Card 0 of 52
Passage 1:
Encouraging the participation of video games in children and teenagers is a dangerous practice. These video games are often violent and thus promote violence in everyday life. Such games have also been shown to encourage violence and anger problems in those already inclined toward violence. At an age at which it is important to foster cooperation among classmates and build friendships, the isolation that comes with excessive gaming makes students more likely to enter conflicts with other students and harms their ability to socialize.
Video games have also been shown to be addictive. This trait makes gaming all the more dangerous, as an exclusive focus on any one hobby can leave children without a well-rounded set of interests and skills. Those playing video games would benefit from other extracurriculars, such as arts or athletics. When children spend all their time playing video games, that leaves less time for more-productive tasks like joining a sport, learning to play an instrument, or picking up other more beneficial hobbies. Parents would be wise to discourage their children from playing video games and instead suggest they pick up a more constructive hobby.
Passage 2:
Video games are often (and unfairly) blamed for negatively impacting children, but in reality, they offer many benefits to those who choose “gaming” as a hobby. Studies show that children who play video games improve their motor skills, reasoning ability, and creative problem-solving when they do so. Additionally, evidence shows us that many find playing video games to be a way to socialize with friends and even build leadership skills, including how to delegate, work as a team, and prioritize tasks. Some have even linked these higher-order thinking skills to career success down the road.
People who would villainize gaming claim that violent games make kids more violent. However, there is little, if any, evidence to show any connection between actions performed in a simulated game and tendencies in real life. In fact, many report that they find playing such games to be stress-relieving, and say that these activities positively impact their mood.
While it is important to limit kids’ daily consumption of any hobby, video games can be a great way to encourage their creative problem solving, leadership, and other valuable life skills!
In paragraph two, the author of passage one makes the following statement:
“Parents would be wise to discourage their children from playing video games and instead suggest they pick up a more constructive hobby.”
Which excerpt from passage two provides the best counterargument to that claim?
In this question, we want something that specifically counters the idea that children should not play video games and should instead focus on “more constructive” hobbies. The correct choice counters this claim by showing that video games can be constructive hobbies. While our other answer choices are all claims made by the author of passage two, only the correct choice specifically addresses a potential flaw in the author of passage one’s argument.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1
It’s a great time to be green! Environmentally friendly practices have become very popular with shoppers. Business owners can capitalize on this trend by accurately advertising how their products are good for the environment, such as by using recycled materials.
Many shoppers associate the color green with sustainability. So, consider using eye-catching green details on your products when describing how they help the environment. You may want to incorporate symbols of nature into your advertising as well. Popular symbols associated with sustainability include leaves, trees, and flowers. These details may not seem important, but they are. The visual way in which a sustainability claim is made can make the difference between a shopper trying your product or leaving it on the shelf.
Some people want to regulate sustainability claims. This is a bad idea. Increased regulation would be an unnecessary burden on businesses. It would slow the time it takes them to adapt to trends. If every advertising decision had to be approved by a regulating body, a lot of time would be wasted. Just think how ridiculous it would be if you wanted to use a blue logo instead of a red one and had to fill out paperwork approving that decision! The threat of increased regulation is all the more reason to emphasize the greenness of your products today.
Passage 2
Environmentalism has become very popular lately. As a result, many products are emphasizing “green” status—that is, how they help protect the environment. This trend has been accompanied by an ugly shadow: “greenwashing.” “Greenwashing” is the practice of making false claims about a product’s sustainability. Companies can say that a product is “greener” than it really is. These false claims are made so that the product can appeal to shoppers.
As a result, shoppers have become less confident about all sustainability claims. There’s no way to tell from packaging and advertisements if a product is actually helping the environment or just claiming to do so. And it’s not easy to research products in the aisles of a supermarket or department store! It’s certainly extra work that many shoppers won’t do. Instead, they ignore “green” claims completely.
Competition and “greenwashing” have also encouraged companies to prioritize appearing green over actually being green. As a result, money is spent on making products appear to be something they are not instead of on actually improving the products and making them more sustainable.
So, what can we do? We need to start by regulating sustainability claims. This way, consumers can be confident that claims they see are true, since false claims would not be allowed on packaging. This will be a step in the right direction.
Which of the following accurately describes how the passages differ?
It's easy to get the passages confused with one another when answering a question like this, so let's make a list of traits of each one so that we can distinguish between them accurately.
Passage 1:
- addressed to advertisers and business owners
- discusses positive effects of claims about sustainability
- urges businesses to make sustainability claims
- opposes regulating sustainability claims
- does not mention "greenwashing."
Passage 2:
- addressed to a general audience
- discusses negative effects of claims about sustainability
- supports regulating sustainability claims
- discusses "greenwashing" as a problem
Now we can sort through these answer choices a bit more easily. Passage 1 certainly doesn't see "green" claims as having primarily negative effects, and it doesn't suggest that "greenwashing" is a positive thing or a problem, since it doesn't mention "greenwashing" at all. Passage 2 doesn't claim that sustainability has always been a part of advertising. Noting these details allows us to narrow down our answer choices to the correct one: "Passage 1 is addressed to business owners, but Passage 2 is addressed to a general audience." We can tell that Passage 1 addresses business owners because of the way it gives advice about designing advertisement claims and ends with a call to action aimed at business owners: "The threat of increased regulation is all the more reason to emphasize the greenness of your products today." Notice how it uses the word "your" in "your products" to speak directly to business owners. On the other hand, Passage 2 is addressed to a general audience. It explains what greenwashing is, the problems it has caused, and then suggests that regulation could help solve it. Its call to action is aimed at the general public: "So, what can we do? We need to start by regulating sustainability claims." This all confirms that the correct answer is the one discussing the passages' different audiences.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1
It’s a great time to be green! Environmentally friendly practices have become very popular with shoppers. Business owners can capitalize on this trend by accurately advertising how their products are good for the environment, such as by using recycled materials.
Many shoppers associate the color green with sustainability. So, consider using eye-catching green details on your products when describing how they help the environment. You may want to incorporate symbols of nature into your advertising as well. Popular symbols associated with sustainability include leaves, trees, and flowers. These details may not seem important, but they are. The visual way in which a sustainability claim is made can make the difference between a shopper trying your product or leaving it on the shelf.
Some people want to regulate sustainability claims. This is a bad idea. Increased regulation would be an unnecessary burden on businesses. It would slow the time it takes them to adapt to trends. If every advertising decision had to be approved by a regulating body, a lot of time would be wasted. Just think how ridiculous it would be if you wanted to use a blue logo instead of a red one and had to fill out paperwork approving that decision! The threat of increased regulation is all the more reason to emphasize the greenness of your products today.
Passage 2
Environmentalism has become very popular lately. As a result, many products are emphasizing “green” status—that is, how they help protect the environment. This trend has been accompanied by an ugly shadow: “greenwashing.” “Greenwashing” is the practice of making false claims about a product’s sustainability. Companies can say that a product is “greener” than it really is. These false claims are made so that the product can appeal to shoppers.
As a result, shoppers have become less confident about all sustainability claims. There’s no way to tell from packaging and advertisements if a product is actually helping the environment or just claiming to do so. And it’s not easy to research products in the aisles of a supermarket or department store! It’s certainly extra work that many shoppers won’t do. Instead, they ignore “green” claims completely.
Competition and “greenwashing” have also encouraged companies to prioritize appearing green over actually being green. As a result, money is spent on making products appear to be something they are not instead of on actually improving the products and making them more sustainable.
So, what can we do? We need to start by regulating sustainability claims. This way, consumers can be confident that claims they see are true, since false claims would not be allowed on packaging. This will be a step in the right direction.
The passages make conflicting statements about which of the following topics?
While both Passage 1 and Passage 2 discuss sustainability as it relates to advertising on products, they don't make very many statements that explicitly and directly disagree with one another. One reason for this is that Passage 2 discusses "greenwashing" directly, Passage 1 never mentions it. This can make it a bit challenging to identify the specific point about which they disagree.
Let's summarize the claims made in each of the passages to find the statements that oppose one another, using the provided answer choices as guidelines.
Passage 1
- Environmentalism is popular with shoppers.
- By advertising how their products are sustainable, businesses can make use of the trend.
- Regulating sustainability claims is a bad idea because it will slow down businesses' abilities to react to trends.
Passage 2
- Environmentalism is popular, leading to the popularity of "green" products.
- "Greenwashing" is a bad thing.
- Because of greenwashing, shoppers are less confident about sustainability claims, ignoring them completely.
- Another result of greenwashing is that companies think it's more important to appear sustainable than to actually be sustainable.
- We should regulate sustainability claims to deal with this problem.
Look at that—the underlined claims oppose one another directly! The best answer is the one that reflects these particular statements: that the passages disagree about "whether sustainability claims should be regulated."
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1
It’s a great time to be green! Environmentally friendly practices have become very popular with shoppers. Business owners can capitalize on this trend by accurately advertising how their products are good for the environment, such as by using recycled materials.
Many shoppers associate the color green with sustainability. So, consider using eye-catching green details on your products when describing how they help the environment. You may want to incorporate symbols of nature into your advertising as well. Popular symbols associated with sustainability include leaves, trees, and flowers. These details may not seem important, but they are. The visual way in which a sustainability claim is made can make the difference between a shopper trying your product or leaving it on the shelf.
Some people want to regulate sustainability claims. This is a bad idea. Increased regulation would be an unnecessary burden on businesses. It would slow the time it takes them to adapt to trends. If every advertising decision had to be approved by a regulating body, a lot of time would be wasted. Just think how ridiculous it would be if you wanted to use a blue logo instead of a red one and had to fill out paperwork approving that decision! The threat of increased regulation is all the more reason to emphasize the greenness of your products today.
Passage 2
Environmentalism has become very popular lately. As a result, many products are emphasizing “green” status—that is, how they help protect the environment. This trend has been accompanied by an ugly shadow: “greenwashing.” “Greenwashing” is the practice of making false claims about a product’s sustainability. Companies can say that a product is “greener” than it really is. These false claims are made so that the product can appeal to shoppers.
As a result, shoppers have become less confident about all sustainability claims. There’s no way to tell from packaging and advertisements if a product is actually helping the environment or just claiming to do so. And it’s not easy to research products in the aisles of a supermarket or department store! It’s certainly extra work that many shoppers won’t do. Instead, they ignore “green” claims completely.
Competition and “greenwashing” have also encouraged companies to prioritize appearing green over actually being green. As a result, money is spent on making products appear to be something they are not instead of on actually improving the products and making them more sustainable.
So, what can we do? We need to start by regulating sustainability claims. This way, consumers can be confident that claims they see are true, since false claims would not be allowed on packaging. This will be a step in the right direction.
In its second paragraph, Passage 1 states, “These details may not seem important, but they are. The visual way in which a sustainability claim is made can make the difference between a shopper trying your product or leaving it on the shelf.”
Which of the following sentences in Passage 2 most directly opposes this claim?
To directly oppose Passage 1's claim, the correct sentence from Passage 2 will need to be talking about the same specific thing that Passage 1's claim concerns. Passage 2's claim will voice a different view about the topic, but the fact remains that to directly oppose someone else's claim, you have to be talking about the same thing. Let's start by identifying what Passage 1's claim specifically concerns. To what do "these details" refer? This sentence appears in the second paragraph of Passage 1, where it discusses visual details of advertising decisions, like what colors and icons to use when making claims about sustainability. The excerpt says that these claims have a big effect on whether a customer will or won't purchase a product.
Now that we've identified that, let's look over the answer choices and find the one that most directly talks about visual details of advertising and the effects they have. ""As a result, money is spent on making products appear to be something they are not instead of on actually improving the products and making them more sustainable" talks about the appearance of advertising claims, but it doesn't directly oppose Passage 1's claim that these are very effective. It's bringing up a new point—that the money spent making them appear sustainable isn't being used to make them more sustainable. The answer choice “Competition and 'greenwashing' have also encouraged companies to prioritize appearing green over actually being green" similarly mentions appearing to be green, but doesn't suggest that these appearances aren't effective, even though Passage 2 accuses many of them as involving false claims. The answer choice “And it’s not easy to research products in the aisles of a supermarket or department store! It’s certainly extra work that many shoppers won’t do" has nothing to do with sustainability claims and advertising details, so it's not correct.
We have two answer choices left to choose from: "As a result, shoppers have become less confident about all sustainability claims" and “Instead, \[shoppers\] ignore “green” claims completely.” Both of these are stating that the details of sustainability claims aren't making them really effective at getting people to buy those products. Which opposes Statement 1's claim most directly? The idea that shoppers ignore sustainability claims completely is a stronger opposing argument than is the idea that shoppers are simply less confident in the claims, so the best answer is “Instead, \[shoppers\] ignore “green” claims completely.”
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1:
Encouraging the participation of video games in children and teenagers is a dangerous practice. These video games are often violent and thus promote violence in everyday life. Such games have also been shown to encourage violence and anger problems in those already inclined toward violence. At an age at which it is important to foster cooperation among classmates and build friendships, the isolation that comes with excessive gaming makes students more likely to enter conflicts with other students and harms their ability to socialize.
Video games have also been shown to be addictive. This trait makes gaming all the more dangerous, as an exclusive focus on any one hobby can leave children without a well-rounded set of interests and skills. Those playing video games would benefit from other extracurriculars, such as arts or athletics. When children spend all their time playing video games, that leaves less time for more-productive tasks like joining a sport, learning to play an instrument, or picking up other more beneficial hobbies. Parents would be wise to discourage their children from playing video games and instead suggest they pick up a more constructive hobby.
Passage 2:
Video games are often (and unfairly) blamed for negatively impacting children, but in reality, they offer many benefits to those who choose “gaming” as a hobby. Studies show that children who play video games improve their motor skills, reasoning ability, and creative problem-solving when they do so. Additionally, evidence shows us that many find playing video games to be a way to socialize with friends and even build leadership skills, including how to delegate, work as a team, and prioritize tasks. Some have even linked these higher-order thinking skills to career success down the road.
People who would villainize gaming claim that violent games make kids more violent. However, there is little, if any, evidence to show any connection between actions performed in a simulated game and tendencies in real life. In fact, many report that they find playing such games to be stress-relieving, and say that these activities positively impact their mood.
While it is important to limit kids’ daily consumption of any hobby, video games can be a great way to encourage their creative problem solving, leadership, and other valuable life skills!
Who would be most likely to agree with the following statement?
If video games designed for children feature characters consuming healthy, nutritious snacks, children observing and interacting with these games will be encouraged to eat healthier.
Here, the author of passage one uses the claim that video games cause children to be more prone to violence in the real world to advocate that children should not be playing such games. The author of passage two refutes this claim from critics (like the author of passage one) by saying that “there is little, if any, evidence to show any connection between actions performed in a simulated game and tendencies in real life.” So, the author of passage one would likely agree that consuming healthy snacks in a game could encourage children to do so in real life, while the author of passage two does not agree that a child taking an action in the simulated “world” of the game would have any impact on that child’s tendencies in the real world.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1:
Encouraging the participation of video games in children and teenagers is a dangerous practice. These video games are often violent and thus promote violence in everyday life. Such games have also been shown to encourage violence and anger problems in those already inclined toward violence. At an age at which it is important to foster cooperation among classmates and build friendships, the isolation that comes with excessive gaming makes students more likely to enter conflicts with other students and harms their ability to socialize.
Video games have also been shown to be addictive. This trait makes gaming all the more dangerous, as an exclusive focus on any one hobby can leave children without a well-rounded set of interests and skills. Those playing video games would benefit from other extracurriculars, such as arts or athletics. When children spend all their time playing video games, that leaves less time for more-productive tasks like joining a sport, learning to play an instrument, or picking up other more beneficial hobbies. Parents would be wise to discourage their children from playing video games and instead suggest they pick up a more constructive hobby.
Passage 2:
Video games are often (and unfairly) blamed for negatively impacting children, but in reality, they offer many benefits to those who choose “gaming” as a hobby. Studies show that children who play video games improve their motor skills, reasoning ability, and creative problem-solving when they do so. Additionally, evidence shows us that many find playing video games to be a way to socialize with friends and even build leadership skills, including how to delegate, work as a team, and prioritize tasks. Some have even linked these higher-order thinking skills to career success down the road.
People who would villainize gaming claim that violent games make kids more violent. However, there is little, if any, evidence to show any connection between actions performed in a simulated game and tendencies in real life. In fact, many report that they find playing such games to be stress-relieving, and say that these activities positively impact their mood.
While it is important to limit kids’ daily consumption of any hobby, video games can be a great way to encourage their creative problem solving, leadership, and other valuable life skills!
Which of the following statements would the authors of both passages be most likely to agree on?
Both authors cite direct evidence supporting the idea that too much of any hobby can be a bad thing. In paragraph one, the author of passage one says that “exclusive focus on any one hobby can leave children without a well-rounded set of growing skills,” and in paragraph three of passage two, the author notes that “it is important to limit kids’ daily consumption of any hobby.” So, we can see that both authors agree that too much focus on any one hobby can be a bad thing for children. Several of our incorrect answer choices feature arguments that only one of the two authors might side with, or extreme language lie “most” and “only,” which take the answer choices too far.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1:
Encouraging the participation of video games in children and teenagers is a dangerous practice. These video games are often violent and thus promote violence in everyday life. Such games have also been shown to encourage violence and anger problems in those already inclined toward violence. At an age at which it is important to foster cooperation among classmates and build friendships, the isolation that comes with excessive gaming makes students more likely to enter conflicts with other students and harms their ability to socialize.
Video games have also been shown to be addictive. This trait makes gaming all the more dangerous, as an exclusive focus on any one hobby can leave children without a well-rounded set of interests and skills. Those playing video games would benefit from other extracurriculars, such as arts or athletics. When children spend all their time playing video games, that leaves less time for more-productive tasks like joining a sport, learning to play an instrument, or picking up other more beneficial hobbies. Parents would be wise to discourage their children from playing video games and instead suggest they pick up a more constructive hobby.
Passage 2:
Video games are often (and unfairly) blamed for negatively impacting children, but in reality, they offer many benefits to those who choose “gaming” as a hobby. Studies show that children who play video games improve their motor skills, reasoning ability, and creative problem-solving when they do so. Additionally, evidence shows us that many find playing video games to be a way to socialize with friends and even build leadership skills, including how to delegate, work as a team, and prioritize tasks. Some have even linked these higher-order thinking skills to career success down the road.
People who would villainize gaming claim that violent games make kids more violent. However, there is little, if any, evidence to show any connection between actions performed in a simulated game and tendencies in real life. In fact, many report that they find playing such games to be stress-relieving, and say that these activities positively impact their mood.
While it is important to limit kids’ daily consumption of any hobby, video games can be a great way to encourage their creative problem solving, leadership, and other valuable life skills!
The authors of both passages would be most likely to describe video games as
Here, we want to find the commonality behind what both authors consider to be true of video games. While some of our answers align with one author’s opinion but contrast the other, only “appealing to children” addresses an opinion held by both authors. Both authors provide the support that children enjoy video games and find them appealing, though one considers this to be a primarily positive attribute, while the other considers this trait primarily negative and dangerous.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1:
When schools prepare elective courses for their students (courses that provide an optional list of classes to suit different students’ interests), they should not comply with pressures to make those classes more “practical” or “career-driven.” Elective courses should be a way for students to express their creativity and interests in a format they enjoy and should provide students with a break from the mundane math and English topics they’ve spent the day learning about. Whether it’s painting, photography, dodgeball, or gardening, elective courses should be a way for students to establish and embrace hobbies and interests, a break from an otherwise full day of learning all are subjected to.
Passage 2:
Elective courses provide an opportunity for students to branch out and take different courses from those of their classmates. However, too much emphasis in school has been placed on topics that most students will never use as adults! Most students will not grow up to be artists or to use the Pythagorean Theorem in their day-to-day lives. So, it’s only logical that elective courses should be focused on life skills students will find helpful as adults, such as personal finance and home economics. It’s never too early to build life skills that will make an individual more well-rounded as an adult!
Passage 3:
Core classes are fighting a losing battle against electives for middle and high school-aged children. While schools mean well when they encourage students to express their creativity in class, emphasis on elective classes must come at the direct expense of more valuable core material. Schools should understand that their job is to prepare children and young adults for the workforce, and should place more emphasis on STEM (Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) material. There is currently more demand for STEM workers than there are interested and qualified adults. Therefore, if we place more emphasis on STEM skills for students, we will encourage interest in the jobs most needed when those children grow up and plan for their careers.
Which of the following most clearly expresses what each of the three authors disagrees about?
While some of the other answer options are addressed in one of the passages, or perhaps even two, the only thing we know all three authors disagree - to at least some extent - about is what schools should prioritize in classroom learning. Each of the three authors has a distinctly different perspective on what needs to be further prioritized in classroom learning and, where applicable, in elective classes in particular.
Passage 1’s author believes that “whether it’s painting, photography, dodgeball, or gardening, elective courses should be a way for students to establish and embrace hobbies and interests, a break from an otherwise full day of learning all are subjected to.”
Passage 2’s author thinks that “it’s only logical that elective courses should be focused on life skills students will find helpful as adults, such as personal finance and home economics.”
Passage 3’s author believes that “Schools should understand that their job is to prepare children and young adults for the workforce, and should place more emphasis on STEM (Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) material.”
So, we know that each author has a different perspective on what schools should emphasize in elective courses, and the role such courses should play in schooling as a whole.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1:
When schools prepare elective courses for their students (courses that provide an optional list of classes to suit different students’ interests), they should not comply with pressures to make those classes more “practical” or “career-driven.” Elective courses should be a way for students to express their creativity and interests in a format they enjoy and should provide students with a break from the mundane math and English topics they’ve spent the day learning about. Whether it’s painting, photography, dodgeball, or gardening, elective courses should be a way for students to establish and embrace hobbies and interests, a break from an otherwise full day of learning all are subjected to.
Passage 2:
Elective courses provide an opportunity for students to branch out and take different courses from those of their classmates. However, too much emphasis in school has been placed on topics that most students will never use as adults! Most students will not grow up to be artists or to use the Pythagorean Theorem in their day-to-day lives. So, it’s only logical that elective courses should be focused on life skills students will find helpful as adults, such as personal finance and home economics. It’s never too early to build life skills that will make an individual more well-rounded as an adult!
Passage 3:
Core classes are fighting a losing battle against electives for middle and high school-aged children. While schools mean well when they encourage students to express their creativity in class, emphasis on elective classes must come at the direct expense of more valuable core material. Schools should understand that their job is to prepare children and young adults for the workforce, and should place more emphasis on STEM (Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) material. There is currently more demand for STEM workers than there are interested and qualified adults. Therefore, if we place more emphasis on STEM skills for students, we will encourage interest in the jobs most needed when those children grow up and plan for their careers.
Which author would be most likely to agree with the following statement?
“Children are under enough pressure as it is. Asking children to commit their “elective” time to stressful tasks that might not be helpful to them until their adult lives is unreasonable and counterproductive.”
The authors of Passages 2 and 3 both cite practical, future-driven reasons why classes, even elective classes, should be focused on skills that will become useful for students as they grow up and seek out jobs/care for themselves. The author of Passage 1 contrasts this view specifically, by citing that “elective courses should be a way for students to establish and embrace hobbies and interests, a break from an otherwise full day of learning all are subjected to.” So, the author of Passage 1 believes the ideal role of electives is to provide a break and an opportunity to pursue personal interests, not to set students up for future career success or practical life skills.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1:
When schools prepare elective courses for their students (courses that provide an optional list of classes to suit different students’ interests), they should not comply with pressures to make those classes more “practical” or “career-driven.” Elective courses should be a way for students to express their creativity and interests in a format they enjoy and should provide students with a break from the mundane math and English topics they’ve spent the day learning about. Whether it’s painting, photography, dodgeball, or gardening, elective courses should be a way for students to establish and embrace hobbies and interests, a break from an otherwise full day of learning all are subjected to.
Passage 2:
Elective courses provide an opportunity for students to branch out and take different courses from those of their classmates. However, too much emphasis in school has been placed on topics that most students will never use as adults! Most students will not grow up to be artists or to use the Pythagorean Theorem in their day-to-day lives. So, it’s only logical that elective courses should be focused on life skills students will find helpful as adults, such as personal finance and home economics. It’s never too early to build life skills that will make an individual more well-rounded as an adult!
Passage 3:
Core classes are fighting a losing battle against electives for middle and high school-aged children. While schools mean well when they encourage students to express their creativity in class, emphasis on elective classes must come at the direct expense of more valuable core material. Schools should understand that their job is to prepare children and young adults for the workforce, and should place more emphasis on STEM (Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) material. There is currently more demand for STEM workers than there are interested and qualified adults. Therefore, if we place more emphasis on STEM skills for students, we will encourage interest in the jobs most needed when those children grow up and plan for their careers.
Which of the following excerpts from Passages 2 & 3 would the author of Passage 1 be most likely to disagree with?
While there are some components the authors might likely agree on, only one of our options represents a clear point of disagreement. While the author of passage 3 claims that “emphasis on elective classes must come at the direct expense of more valuable core material,” the author of Passage 1 clearly sees value in elective courses, and would not entirely agree that core courses represent “more valuable” time spent. In fact, the author of Passage 1 argues that taking time to reinforce creative skills and relieve stress is also an essential part of a child’s school day, and should be accomplished through the use of electives.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1:
School-age children are filled with curiosity and seek to discover new and exciting things every day! So, it is silly to assume that a child would not appreciate the faraway places and times of classics by Mark Twain, Charles Dickens, and Shakespeare. Regardless of the child’s age, if he or she can break down the structure of Shakespeare’s sonnets or the satire of Dickens’s episodics, there is no reason such a child should have to wait until the later part of his or her schooling to enjoy such works. In fact, limiting younger children to writing consisting only of relatable elementary- and middle-school topics such as going to school, overcoming bullying, and growing up only acts to stifle the curiosity that could otherwise be strengthened by the wonder of classic literature.
Passage 2:
There is no simpler way to drive children away from reading than to fill their arms and their reading lists with dense, boring novels full of language and topics they find unrelatable and difficult to understand. Allow a child to find his love for reading through books that he can relate to and he will hold onto that appreciation of reading for a lifetime. Force him to know only difficult constructions and dated language when he reads, and you’ll be sure to chase him away from the hobby entirely! By allowing children to read about what they find interesting, or what they can relate to, whether it’s the common challenges faced making friends in school or the wonder of talking animals and superheroes, you build the foundation for a love of reading that will eventually make its way to the classic literature adult readers have come to embrace.
Which of the following would the authors of both passages be likely to agree on?
Here, we’re looking for something both authors agree upon. It’s clear from the passages that both authors agree that reading is an important and worthwhile hobby for children. The point the authors disagree on is how to best keep children interested in reading. Several of our wrong answers either represent one point of view, but not the other, or take a detail present in one of the passages way too far to create a point of view that is unrealistic for either author. (Does either author really think children will believe the talking animals and superheroes are true stories?)
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1:
School-age children are filled with curiosity and seek to discover new and exciting things every day! So, it is silly to assume that a child would not appreciate the faraway places and times of classics by Mark Twain, Charles Dickens, and Shakespeare. Regardless of the child’s age, if he or she can break down the structure of Shakespeare’s sonnets or the satire of Dickens’s episodics, there is no reason such a child should have to wait until the later part of his or her schooling to enjoy such works. In fact, limiting younger children to writing consisting only of relatable elementary- and middle-school topics such as going to school, overcoming bullying, and growing up only acts to stifle the curiosity that could otherwise be strengthened by the wonder of classic literature.
Passage 2:
There is no simpler way to drive children away from reading than to fill their arms and their reading lists with dense, boring novels full of language and topics they find unrelatable and difficult to understand. Allow a child to find his love for reading through books that he can relate to and he will hold onto that appreciation of reading for a lifetime. Force him to know only difficult constructions and dated language when he reads, and you’ll be sure to chase him away from the hobby entirely! By allowing children to read about what they find interesting, or what they can relate to, whether it’s the common challenges faced making friends in school or the wonder of talking animals and superheroes, you build the foundation for a love of reading that will eventually make its way to the classic literature adult readers have come to embrace.
Which of the following represents the point the authors of Passages 1 & 2 disagree about?
If we summarize the points made by each author, we can see that the author of Passage 1 thinks that children would find value in reading classic novels, and that they should be encouraged to do so. The author of Passage 2 on the other hand, thinks that children will be encouraged to read if they are given books written specifically with their interests and daily lives in mind, they will be more likely to want to continue to read. This aligns perfectly with: “The author of Passage 1 believes that children would benefit from reading classic literature designed for adults, but the author of Passage 2 believes that the novels children read should be designed with their age and interests in mind.” Here, our wrong answers either take too far an extreme, or present the correct opinion from the wrong point of view/passage, as we see with: “The author of Passage 1 believes that children learn to love reading when they read about topics they know and experience, but the author of Passage 2 believes that only classic literature can truly grow this interest.”
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1:
School-age children are filled with curiosity and seek to discover new and exciting things every day! So, it is silly to assume that a child would not appreciate the faraway places and times of classics by Mark Twain, Charles Dickens, and Shakespeare. Regardless of the child’s age, if he or she can break down the structure of Shakespeare’s sonnets or the satire of Dickens’s episodics, there is no reason such a child should have to wait until the later part of his or her schooling to enjoy such works. In fact, limiting younger children to writing consisting only of relatable elementary- and middle-school topics such as going to school, overcoming bullying, and growing up only acts to stifle the curiosity that could otherwise be strengthened by the wonder of classic literature.
Passage 2:
There is no simpler way to drive children away from reading than to fill their arms and their reading lists with dense, boring novels full of language and topics they find unrelatable and difficult to understand. Allow a child to find his love for reading through books that he can relate to and he will hold onto that appreciation of reading for a lifetime. Force him to know only difficult constructions and dated language when he reads, and you’ll be sure to chase him away from the hobby entirely! By allowing children to read about what they find interesting, or what they can relate to, whether it’s the common challenges faced making friends in school or the wonder of talking animals and superheroes, you build the foundation for a love of reading that will eventually make its way to the classic literature adult readers have come to embrace.
Which point of view would the following piece of evidence be most likely to support?
When asked about the inspiration for their work, many adults working in the field of literature cite classic novels such as The Great Gatsby and Wuthering Heights as the novels that gained their interest in literature at a young age.
We can see that the author of Passage 1 thinks that allowing and encouraging children to read classic novels at a young age will inspire them to continue to enjoy reading and literature as a whole. The author of Passage 2, on the other hand, thinks that “There is no simpler way to drive children away from reading than to fill their arms and their reading lists with dense, boring novels full of language and topics they find unrelatable and difficult to understand.” So, The author of Passage 1, but not the author of Passage 2” would be supported by this piece of evidence.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1
It’s a great time to be green! Environmentally friendly practices have become very popular with shoppers. Business owners can capitalize on this trend by accurately advertising how their products are good for the environment, such as by using recycled materials.
Many shoppers associate the color green with sustainability. So, consider using eye-catching green details on your products when describing how they help the environment. You may want to incorporate symbols of nature into your advertising as well. Popular symbols associated with sustainability include leaves, trees, and flowers. These details may not seem important, but they are. The visual way in which a sustainability claim is made can make the difference between a shopper trying your product or leaving it on the shelf.
Some people want to regulate sustainability claims. This is a bad idea. Increased regulation would be an unnecessary burden on businesses. It would slow the time it takes them to adapt to trends. If every advertising decision had to be approved by a regulating body, a lot of time would be wasted. Just think how ridiculous it would be if you wanted to use a blue logo instead of a red one and had to fill out paperwork approving that decision! The threat of increased regulation is all the more reason to emphasize the greenness of your products today.
Passage 2
Environmentalism has become very popular lately. As a result, many products are emphasizing “green” status—that is, how they help protect the environment. This trend has been accompanied by an ugly shadow: “greenwashing.” “Greenwashing” is the practice of making false claims about a product’s sustainability. Companies can say that a product is “greener” than it really is. These false claims are made so that the product can appeal to shoppers.
As a result, shoppers have become less confident about all sustainability claims. There’s no way to tell from packaging and advertisements if a product is actually helping the environment or just claiming to do so. And it’s not easy to research products in the aisles of a supermarket or department store! It’s certainly extra work that many shoppers won’t do. Instead, they ignore “green” claims completely.
Competition and “greenwashing” have also encouraged companies to prioritize appearing green over actually being green. As a result, money is spent on making products appear to be something they are not instead of on actually improving the products and making them more sustainable.
So, what can we do? We need to start by regulating sustainability claims. This way, consumers can be confident that claims they see are true, since false claims would not be allowed on packaging. This will be a step in the right direction.
Which of the following accurately describes how the passages differ?
It's easy to get the passages confused with one another when answering a question like this, so let's make a list of traits of each one so that we can distinguish between them accurately.
Passage 1:
- addressed to advertisers and business owners
- discusses positive effects of claims about sustainability
- urges businesses to make sustainability claims
- opposes regulating sustainability claims
- does not mention "greenwashing."
Passage 2:
- addressed to a general audience
- discusses negative effects of claims about sustainability
- supports regulating sustainability claims
- discusses "greenwashing" as a problem
Now we can sort through these answer choices a bit more easily. Passage 1 certainly doesn't see "green" claims as having primarily negative effects, and it doesn't suggest that "greenwashing" is a positive thing or a problem, since it doesn't mention "greenwashing" at all. Passage 2 doesn't claim that sustainability has always been a part of advertising. Noting these details allows us to narrow down our answer choices to the correct one: "Passage 1 is addressed to business owners, but Passage 2 is addressed to a general audience." We can tell that Passage 1 addresses business owners because of the way it gives advice about designing advertisement claims and ends with a call to action aimed at business owners: "The threat of increased regulation is all the more reason to emphasize the greenness of your products today." Notice how it uses the word "your" in "your products" to speak directly to business owners. On the other hand, Passage 2 is addressed to a general audience. It explains what greenwashing is, the problems it has caused, and then suggests that regulation could help solve it. Its call to action is aimed at the general public: "So, what can we do? We need to start by regulating sustainability claims." This all confirms that the correct answer is the one discussing the passages' different audiences.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1
It’s a great time to be green! Environmentally friendly practices have become very popular with shoppers. Business owners can capitalize on this trend by accurately advertising how their products are good for the environment, such as by using recycled materials.
Many shoppers associate the color green with sustainability. So, consider using eye-catching green details on your products when describing how they help the environment. You may want to incorporate symbols of nature into your advertising as well. Popular symbols associated with sustainability include leaves, trees, and flowers. These details may not seem important, but they are. The visual way in which a sustainability claim is made can make the difference between a shopper trying your product or leaving it on the shelf.
Some people want to regulate sustainability claims. This is a bad idea. Increased regulation would be an unnecessary burden on businesses. It would slow the time it takes them to adapt to trends. If every advertising decision had to be approved by a regulating body, a lot of time would be wasted. Just think how ridiculous it would be if you wanted to use a blue logo instead of a red one and had to fill out paperwork approving that decision! The threat of increased regulation is all the more reason to emphasize the greenness of your products today.
Passage 2
Environmentalism has become very popular lately. As a result, many products are emphasizing “green” status—that is, how they help protect the environment. This trend has been accompanied by an ugly shadow: “greenwashing.” “Greenwashing” is the practice of making false claims about a product’s sustainability. Companies can say that a product is “greener” than it really is. These false claims are made so that the product can appeal to shoppers.
As a result, shoppers have become less confident about all sustainability claims. There’s no way to tell from packaging and advertisements if a product is actually helping the environment or just claiming to do so. And it’s not easy to research products in the aisles of a supermarket or department store! It’s certainly extra work that many shoppers won’t do. Instead, they ignore “green” claims completely.
Competition and “greenwashing” have also encouraged companies to prioritize appearing green over actually being green. As a result, money is spent on making products appear to be something they are not instead of on actually improving the products and making them more sustainable.
So, what can we do? We need to start by regulating sustainability claims. This way, consumers can be confident that claims they see are true, since false claims would not be allowed on packaging. This will be a step in the right direction.
The passages make conflicting statements about which of the following topics?
While both Passage 1 and Passage 2 discuss sustainability as it relates to advertising on products, they don't make very many statements that explicitly and directly disagree with one another. One reason for this is that Passage 2 discusses "greenwashing" directly, Passage 1 never mentions it. This can make it a bit challenging to identify the specific point about which they disagree.
Let's summarize the claims made in each of the passages to find the statements that oppose one another, using the provided answer choices as guidelines.
Passage 1
- Environmentalism is popular with shoppers.
- By advertising how their products are sustainable, businesses can make use of the trend.
- Regulating sustainability claims is a bad idea because it will slow down businesses' abilities to react to trends.
Passage 2
- Environmentalism is popular, leading to the popularity of "green" products.
- "Greenwashing" is a bad thing.
- Because of greenwashing, shoppers are less confident about sustainability claims, ignoring them completely.
- Another result of greenwashing is that companies think it's more important to appear sustainable than to actually be sustainable.
- We should regulate sustainability claims to deal with this problem.
Look at that—the underlined claims oppose one another directly! The best answer is the one that reflects these particular statements: that the passages disagree about "whether sustainability claims should be regulated."
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1
It’s a great time to be green! Environmentally friendly practices have become very popular with shoppers. Business owners can capitalize on this trend by accurately advertising how their products are good for the environment, such as by using recycled materials.
Many shoppers associate the color green with sustainability. So, consider using eye-catching green details on your products when describing how they help the environment. You may want to incorporate symbols of nature into your advertising as well. Popular symbols associated with sustainability include leaves, trees, and flowers. These details may not seem important, but they are. The visual way in which a sustainability claim is made can make the difference between a shopper trying your product or leaving it on the shelf.
Some people want to regulate sustainability claims. This is a bad idea. Increased regulation would be an unnecessary burden on businesses. It would slow the time it takes them to adapt to trends. If every advertising decision had to be approved by a regulating body, a lot of time would be wasted. Just think how ridiculous it would be if you wanted to use a blue logo instead of a red one and had to fill out paperwork approving that decision! The threat of increased regulation is all the more reason to emphasize the greenness of your products today.
Passage 2
Environmentalism has become very popular lately. As a result, many products are emphasizing “green” status—that is, how they help protect the environment. This trend has been accompanied by an ugly shadow: “greenwashing.” “Greenwashing” is the practice of making false claims about a product’s sustainability. Companies can say that a product is “greener” than it really is. These false claims are made so that the product can appeal to shoppers.
As a result, shoppers have become less confident about all sustainability claims. There’s no way to tell from packaging and advertisements if a product is actually helping the environment or just claiming to do so. And it’s not easy to research products in the aisles of a supermarket or department store! It’s certainly extra work that many shoppers won’t do. Instead, they ignore “green” claims completely.
Competition and “greenwashing” have also encouraged companies to prioritize appearing green over actually being green. As a result, money is spent on making products appear to be something they are not instead of on actually improving the products and making them more sustainable.
So, what can we do? We need to start by regulating sustainability claims. This way, consumers can be confident that claims they see are true, since false claims would not be allowed on packaging. This will be a step in the right direction.
In its second paragraph, Passage 1 states, “These details may not seem important, but they are. The visual way in which a sustainability claim is made can make the difference between a shopper trying your product or leaving it on the shelf.”
Which of the following sentences in Passage 2 most directly opposes this claim?
To directly oppose Passage 1's claim, the correct sentence from Passage 2 will need to be talking about the same specific thing that Passage 1's claim concerns. Passage 2's claim will voice a different view about the topic, but the fact remains that to directly oppose someone else's claim, you have to be talking about the same thing. Let's start by identifying what Passage 1's claim specifically concerns. To what do "these details" refer? This sentence appears in the second paragraph of Passage 1, where it discusses visual details of advertising decisions, like what colors and icons to use when making claims about sustainability. The excerpt says that these claims have a big effect on whether a customer will or won't purchase a product.
Now that we've identified that, let's look over the answer choices and find the one that most directly talks about visual details of advertising and the effects they have. ""As a result, money is spent on making products appear to be something they are not instead of on actually improving the products and making them more sustainable" talks about the appearance of advertising claims, but it doesn't directly oppose Passage 1's claim that these are very effective. It's bringing up a new point—that the money spent making them appear sustainable isn't being used to make them more sustainable. The answer choice “Competition and 'greenwashing' have also encouraged companies to prioritize appearing green over actually being green" similarly mentions appearing to be green, but doesn't suggest that these appearances aren't effective, even though Passage 2 accuses many of them as involving false claims. The answer choice “And it’s not easy to research products in the aisles of a supermarket or department store! It’s certainly extra work that many shoppers won’t do" has nothing to do with sustainability claims and advertising details, so it's not correct.
We have two answer choices left to choose from: "As a result, shoppers have become less confident about all sustainability claims" and “Instead, \[shoppers\] ignore “green” claims completely.” Both of these are stating that the details of sustainability claims aren't making them really effective at getting people to buy those products. Which opposes Statement 1's claim most directly? The idea that shoppers ignore sustainability claims completely is a stronger opposing argument than is the idea that shoppers are simply less confident in the claims, so the best answer is “Instead, \[shoppers\] ignore “green” claims completely.”
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1:
Encouraging the participation of video games in children and teenagers is a dangerous practice. These video games are often violent and thus promote violence in everyday life. Such games have also been shown to encourage violence and anger problems in those already inclined toward violence. At an age at which it is important to foster cooperation among classmates and build friendships, the isolation that comes with excessive gaming makes students more likely to enter conflicts with other students and harms their ability to socialize.
Video games have also been shown to be addictive. This trait makes gaming all the more dangerous, as an exclusive focus on any one hobby can leave children without a well-rounded set of interests and skills. Those playing video games would benefit from other extracurriculars, such as arts or athletics. When children spend all their time playing video games, that leaves less time for more-productive tasks like joining a sport, learning to play an instrument, or picking up other more beneficial hobbies. Parents would be wise to discourage their children from playing video games and instead suggest they pick up a more constructive hobby.
Passage 2:
Video games are often (and unfairly) blamed for negatively impacting children, but in reality, they offer many benefits to those who choose “gaming” as a hobby. Studies show that children who play video games improve their motor skills, reasoning ability, and creative problem-solving when they do so. Additionally, evidence shows us that many find playing video games to be a way to socialize with friends and even build leadership skills, including how to delegate, work as a team, and prioritize tasks. Some have even linked these higher-order thinking skills to career success down the road.
People who would villainize gaming claim that violent games make kids more violent. However, there is little, if any, evidence to show any connection between actions performed in a simulated game and tendencies in real life. In fact, many report that they find playing such games to be stress-relieving, and say that these activities positively impact their mood.
While it is important to limit kids’ daily consumption of any hobby, video games can be a great way to encourage their creative problem solving, leadership, and other valuable life skills!
Who would be most likely to agree with the following statement?
If video games designed for children feature characters consuming healthy, nutritious snacks, children observing and interacting with these games will be encouraged to eat healthier.
Here, the author of passage one uses the claim that video games cause children to be more prone to violence in the real world to advocate that children should not be playing such games. The author of passage two refutes this claim from critics (like the author of passage one) by saying that “there is little, if any, evidence to show any connection between actions performed in a simulated game and tendencies in real life.” So, the author of passage one would likely agree that consuming healthy snacks in a game could encourage children to do so in real life, while the author of passage two does not agree that a child taking an action in the simulated “world” of the game would have any impact on that child’s tendencies in the real world.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1:
Encouraging the participation of video games in children and teenagers is a dangerous practice. These video games are often violent and thus promote violence in everyday life. Such games have also been shown to encourage violence and anger problems in those already inclined toward violence. At an age at which it is important to foster cooperation among classmates and build friendships, the isolation that comes with excessive gaming makes students more likely to enter conflicts with other students and harms their ability to socialize.
Video games have also been shown to be addictive. This trait makes gaming all the more dangerous, as an exclusive focus on any one hobby can leave children without a well-rounded set of interests and skills. Those playing video games would benefit from other extracurriculars, such as arts or athletics. When children spend all their time playing video games, that leaves less time for more-productive tasks like joining a sport, learning to play an instrument, or picking up other more beneficial hobbies. Parents would be wise to discourage their children from playing video games and instead suggest they pick up a more constructive hobby.
Passage 2:
Video games are often (and unfairly) blamed for negatively impacting children, but in reality, they offer many benefits to those who choose “gaming” as a hobby. Studies show that children who play video games improve their motor skills, reasoning ability, and creative problem-solving when they do so. Additionally, evidence shows us that many find playing video games to be a way to socialize with friends and even build leadership skills, including how to delegate, work as a team, and prioritize tasks. Some have even linked these higher-order thinking skills to career success down the road.
People who would villainize gaming claim that violent games make kids more violent. However, there is little, if any, evidence to show any connection between actions performed in a simulated game and tendencies in real life. In fact, many report that they find playing such games to be stress-relieving, and say that these activities positively impact their mood.
While it is important to limit kids’ daily consumption of any hobby, video games can be a great way to encourage their creative problem solving, leadership, and other valuable life skills!
In paragraph two, the author of passage one makes the following statement:
“Parents would be wise to discourage their children from playing video games and instead suggest they pick up a more constructive hobby.”
Which excerpt from passage two provides the best counterargument to that claim?
In this question, we want something that specifically counters the idea that children should not play video games and should instead focus on “more constructive” hobbies. The correct choice counters this claim by showing that video games can be constructive hobbies. While our other answer choices are all claims made by the author of passage two, only the correct choice specifically addresses a potential flaw in the author of passage one’s argument.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1:
Encouraging the participation of video games in children and teenagers is a dangerous practice. These video games are often violent and thus promote violence in everyday life. Such games have also been shown to encourage violence and anger problems in those already inclined toward violence. At an age at which it is important to foster cooperation among classmates and build friendships, the isolation that comes with excessive gaming makes students more likely to enter conflicts with other students and harms their ability to socialize.
Video games have also been shown to be addictive. This trait makes gaming all the more dangerous, as an exclusive focus on any one hobby can leave children without a well-rounded set of interests and skills. Those playing video games would benefit from other extracurriculars, such as arts or athletics. When children spend all their time playing video games, that leaves less time for more-productive tasks like joining a sport, learning to play an instrument, or picking up other more beneficial hobbies. Parents would be wise to discourage their children from playing video games and instead suggest they pick up a more constructive hobby.
Passage 2:
Video games are often (and unfairly) blamed for negatively impacting children, but in reality, they offer many benefits to those who choose “gaming” as a hobby. Studies show that children who play video games improve their motor skills, reasoning ability, and creative problem-solving when they do so. Additionally, evidence shows us that many find playing video games to be a way to socialize with friends and even build leadership skills, including how to delegate, work as a team, and prioritize tasks. Some have even linked these higher-order thinking skills to career success down the road.
People who would villainize gaming claim that violent games make kids more violent. However, there is little, if any, evidence to show any connection between actions performed in a simulated game and tendencies in real life. In fact, many report that they find playing such games to be stress-relieving, and say that these activities positively impact their mood.
While it is important to limit kids’ daily consumption of any hobby, video games can be a great way to encourage their creative problem solving, leadership, and other valuable life skills!
Which of the following statements would the authors of both passages be most likely to agree on?
Both authors cite direct evidence supporting the idea that too much of any hobby can be a bad thing. In paragraph one, the author of passage one says that “exclusive focus on any one hobby can leave children without a well-rounded set of growing skills,” and in paragraph three of passage two, the author notes that “it is important to limit kids’ daily consumption of any hobby.” So, we can see that both authors agree that too much focus on any one hobby can be a bad thing for children. Several of our incorrect answer choices feature arguments that only one of the two authors might side with, or extreme language lie “most” and “only,” which take the answer choices too far.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage 1:
Encouraging the participation of video games in children and teenagers is a dangerous practice. These video games are often violent and thus promote violence in everyday life. Such games have also been shown to encourage violence and anger problems in those already inclined toward violence. At an age at which it is important to foster cooperation among classmates and build friendships, the isolation that comes with excessive gaming makes students more likely to enter conflicts with other students and harms their ability to socialize.
Video games have also been shown to be addictive. This trait makes gaming all the more dangerous, as an exclusive focus on any one hobby can leave children without a well-rounded set of interests and skills. Those playing video games would benefit from other extracurriculars, such as arts or athletics. When children spend all their time playing video games, that leaves less time for more-productive tasks like joining a sport, learning to play an instrument, or picking up other more beneficial hobbies. Parents would be wise to discourage their children from playing video games and instead suggest they pick up a more constructive hobby.
Passage 2:
Video games are often (and unfairly) blamed for negatively impacting children, but in reality, they offer many benefits to those who choose “gaming” as a hobby. Studies show that children who play video games improve their motor skills, reasoning ability, and creative problem-solving when they do so. Additionally, evidence shows us that many find playing video games to be a way to socialize with friends and even build leadership skills, including how to delegate, work as a team, and prioritize tasks. Some have even linked these higher-order thinking skills to career success down the road.
People who would villainize gaming claim that violent games make kids more violent. However, there is little, if any, evidence to show any connection between actions performed in a simulated game and tendencies in real life. In fact, many report that they find playing such games to be stress-relieving, and say that these activities positively impact their mood.
While it is important to limit kids’ daily consumption of any hobby, video games can be a great way to encourage their creative problem solving, leadership, and other valuable life skills!
The authors of both passages would be most likely to describe video games as
Here, we want to find the commonality behind what both authors consider to be true of video games. While some of our answers align with one author’s opinion but contrast the other, only “appealing to children” addresses an opinion held by both authors. Both authors provide the support that children enjoy video games and find them appealing, though one considers this to be a primarily positive attribute, while the other considers this trait primarily negative and dangerous.
Compare your answer with the correct one above