Adult Literacy Intermediate Quiz: Revising Opinion Writing
10 questions · exam conditions
0:00
Revising Opinion WritingQuestion 1 of 10

A worker is writing to the transit department: "The city should add a 6:15 a.m. bus on Route 4. The first bus now arrives at 7:00 a.m., but the nearby factory's morning shift begins at 7:00. Many employees need an earlier bus."

Which sentence would provide the strongest support for the worker's opinion?

Route 4 passes several older buildings before it reaches the factory entrance.
One factory employee said that riding an early bus would feel less stressful.
In a survey, 18 of 24 factory employees said they would regularly use the earlier bus.
Public transportation is an important service that cities should provide for their residents.
← Back to quizzes

Adult Literacy Intermediate Quiz

Adult Literacy Intermediate Quiz: Revising Opinion Writing

Practice Revising Opinion Writing in Adult Literacy Intermediate with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Revising Opinion Writing, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for Adult Literacy Intermediate.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

A worker is writing to the transit department: "The city should add a 6:15 a.m. bus on Route 4. The first bus now arrives at 7:00 a.m., but the nearby factory's morning shift begins at 7:00. Many employees need an earlier bus."

Which sentence would provide the strongest support for the worker's opinion?

  1. Route 4 passes several older buildings before it reaches the factory entrance.
  2. One factory employee said that riding an early bus would feel less stressful.
  3. In a survey, 18 of 24 factory employees said they would regularly use the earlier bus. (correct answer)
  4. Public transportation is an important service that cities should provide for their residents.
Explanation: When a question asks you to find the strongest support for an opinion, you're looking for evidence — specific facts or data that directly back up the claim being made. The worker's opinion is clear: the city should add a 6:15 a.m. bus because employees need it. The strongest support will prove that real demand exists for that earlier bus. C is the correct answer because it gives concrete, measurable evidence: 18 out of 24 employees (that's 75%) said they would regularly use the earlier bus. This directly proves demand, which is exactly what the transit department would need to justify adding a new route. Numbers and surveys carry persuasive weight because they represent more than one person's experience. A is irrelevant — the age of buildings along the route has nothing to do with whether employees need an earlier bus. It doesn't support the worker's request at all. B sounds supportive, but it's very weak. One employee saying an early bus would "feel less stressful" is a personal opinion about comfort, not evidence that many people need or would use the bus. A single, vague feeling doesn't prove widespread demand. D is a broad, general statement about public transit that could apply to any transit issue anywhere. It doesn't specifically support this request for this route. General truths don't strengthen a specific argument. Strategy tip: When evaluating supporting evidence, ask yourself: Is this specific? Does it directly address the claim? Does it show scale or numbers? On reading questions like this, the answer with real data almost always outweighs opinions, feelings, or general statements.

Question 2

(1) The town should install a covered bench at the Pine Street bus stop. (2) Riders now wait there in rain and strong sunlight. (3) Route 8 buses were painted blue last year. (4) A shelter would make the wait more manageable, especially for older adults.

Which sentence should replace sentence 3 to strengthen the paragraph's support and focus?

  1. Some residents prefer blue buses, while other residents prefer buses painted green or white.
  2. Transit staff count about 22 weekday riders at this stop, which has no nearby covered area. (correct answer)
  3. Construction projects can provide temporary work, although the town must choose them carefully.
  4. Several downtown bus stops have benches near stores that sell drinks and prepared food.
Explanation: When a paragraph makes an argument, every sentence should push that argument forward with relevant evidence or reasoning. Here, the paragraph argues that Pine Street needs a covered bench — it opens with that claim, notes that riders face rain and sun, and closes by saying a shelter would help older adults. Sentence 3, about blue buses, breaks that chain completely. Your job is to find a replacement that fills the gap with focused, useful support. Choice B is the strongest replacement because it provides concrete evidence directly tied to the argument. Knowing that roughly 22 weekday riders use a stop with no nearby covered area gives decision-makers a specific reason to act — it shows real demand and confirms the gap the paragraph describes. That kind of data-backed, on-topic detail is exactly what a persuasive paragraph needs. Choice A is off-track because bus color preferences have nothing to do with weather protection or rider comfort at this stop. It introduces a new debate rather than supporting the existing one. Choice C mentions construction projects providing temporary work, which might be loosely connected to building a shelter, but it shifts focus away from the riders' need and toward an unrelated economic point — it dilutes the argument. Choice D describes other bus stops with nearby food and drink vendors, which is not relevant to why this stop needs a shelter; it doesn't address weather exposure or ridership at Pine Street at all. A useful strategy: when replacing a sentence in an argument, ask yourself, "Does this new sentence give evidence or reasoning that directly supports the main claim?" If it introduces a new topic or only loosely connects, it doesn't belong.

Question 3

A resident writes, "The city should publish a plain-language checklist explaining rental inspection notices. Renters need a clear way to understand what each notice requires and what steps to take next."

Which sentence would add the most credible and relevant support to the resident's opinion?

  1. The housing office website uses green headings and includes photographs of several city buildings throughout the site.
  2. One landlord explained that rental inspections are important for maintaining safe and livable housing conditions.
  3. The service center recorded 74 calls in three months from renters asking what inspection notices required. (correct answer)
  4. Many residents probably dislike government forms because official documents often seem confusing and unpleasant to read.
Explanation: When a question asks which sentence adds the most credible and relevant support, you're looking for two things at once: evidence that is believable (based on facts, data, or reliable sources) and directly connected to the specific claim being made. The resident's argument is that renters need a plain-language checklist because they don't understand what inspection notices require. Strong support should show that this confusion is real and widespread. C does exactly that. A recorded count of 74 calls from renters specifically asking what inspection notices required is concrete, measurable evidence that the confusion the resident describes is an actual, documented problem — not just a guess. That data directly supports the call for a clearer resource. A is irrelevant. Website colors and photographs say nothing about whether renters understand inspection notices. It describes visual design, not information clarity or renter need. B comes from a landlord commenting on why inspections matter, not on whether renters understand the notices. It also doesn't address confusion or the need for a checklist — it simply defends inspections in general, which is a related but different point. D is a vague assumption. Words like "probably" and "many residents" signal opinion without evidence. It also broadens the claim to all government forms, drifting away from the specific issue of rental inspection notices. Study tip: On questions like this, mentally test each choice with two questions: Is this based on real evidence? and Does it directly address the specific claim? If an answer fails either test, eliminate it — even if it sounds related on the surface.

Question 4

A tenant writes, "Our apartment office should accept maintenance requests online. Residents now must call between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., but many residents work during those hours. An online form would solve every repair problem, so the phone line should be removed."

Which revision best strengthens the reasons, avoids an exaggerated claim, and keeps the main opinion clear?

  1. The office should replace telephone requests with an online form because modern residents always prefer digital communication over calling.
  2. The office should add an online form while keeping phone service, allowing residents to report and track problems after hours. (correct answer)
  3. The office should extend its phone hours instead of using an online form, since staff members can answer resident questions directly.
  4. The office should use an online form because it would prevent all maintenance emergencies and reduce every resident's monthly rent.
Explanation: When evaluating an argument, you want to check three things: Are the claims reasonable and specific? Does the solution address the actual problem? And does the writing avoid overstatements that weaken credibility? Keep all three in mind as you read each choice. The original passage identifies a real, specific problem — residents can't call during work hours — but then makes an exaggerated claim that an online form would "solve every repair problem," and goes too far by suggesting the phone line be removed entirely. The strongest revision fixes both of those flaws. Choice B does exactly that: it proposes adding an online form while keeping phone service, which directly addresses the after-hours access problem without making sweeping promises. It's balanced, practical, and keeps the core opinion — the office needs an online form — front and center. Choice A fails because it replaces one exaggeration with another. Saying residents "always prefer" digital communication is an absolute claim that's easy to challenge and impossible to prove. Choice C actually abandons the main opinion entirely. The tenant's argument is for an online form, and C suggests extended phone hours instead — that's a different solution to a different problem. Choice D is the most extreme distractor: claiming an online form would "prevent all maintenance emergencies" and "reduce every resident's monthly rent" are wild overstatements with no logical connection to the argument. A useful strategy: watch for words like always, every, all, and never in answer choices. On literacy exams, these absolute terms almost always signal an exaggerated or unsupportable claim — and strong arguments rely on specific, reasonable reasoning instead.

Question 5

A company requires food-safety training for employees on three different shifts. The training room is available only at 2:00 p.m. The writer states, "The company should offer the course online because online training would be more convenient."

Which revision gives the most specific and relevant reason for the writer's opinion?

  1. The company should offer the course online because many useful activities now take place online.
  2. The company should offer the course online because the training room has recently been repainted.
  3. The company should offer the course online so workers on all three shifts can complete it when available. (correct answer)
  4. The company should offer the course online because employees may enjoy using computers during training.
Explanation: When a writer gives a reason to support an opinion, that reason should be specific and directly relevant to the problem being described. Here, the problem is clear: workers on three different shifts can't all attend a 2:00 p.m. training session. A strong revision will connect the solution — online training — to that exact problem. Choice C does this perfectly. It states that workers on all three shifts can complete the training "when available," which directly addresses the scheduling conflict caused by having only one available time slot. The reason is tied to the specific details of the situation, making the argument genuinely persuasive. Now look at why the other choices fall short. Choice A says that "many useful activities now take place online," which is a vague, general observation about the internet — it could apply to almost any situation and says nothing about shift scheduling. Choice B mentions that the training room "has recently been repainted," which is completely unrelated to whether online training would solve the company's problem; it's a distractor that sounds like a detail but leads nowhere useful. Choice D suggests employees "may enjoy using computers," but personal enjoyment doesn't explain why online training solves the three-shift problem — it's a weak, off-topic reason. A helpful strategy: when evaluating reasons that support an opinion, ask yourself, "Does this reason explain why the solution fits THIS specific problem?" If the reason could apply to almost any situation — or is unrelated to the problem entirely — it's too weak or irrelevant. Strong reasons are always anchored to the specific details in the passage.

Question 6

The property manager should replace the recycling signs. Several tenants told the manager that they could not understand them, so they should change them.

Which revision of the second sentence most clearly shows who should take action and what should be changed?

  1. Several tenants told the manager that they were confusing, so they should be changed soon.
  2. The manager heard from several tenants, and they agreed that they should change the signs.
  3. Several tenants could not understand the manager, so the recycling signs should change them.
  4. Several tenants said the signs were hard to understand, so the manager should replace the signs. (correct answer)
Explanation: When a sentence contains multiple pronouns like "they" or "them," you need to ask: who exactly does this word refer to? This is called pronoun clarity, and unclear pronoun references are one of the most common writing problems tested on this exam. The original sentence — "Several tenants told the manager that they could not understand them, so they should change them" — is packed with unclear pronouns. Who is "they"? The tenants? The manager? Who should change "them"? The signs? The tenants? Answer D fixes all of this by naming specific actors and objects: the tenants said the signs were hard to understand, and the manager should replace the signs. Every part of the sentence tells you exactly who does what to what. That's your correct answer. Answer A replaces "the signs" with "they were confusing" and "they should be changed" — but we still don't know who found them confusing or who should change them. The pronouns remain just as muddy as the original. Answer B introduces "they agreed," but who agreed? The manager and tenants together? It's unclear. The sentence also doesn't specify what should be changed. Answer C is actually worse than the original — it says the tenants "could not understand the manager," which changes the meaning entirely, and "the recycling signs should change them" makes no logical sense at all. Study tip: Whenever you revise a sentence for clarity, mentally replace each pronoun with the noun it stands for. If the sentence still makes sense, the pronoun is working correctly. If it sounds strange or ambiguous, replace the pronoun with the actual noun.

Question 7

The library should remain open until 7:00 p.m. on Saturdays. During a four-week trial, 46 people visited between 5:00 and 7:00 p.m., and 29 of them used the public computers. Many said they could not visit earlier because of work. The writer needs one more sentence to connect this evidence to the opinion.

Which sentence would most clearly connect the evidence to the writer's opinion?

  1. These results suggest that later hours would meet a demonstrated need among working adults. (correct answer)
  2. On the other hand, later hours would be a pleasant change for the library staff.
  3. For this reason, every city building should remain open later on Saturday evenings.
  4. In addition, the library bought six computer chairs during the same four-week period.
Explanation: When a writer makes an opinion and then presents evidence, they need a connecting sentence that links the two together — essentially saying, "here's what this evidence proves about my opinion." That connecting sentence should stay focused on the same topic, the same audience, and the same claim. The opinion here is that the library should stay open later on Saturdays. The evidence shows that 46 people visited during those late hours, 29 used computers, and many couldn't come earlier due to work. A strong connecting sentence should pull those pieces together and point back to the original claim. Answer A does exactly that. It uses the word "results" to reference the data, identifies "working adults" as the specific group the evidence describes, and concludes that extending hours would meet a "demonstrated need" — directly supporting the opinion. A is the correct answer. Answer B introduces library staff, who were never mentioned in the passage. Even if later hours affected staff, that idea doesn't connect the visitor data to the opinion about extended hours — it shifts the focus entirely. Answer C makes a leap from "this one library" to "every city building," which is a classic overgeneralization. The evidence only supports a claim about this specific library, not all city buildings everywhere. Answer D brings up computer chairs purchased during the same period. That detail is unrelated to the argument being made — it's a distractor that shares a time frame but contributes nothing to the opinion about hours. Study tip: When looking for a connecting sentence, ask yourself: does this sentence reference the evidence and point back to the original opinion? If it does either one but not both, it's probably wrong.

Question 8

Our office should provide washable cups in the staff kitchen. Employees use about 600 disposable cups each month. The supply manager estimates that washable cups would pay for themselves within four months and then reduce both purchasing costs and trash.

Which concluding sentence best completes the opinion paragraph without introducing an unsupported new claim?

  1. Washable cups would also prevent employees from becoming sick during cold and flu season.
  2. Because of these facts, every employee should be required to stop using disposable products immediately.
  3. In summary, the office currently uses approximately 600 disposable cups during each month.
  4. For these reasons, providing washable cups would be a practical way to reduce waste and costs. (correct answer)
Explanation: When a paragraph states an opinion and backs it up with facts, the concluding sentence should tie those facts back to the original opinion — without stretching beyond what the evidence actually supports. Ask yourself: does this conclusion follow directly from what was stated, or does it introduce something new and unproven? Choice D does exactly what a strong concluding sentence should do. The passage presents two supporting facts — the volume of disposable cups used and the cost savings of switching — so a conclusion calling washable cups "a practical way to reduce waste and costs" is a direct, well-supported wrap-up. It restates the opinion using the evidence already provided. This is your correct answer. Choice A introduces a health claim about preventing illness during cold and flu season. Nothing in the passage mentions germs or sickness, so this is an unsupported leap — a new idea smuggled in at the end, which weakens rather than strengthens the argument. Choice B takes the opinion too far. The passage recommends providing washable cups, not mandating that all employees immediately stop using all disposable products. This conclusion is more extreme than anything the evidence justifies, making it an overreach. Choice C is a trap that looks safe because it only repeats a fact from the passage. However, a concluding sentence should synthesize and reinforce the opinion, not simply restate a detail. Summarizing one statistic without connecting it back to the recommendation is a weak, incomplete ending. Your strategy: when evaluating concluding sentences, check two things — does it connect back to the opinion, and does it stay within the boundaries of the evidence? If it adds a new claim or drifts from the main point, eliminate it.

Question 9

In a workplace survey, 31 of 40 employees said they preferred to receive their schedules at least two weeks in advance. A supervisor writes, "Clearly, every employee needs schedules posted two weeks early, and this change will eliminate all attendance problems."

Which revision makes the claim more accurate while keeping the supervisor's opinion?

  1. Because most surveyed employees preferred earlier notice, posting schedules two weeks ahead would better meet their planning needs. (correct answer)
  2. Because every surveyed employee preferred earlier notice, posting schedules two weeks early would prevent all future absences from occurring.
  3. Because some employees answered the survey, the current scheduling process should remain exactly as it is without any changes.
  4. Because schedules affect attendance patterns, posting them two weeks ahead would certainly increase overall workplace productivity.
Explanation: When a question asks you to make a claim "more accurate while keeping the opinion," you need to find an answer that fixes overstatements in the original but still supports the supervisor's position. The original claim makes two errors: it says every employee wants earlier schedules (when only 31 of 40 do), and it promises to eliminate all attendance problems (an absolute claim no survey can support). Choice A corrects both problems gracefully. It says "most surveyed employees" — which accurately reflects 31 out of 40, a clear majority but not everyone. It also says the change "would better meet their planning needs," which is a reasonable opinion supported by the data without making impossible guarantees. This keeps the supervisor's pro-change stance while grounding it in what the survey actually shows. Choice B repeats the original's exaggeration by claiming "every surveyed employee" preferred earlier notice, which is false — nine employees did not. It also promises to "prevent all future absences," an absolute that no scheduling change could guarantee. Choice C swings to the opposite extreme, arguing the current process should stay unchanged — this abandons the supervisor's opinion entirely rather than refining it. Choice D keeps the supervisor's supportive tone but introduces an unsupported leap: the survey asked about scheduling preferences, not productivity, so claiming it "would certainly increase overall workplace productivity" goes beyond what the data can justify. A quick tip to remember: watch for words like every, all, certainly, and never — these absolutes are almost always red flags in evidence-based claims and are common traps on literacy exams.

Question 10

An employee committee recommends replacing an old break-room refrigerator with an energy-efficient model. Some managers object because the new refrigerator will cost $900.

Which sentence would best address the managers' concern while strengthening the committee's recommendation?

  1. Managers should approve the refrigerator because employees deserve newer equipment in the break room.
  2. The old refrigerator costs about $430 more per year to power and has needed frequent repairs. (correct answer)
  3. Although $900 is a large expense, the committee still strongly prefers the newer refrigerator.
  4. The break room also needs brighter lights and additional chairs for employees on lunch breaks.
Explanation: When a question asks you to "address a concern while strengthening a recommendation," you're being tested on persuasive reasoning. The key is finding an answer that does both things — it acknowledges the objection (cost) and gives a concrete reason why the recommendation still makes sense. The managers' concern is the $900 price tag. The most powerful way to counter a cost objection is with financial evidence that reframes the expense. Answer B does exactly this: it reveals that the old refrigerator costs $430 more per year in energy alone, plus frequent repair costs. Over just two years, those savings would exceed the purchase price, making the new refrigerator the smarter financial choice. This directly speaks to the managers' worry and gives the committee's recommendation a stronger, data-backed foundation. Answer A tells managers they should approve the purchase because employees "deserve" newer equipment. This appeals to fairness rather than addressing the $900 concern — it ignores the objection entirely instead of resolving it. Answer C acknowledges the cost but offers no reason to overcome it; saying the committee "strongly prefers" the new model is just restating the original recommendation without adding any persuasive support. Answer D shifts the conversation to lighting and furniture, which is completely off-topic and does nothing to address the refrigerator debate or the managers' financial concern. A useful strategy: when a question asks you to address and strengthen, mentally check both boxes for each answer choice. If an option only does one — or neither — eliminate it. The right answer will directly confront the concern with relevant, specific evidence, just as B does here.