policy replaced a bank of 15 guaranteed days, the median number of days taken fell from 14 to 9, even though employees were repeatedly told to "take what you need." She also quotes an employee survey in which 62% of respondents said they felt they needed manager approval for vacations more than before, despite the policy's promise of flexibility. The columnist concedes that some workers may simply prefer working, but she claims the pattern suggests a social constraint: when no one can point to an earned balance, employees become cautious about appearing less committed than peers. Her claim is that "unlimited" time off can operate as an informal limit.
The evidence supports the author's claim by…
Answer: demonstrating that the policy reduced vacation use and increased perceived gatekeeping, implying that ambiguity and workplace norms can suppress time off
This question asks you to explain how evidence supports a claim about unlimited vacation policies discouraging time off. The columnist presents two pieces of evidence: vacation days taken dropped from 14 to 9 after the policy change, and 62% of employees felt they needed more manager approval despite the policy's flexibility promise. This evidence demonstrates how removing formal limits can create informal social pressures—without a clear entitlement, employees become cautious about appearing less committed than peers. Choice A correctly identifies how the evidence implies that ambiguity and workplace norms can suppress time off. Choice D fails by merely repeating the statistics without explaining the psychological mechanism that connects unlimited policies to reduced usage. When analyzing evidence about workplace policies, consider how formal rules interact with informal social dynamics.
- A museum director writes an evaluative letter arguing that "community trust is built less by grand openings than by repeated, low-stakes invitations that signal belonging." The director describes a year-long initiative: instead of one large annual gala, the museum hosted monthly free-entry evenings with neighborhood partners and offered bilingual gallery guides. Attendance during those evenings averaged 1,200 visitors, and first-time visitors made up 46% of attendees. In a post-visit survey, 63% of first-time visitors said they were "likely" to return within three months; the prior year, after the gala, only 28% of surveyed attendees (many of whom were repeat donors) reported the same likelihood.
The evidence supports the author's claim by indicating that monthly free-entry evenings drew 46% first-time visitors and yielded a 63% stated likelihood of return compared with 28% after the gala because…
Answer: recurring, accessible events can convert newcomers into potential repeat visitors more effectively than a single high-profile event aimed at established supporters
This question assesses the skill of explaining how evidence supports a claim. The evidence that monthly free evenings drew 46% first-time visitors with 63% likely to return, versus 28% after the gala, supports the director's claim by showing recurring, accessible events build broader trust than one-off galas. This connection emphasizes low-stakes invitations fostering belonging, converting newcomers effectively. Comparing attendee composition and return intent isolates the initiative's inclusive design. Choice B misinterprets by equating any attendance increase with trust, overlooking the evidence's focus on newcomer engagement. For transferable use, examine how evidence contrasts approaches for outcomes and reject oversimplifications of success metrics.
- Read the following embedded passage and answer the question.
A librarian argues that removing late fees increased responsibility rather than encouraging carelessness. She reports that after fees were eliminated, the share of items returned within one week of the due date rose from 61% to 70%, and the number of accounts blocked for unpaid fines dropped sharply. She also notes that circulation increased, but replacement costs for lost items remained flat. The librarian acknowledges that some patrons still return items late, yet she claims that when fines disappear, people who previously avoided the library due to accumulating debt re-engage—and returning materials becomes possible again. Her claim is that late fees can be counterproductive to timely returns.
The author uses this evidence to suggest that…
Answer: eliminating late fees improved return behavior and did not raise losses, supporting the idea that fines had discouraged engagement and timely returns
This question tests your ability to explain how evidence supports a claim about late fees being counterproductive to timely returns. The librarian presents evidence showing that after eliminating fees, on-time returns actually increased from 61% to 70%, blocked accounts dropped, and circulation rose while replacement costs stayed flat. This pattern suggests that fines had discouraged library engagement—people who owed money avoided returning altogether, creating a vicious cycle. Choice A correctly explains how the evidence supports the idea that fines had discouraged engagement and timely returns. Choice D merely states one statistic without explaining its significance to the counterproductive fees argument. The strategy is to recognize how evidence showing improved outcomes after removing a punishment can support claims about that punishment's counterproductive effects.
- A public health columnist argues that "the strongest predictor of whether people stick with exercise is not motivation, but convenience engineered into daily routines." To support this claim, the columnist cites a university study of 600 commuters: when a company moved its bike storage from a basement room (requiring a keycard and elevator ride) to a ground-floor, glass-fronted area beside the main entrance, bike commuting among employees increased from 9% to 16% over four months. The study also reports that the company did not offer new fitness incentives, and that average employee self-reported "motivation to exercise" scores stayed statistically unchanged.
The author uses this evidence to suggest that bike commuting rose from 9% to 16% after bike storage became easier to access, even though motivation scores did not change in order to…
Answer: imply that reducing small logistical barriers can change behavior more reliably than trying to increase people's stated desire to exercise
This question assesses the skill of explaining how evidence supports a claim. The evidence that bike commuting rose from 9% to 16% after easier storage access, despite unchanged motivation scores and no new incentives, supports the columnist's claim by showing that convenience in routines drives behavior more than internal motivation. This logical link emphasizes how removing logistical barriers—like keycards and elevators—integrates exercise seamlessly into daily life, leading to sustained changes without relying on fluctuating desire. By controlling for incentives and measuring motivation stability, the evidence isolates convenience as the key factor in the increase. Choice B distracts by misinterpreting the evidence to dismiss motivation entirely, ignoring its potential role in other contexts not addressed here. A useful strategy is to examine how evidence controls for variables to pinpoint the claim's mechanism and avoid choices that absolutize findings.
- In a review of school discipline policies, an education advocate claims that "restorative practices work best when they are treated as infrastructure, not as an add-on." The advocate describes two middle schools in the same district. School A trained all staff, scheduled a daily advisory period, and tracked follow-up meetings; School B offered a one-time workshop and left implementation to individual teachers. Over a semester, suspensions at School A fell 37% and chronic absenteeism fell 12%, while School B's suspensions fell 5% and absenteeism was unchanged. The advocate notes that both schools serve similar demographics and received the same district funding.
The evidence supports the author's claim by indicating that the school with scheduled advisory time and systemwide tracking saw far larger drops in suspensions and absenteeism than the school that relied on individual teachers because…
Answer: treating restorative practices as a consistent, schoolwide system appears more effective than offering minimal training without structures that sustain implementation
This question assesses the skill of explaining how evidence supports a claim. The evidence that School A saw a 37% drop in suspensions and 12% in absenteeism, compared to School B's 5% and unchanged rates, supports the advocate's claim by contrasting systematic implementation with minimal, individual efforts. This connection reveals that treating restorative practices as infrastructure—with training, scheduling, and tracking—creates sustained impact, while add-on approaches yield limited results. By noting similar demographics and funding, the evidence highlights implementation depth as the differentiator in outcomes. Choice B misinterprets by assuming guaranteed reductions regardless of execution, distorting the evidence's emphasis on structured support. For broader application, focus on how comparative evidence underscores effective conditions for a claim and identify distractors that ignore implementation nuances.
- Read the following embedded passage and answer the question.
A city council member argues that the downtown "street redesign" has improved public safety. She notes that in the six months after the redesign, police reports show a 22% drop in collisions at the three intersections where curb extensions and shorter crosswalks were installed, while collisions in the rest of downtown fell only 3%. She adds that emergency-room intake data show fewer pedestrian injury admissions on Friday and Saturday nights, the same periods when the redesigned blocks have the highest foot traffic. The council member concedes that the city also increased traffic enforcement during the same months, but she maintains that enforcement alone cannot explain why the largest improvements cluster around the redesigned intersections. Her claim is that the redesign itself—not merely stricter policing—made downtown meaningfully safer.
The author uses this evidence to suggest that…
Answer: the redesign's safety effect is most credible where the largest, location-specific declines align with the treated intersections and peak pedestrian use times
This question tests your ability to explain how evidence supports a claim about the street redesign's safety impact. The council member presents two key pieces of evidence: a 22% drop in collisions specifically at the three redesigned intersections (versus only 3% elsewhere) and fewer pedestrian injuries during peak foot traffic times at those same locations. This location-specific and time-specific alignment between the evidence and the claim creates a strong logical connection—the safety improvements occur precisely where and when the redesign would most likely have an effect. Choice B correctly identifies this pattern of evidence clustering around the treated areas as the most credible support for the claim. Choice A overstates by claiming the redesign caused ALL improvements citywide, while the evidence shows the opposite pattern. The key strategy here is to look for evidence that shows specific alignment between the intervention (redesign) and the outcomes (safety improvements), rather than broad generalizations.
- Read the following embedded passage and answer the question.
A superintendent claims that switching to a later high-school start time improved learning. In her memo, she points out that after the schedule change, first-period tardiness fell from 18% to 7%, and teachers reported fewer students "sleeping in class." She also cites district data showing that the biggest gains in course pass rates occurred in ninth grade, the cohort that previously had the earliest bus pickups. She acknowledges that the district also updated its math curriculum that year, but she argues that a curriculum change would not so neatly match improvements in the specific period most affected by the bell schedule. Her central claim is that the later start time was a primary driver of the improved academic outcomes.
The evidence supports the author's claim by…
Answer: showing that reduced tardiness and grade-level gains align with the timing change in a way that implies the schedule shift contributed to learning improvements
This question asks you to explain how evidence supports a claim about later school start times improving learning. The superintendent provides evidence that directly connects to the schedule change: tardiness dropped dramatically in first period (when the change would have the most impact), and the biggest academic gains occurred in ninth grade (the group previously affected by the earliest bus pickups). This targeted pattern of improvement—occurring exactly where the schedule change would theoretically help most—creates a logical link between the intervention and the outcomes. Choice A correctly identifies how this alignment implies the schedule shift contributed to improvements. Choice D fails because it merely lists the statistics without explaining the connection, missing how the evidence specifically targets areas most affected by the change. When analyzing evidence-claim relationships, look for patterns that match the expected effects of the proposed cause.
- Read the following embedded passage and answer the question.
A technology columnist argues that requiring two-factor authentication (2FA) for school email accounts improves security without significantly increasing help-desk burden. After a district enabled 2FA for all staff, successful account takeovers dropped from 27 incidents in the prior semester to 3 incidents, while help-desk tickets related to login issues rose from 410 to 455 during the first month and then returned to baseline the next month. The columnist acknowledges the initial spike in tickets but argues that the long-term tradeoff is favorable because compromised accounts can expose student data and trigger costly recovery work.
The evidence supports the author's claim by…
successful account takeovers dropped from 27 incidents in the prior semester to 3 incidents
Answer: demonstrating a substantial reduction in a key security failure, supporting the claim that 2FA meaningfully improves protection even if it causes minor short‑term friction
This question requires explaining how evidence supports a claim about two-factor authentication improving security without excessive burden. The evidence that account takeovers dropped from 27 to 3 incidents demonstrates a dramatic improvement in security—a nearly 90% reduction in successful breaches. This substantial reduction supports the columnist's claim that 2FA meaningfully improves protection, justifying the temporary increase in help-desk tickets. The return to baseline ticket levels after one month shows the burden was indeed temporary. Choice B overstates by claiming permanent elimination of all threats, while C creates an illogical connection. When evaluating security measures, weigh the magnitude of security improvements against temporary implementation challenges.
- Read the following embedded passage and answer the question.
An editor argues that shortening news articles does not necessarily make them more readable. She cites analytics from her publication showing that after a major "brevity initiative," average article length fell by 35% but the share of readers who reached the end dropped from 54% to 46%. She also notes that reader feedback increasingly complained that stories felt "context-free," and reporters reported spending more time writing headlines to compensate for missing explanation. The editor concedes that some pieces benefit from trimming, but she claims that cutting context can force readers to work harder to infer meaning, which may reduce completion. Her claim is that readability depends on clarity and structure, not just fewer words.
The evidence supports the author's claim by…
Answer: indicating that despite shorter length, completion fell and complaints rose, implying that brevity alone may harm clarity and thus readability
This question asks you to explain how evidence supports a claim about shorter articles not necessarily being more readable. The editor provides evidence that despite a 35% reduction in article length, reader completion rates actually dropped from 54% to 46%, and complaints about "context-free" stories increased. This counterintuitive result—shorter articles being completed less often—supports the claim that brevity alone may harm clarity and thus readability. Choice B correctly identifies how this evidence implies that cutting context forces readers to work harder, reducing completion. Choice D fails by merely listing the statistics without explaining the paradox of shorter articles performing worse. The key insight is recognizing how evidence of unintended consequences can support claims that challenge assumptions about simplicity and accessibility.
- Read the following embedded passage and answer the question.
A museum director defends eliminating free-admission Sundays, arguing that the policy had quietly undermined access rather than expanding it. She cites attendance records showing that on free Sundays, average wait times exceeded 75 minutes and the museum reached fire-code capacity by noon, forcing staff to turn visitors away. She also notes that zip-code data reveal a smaller share of visitors from the city's outer neighborhoods on free Sundays than on regular weekdays, when entry is paid but lines are shorter. The director admits that free admission sounds equitable, yet she claims that a policy that looks generous can still function like a barrier if it concentrates demand into a single crowded window. Her claim is that removing free Sundays can, paradoxically, improve real access.
The author uses this evidence to suggest that…
Answer: crowding and capacity limits on free Sundays likely deter or exclude some visitors, especially those traveling farther, weakening the policy's access goals
This question tests your ability to explain how evidence supports a claim about free admission paradoxically reducing access. The director presents evidence showing that free Sundays created severe crowding (75-minute waits, capacity limits by noon) and actually drew fewer visitors from outer neighborhoods compared to paid weekdays. This evidence supports the claim by demonstrating how a well-intentioned policy can backfire—the crowding and capacity limits likely deter visitors, especially those who must travel farther and cannot easily return another day. Choice C correctly explains this logical connection between the evidence and the counterintuitive claim. Choice D merely restates the statistics without explaining their significance to the access argument. The key insight is recognizing how evidence of unintended consequences (crowding deterring visitors) can support claims that challenge conventional wisdom about equity policies.
- Read the following embedded passage and answer the question.
A coach claims that the team's improved performance came from changing practice structure, not from recruiting better athletes. She explains that last season, practices ended with scrimmages that rewarded fast scorers; this season, the team switched to drills emphasizing decision-making under pressure. As evidence, she notes that in game film analysis, turnovers in the final five minutes fell from an average of 4.1 per game to 2.3, while overall scoring remained roughly constant. She also points out that the roster is nearly identical—only one new player logs significant minutes—making a talent explanation less likely. The coach concedes that opponents vary, but she claims the late-game turnover drop reflects a specific skill the new drills targeted. Her claim is that practice design directly shaped late-game execution.
The evidence supports the author's claim by…
Answer: showing a targeted improvement (late-game turnovers) that matches the new practice emphasis, while a mostly unchanged roster weakens the recruiting explanation
This question asks you to explain how evidence supports a claim about practice design improving performance. The coach presents evidence of a specific improvement—late-game turnovers dropping from 4.1 to 2.3—that directly matches the new practice emphasis on decision-making under pressure, while the roster remained mostly unchanged. This targeted improvement in exactly the skill area the new drills addressed, combined with the lack of new players, creates a strong logical connection between the practice change and the performance gain. Choice B correctly identifies how this pattern weakens alternative explanations and supports the practice design claim. Choice D fails by merely restating the statistics without explaining their connection to the practice changes. When analyzing evidence about interventions, look for outcomes that specifically match the intervention's intended effects.
- Read the following embedded passage and answer the question.
A public health columnist claims that small design changes in cafeterias can meaningfully improve nutrition without banning foods. In a county pilot, cafeterias moved fruit to the front of the serving line and placed water at eye level. Over ten school days, students selected fruit in 41% of lunches, up from 26% before the change, while sales of desserts declined 8%. The columnist also notes that no menu items were removed, and that students could still choose dessert if they wanted. Critics argue that students will compensate after school, but the columnist suggests that repeated small choices can accumulate.
The author uses this evidence to suggest that…
students selected fruit in 41% of lunches, up from 26% before the change
Answer: altering the environment can nudge students toward healthier choices without restricting options, supporting the claim that design can improve nutrition
This question asks you to explain how evidence supports a claim about cafeteria design improving nutrition. The evidence that fruit selection rose from 26% to 41% demonstrates that simply changing placement can influence student choices without restricting options. This supports the columnist's claim that small design changes can meaningfully improve nutrition—students chose healthier options more frequently when fruit was more accessible and visible. The fact that no items were removed shows this isn't about restriction but about nudging behavior. Choice B incorrectly claims desserts were banned, while C invents an unsupported price explanation. When analyzing behavioral interventions, focus on how environmental changes can influence choices while preserving autonomy.
