Question:
\section{Passage 1}I have shown how democracy destroys or modifies the different inequalities which originate in society; but is this all? or does it not ultimately affect  that great inequality of man and woman which hasseemed, up to the present day, to be eternally based in human nature? I believe that the social changes which bring nearer to the same level the father and son, the master and servant, and superiors and inferiors generally speaking, will raise woman andmake her more and more the equal of man. But here, more than ever, I feel the necessity of making myself clearly understood; for there is no subject on which the coarse and lawless fancies of our age have taken a freer range.There are people in Europe who, confounding together the different characteristics of the sexes, would make of man and woman beings not only equal but alike. They would give to both the same functions, impose on both the same duties, and grant20 to both the same rights; they would mix them in all things-their occupations, their pleasures, their business. It may readily be conceived, that by thus attempting to make one sex equal to the other, both are degraded; and from so preposterous a medley of 25 the works of nature nothing could ever result but weak men and disorderly women.It is not thus that the Americans understand that species of democratic equality which may be established between the sexes. They admit, that as 30 nature has appointed such wide differences between the physical and moral constitution of man and woman, her manifest design was to give a distinct employment to their various faculties; and they hold that improvement does not consist in making beings 35 so dissimilar do pretty nearly the same things, but in getting each of them to fulfill their respective tasks in the best possible manner. The Americans have applied to the sexes the great principle of political economy which governs the manufactures of our age, 40 by carefully dividing the duties of man from those of woman, in order that the great work of society may be the better carried on.\section{Passage 2}As society was constituted until the last few generations, inequality was its very basis; association 45 grounded on equal rights scarcely existed; to be equals was to be enemies; two persons could hardly coöperate in anything, or meet in any amicable relation, without the law's appointing that one of them should be the superior of the other.50 Mankind have outgrown this state, and all things now tend to substitute, as the general principle of human relations, a just equality, instead of the dominion of the strongest. But of all relations, that between men and women, being the nearest and55 most intimate, and connected with the greatest number of strong emotions, was sure to be the last to throw off the old rule, and receive the new; for, in proportion to the strength of a feeling is the tenacity with which it clings to the forms and60 circumstances with which it has even accidentally become associated. ...... The proper sphere for all human beings is the largest and highest which they are able to attain to. What this is, cannot be ascertained without complete 65 liberty of choice.... Let every occupation be open to all, without favor or discouragement to any, and employments will fall into the hands of those men or women who are found by experience to be most capable of worthily exercising them. There need be70 no fear that women will take out of the hands of men any occupation which men perform better than they. Each individual will prove his or her capacities, in the only way in which capacities can be proved,-by trial; and the world will have the benefit of the best75 faculties of all its inhabitants. But to interfere beforehand by an arbitrary limit, and declare that whatever be the genius, talent, energy, or force of mind, of an individual of a certain sex or class, those faculties shall not be exerted, or shall be exerted only80 in some few of the many modes in which others are permitted to use theirs, is not only an injustice to the individual, and a detriment to society, which loses what it can ill spare, but is also the most effectual way of providing that, in the sex or class so fettered, the85 qualities which are not permitted to be exercised shall not exist.
Question: Which choice best describes the ways that the two authors conceive of the individual's proper position in society?
 A. Tocqueville believes that an individual's position should be defined in important ways by that individual's sex, while Mill believes that an individual's abilities should be the determining factor.
 B. Tocqueville believes that an individual's economic class should determine that individual's position, while Mill believes that class is not a legitimate consideration.
 C. Tocqueville believes that an individual's temperament should determine that individual's position, while Mill believes that temperament should not be a factor in an individual's position.
 D. Tocqueville believes that an individual's position should be determined by what is most beneficial to society, while Mill believes it should be determined by what an individual finds most rewarding. 41
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D

\section{Passage 1}I have shown how democracy destroys or modifies the different inequalities which originate in society; but is this all? or does it not ultimately affect  that great inequality of man and woman which hasseemed, up to the present day, to be eternally based in human nature? I believe that the social changes which bring nearer to the same level the father and son, the master and servant, and superiors and inferiors generally speaking, will raise woman andmake her more and more the equal of man. But here, more than ever, I feel the necessity of making myself clearly understood; for there is no subject on which the coarse and lawless fancies of our age have taken a freer range.There are people in Europe who, confounding together the different characteristics of the sexes, would make of man and woman beings not only equal but alike. They would give to both the same functions, impose on both the same duties, and grant20 to both the same rights; they would mix them in all things-their occupations, their pleasures, their business. It may readily be conceived, that by thus attempting to make one sex equal to the other, both are degraded; and from so preposterous a medley of 25 the works of nature nothing could ever result but weak men and disorderly women.It is not thus that the Americans understand that species of democratic equality which may be established between the sexes. They admit, that as 30 nature has appointed such wide differences between the physical and moral constitution of man and woman, her manifest design was to give a distinct employment to their various faculties; and they hold that improvement does not consist in making beings 35 so dissimilar do pretty nearly the same things, but in getting each of them to fulfill their respective tasks in the best possible manner. The Americans have applied to the sexes the great principle of political economy which governs the manufactures of our age, 40 by carefully dividing the duties of man from those of woman, in order that the great work of society may be the better carried on.\section{Passage 2}As society was constituted until the last few generations, inequality was its very basis; association 45 grounded on equal rights scarcely existed; to be equals was to be enemies; two persons could hardly coöperate in anything, or meet in any amicable relation, without the law's appointing that one of them should be the superior of the other.50 Mankind have outgrown this state, and all things now tend to substitute, as the general principle of human relations, a just equality, instead of the dominion of the strongest. But of all relations, that between men and women, being the nearest and55 most intimate, and connected with the greatest number of strong emotions, was sure to be the last to throw off the old rule, and receive the new; for, in proportion to the strength of a feeling is the tenacity with which it clings to the forms and60 circumstances with which it has even accidentally become associated. ...... The proper sphere for all human beings is the largest and highest which they are able to attain to. What this is, cannot be ascertained without complete 65 liberty of choice.... Let every occupation be open to all, without favor or discouragement to any, and employments will fall into the hands of those men or women who are found by experience to be most capable of worthily exercising them. There need be70 no fear that women will take out of the hands of men any occupation which men perform better than they. Each individual will prove his or her capacities, in the only way in which capacities can be proved,-by trial; and the world will have the benefit of the best75 faculties of all its inhabitants. But to interfere beforehand by an arbitrary limit, and declare that whatever be the genius, talent, energy, or force of mind, of an individual of a certain sex or class, those faculties shall not be exerted, or shall be exerted only80 in some few of the many modes in which others are permitted to use theirs, is not only an injustice to the individual, and a detriment to society, which loses what it can ill spare, but is also the most effectual way of providing that, in the sex or class so fettered, the85 qualities which are not permitted to be exercised shall not exist.
Question: Which choice best describes the ways that the two authors conceive of the individual's proper position in society?
 A. Tocqueville believes that an individual's position should be defined in important ways by that individual's sex, while Mill believes that an individual's abilities should be the determining factor.
 B. Tocqueville believes that an individual's economic class should determine that individual's position, while Mill believes that class is not a legitimate consideration.
 C. Tocqueville believes that an individual's temperament should determine that individual's position, while Mill believes that temperament should not be a factor in an individual's position.
 D. Tocqueville believes that an individual's position should be determined by what is most beneficial to society, while Mill believes it should be determined by what an individual finds most rewarding. 41
Answer: A


Question:
Passage 1.Let every American, every lover of liberty, every.well wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the.Revolution, never to violate in the least particular,.the laws of the country; and never to tolerate their.violation by others. As the patriots of seventy-six did.to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so.to the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every.American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred.honor;—let every man remember that to violate the.law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to.tear the character of his own, and his children’s.liberty. Let reverence for the laws, be breathed by.every American mother, to the lisping babe, that.prattles on her lap—let it be taught in schools, in.seminaries, and in colleges;—let it be written in.Primers, spelling books, and in Almanacs;—let it be.preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative.halls, and enforced in courts of justice. And, in short,.let it become thepolitical religionof the nation;.and let the old and the young, the rich and the poor,.the grave and the gay, of all sexes and tongues, and.colors and conditions, sacrifice unceasingly upon its.altars.....When I so pressingly urge a strict observance of.all the laws, let me not be understood as saying there.are no bad laws, nor that grievances may not arise,.for the redress of which, no legal provisions have.been made. I mean to say no such thing. But I do.mean to say, that, although bad laws, if they exist,.should be repealed as soon as possible, still while they.continue in force, for the sake of example, they.should be religiously observed. So also in unprovided.cases. If such arise, let proper legal provisions be.made for them with the least possible delay; but, till.then, let them if not too intolerable, be borne with..There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress.by mob law. In any case that arises, as for instance,.the promulgation of abolitionism, one of two.positions is necessarily true; that is, the thing is right.within itself, and therefore deserves the protection of.all law and all good citizens; or, it is wrong, and.therefore proper to be prohibited by legal.enactments; and in neither case, is the interposition.of mob law, either necessary, justifiable, or excusable..Passage 2.Unjust laws exist; shall we be content to obey.them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey.them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress.them at once? Men generally, under such a.government as this, think that they ought to wait.until they have persuaded the majority to alter them..They think that, if they should resist, the remedy.would be worse than the evil. But it is the fault of the.government itself that the remedy is worse than the.evil. It makes it worse. Why is it not more apt to.anticipate and provide for reform? Why does it not.cherish its wise minority? Why does it cry and resist.before it is hurt?....If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of.the machine of government, let it go, let it go;.perchance it will wear smooth—certainly the.machine will wear out. If the injustice has a spring, or.a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself,.then perhaps you may consider whether the remedy.will not be worse than the evil; but if it is of such a.nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice.to another, then, I say, break the law. Let your life be.a counter friction to stop the machine. What I have.to do is to see, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to.the wrong which I condemn..As for adopting the ways which the State has.provided for remedying the evil, I know not of such.ways. They take too much time, and a man’s life will.be gone. I have other affairs to attend to. I came into.this world, not chiefly to make this a good place to.live in, but to live in it, be it good or bad. A man has.not everything to do, but something; and because he.cannot do everything, it is not necessary that he.should do something wrong.....I do not hesitate to say, that those who call.themselves Abolitionists should at once effectually.withdraw their support, both in person and property,.from the government...andnotwait till they.constitute a majority of one, before they suffer the.right to prevail through them. I think that it is.enough if they have God on their side, without.waiting for that other one. Moreover, any man more.right than his neighbors constitutes a majority of one.already.
Question: In Passage 2, Thoreau indicates that some unjust aspectsof government are
 A. superficial and can be fixed easily.
 B. subtle and must be studied carefully.
 C. self-correcting and may be beneficial.
 D. inevitable and should be endured.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D

Passage 1.Let every American, every lover of liberty, every.well wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the.Revolution, never to violate in the least particular,.the laws of the country; and never to tolerate their.violation by others. As the patriots of seventy-six did.to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so.to the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every.American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred.honor;—let every man remember that to violate the.law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to.tear the character of his own, and his children’s.liberty. Let reverence for the laws, be breathed by.every American mother, to the lisping babe, that.prattles on her lap—let it be taught in schools, in.seminaries, and in colleges;—let it be written in.Primers, spelling books, and in Almanacs;—let it be.preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative.halls, and enforced in courts of justice. And, in short,.let it become thepolitical religionof the nation;.and let the old and the young, the rich and the poor,.the grave and the gay, of all sexes and tongues, and.colors and conditions, sacrifice unceasingly upon its.altars.....When I so pressingly urge a strict observance of.all the laws, let me not be understood as saying there.are no bad laws, nor that grievances may not arise,.for the redress of which, no legal provisions have.been made. I mean to say no such thing. But I do.mean to say, that, although bad laws, if they exist,.should be repealed as soon as possible, still while they.continue in force, for the sake of example, they.should be religiously observed. So also in unprovided.cases. If such arise, let proper legal provisions be.made for them with the least possible delay; but, till.then, let them if not too intolerable, be borne with..There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress.by mob law. In any case that arises, as for instance,.the promulgation of abolitionism, one of two.positions is necessarily true; that is, the thing is right.within itself, and therefore deserves the protection of.all law and all good citizens; or, it is wrong, and.therefore proper to be prohibited by legal.enactments; and in neither case, is the interposition.of mob law, either necessary, justifiable, or excusable..Passage 2.Unjust laws exist; shall we be content to obey.them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey.them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress.them at once? Men generally, under such a.government as this, think that they ought to wait.until they have persuaded the majority to alter them..They think that, if they should resist, the remedy.would be worse than the evil. But it is the fault of the.government itself that the remedy is worse than the.evil. It makes it worse. Why is it not more apt to.anticipate and provide for reform? Why does it not.cherish its wise minority? Why does it cry and resist.before it is hurt?....If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of.the machine of government, let it go, let it go;.perchance it will wear smooth—certainly the.machine will wear out. If the injustice has a spring, or.a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself,.then perhaps you may consider whether the remedy.will not be worse than the evil; but if it is of such a.nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice.to another, then, I say, break the law. Let your life be.a counter friction to stop the machine. What I have.to do is to see, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to.the wrong which I condemn..As for adopting the ways which the State has.provided for remedying the evil, I know not of such.ways. They take too much time, and a man’s life will.be gone. I have other affairs to attend to. I came into.this world, not chiefly to make this a good place to.live in, but to live in it, be it good or bad. A man has.not everything to do, but something; and because he.cannot do everything, it is not necessary that he.should do something wrong.....I do not hesitate to say, that those who call.themselves Abolitionists should at once effectually.withdraw their support, both in person and property,.from the government...andnotwait till they.constitute a majority of one, before they suffer the.right to prevail through them. I think that it is.enough if they have God on their side, without.waiting for that other one. Moreover, any man more.right than his neighbors constitutes a majority of one.already.
Question: In Passage 2, Thoreau indicates that some unjust aspectsof government are
 A. superficial and can be fixed easily.
 B. subtle and must be studied carefully.
 C. self-correcting and may be beneficial.
 D. inevitable and should be endured.
Answer: D


Question:
\section{Passage 1}"Pathogens are acquiring resistance faster than we can introduce new antibiotics, and this is causing a human health crisis," says biochemist Kim Lewis of  Northeastern University.Lewis is part of a team that recently unveiled a promising antibiotic, born from a new way to tap the powers of soil microorganisms. In animal tests, teixobactin proved effective at killing off a wide variety of disease-causing bacteria-even those thathave developed immunity to other drugs. The scientists' best efforts to create mutant bacteria with resistance to the drug failed, meaning teixobactin could function effectively for decades before pathogens naturally evolve resistance to it.Natural microbial substances from soil bacteria and fungi have been at the root of most antibiotic drug development during the past century. But only about one percent of these organisms can be grown in a lab. The rest, in staggering numbers, haveremained uncultured and of limited use to medical science, until now. "Instead of trying to figure out the ideal conditions for each and every one of the millions of organisms out there in the environment, to allow them to grow in the lab, we simply growthem in their natural environment where they already have the conditions they need for growth," Lewis says.To do this, the team designed a gadget that sandwiches a soil sample between two membranes,each perforated with pores that allow molecules like nutrients to diffuse through but don't allow the passage of cells. "We just use it to trick the bacteria into thinking that they are in their natural environment," Lewis says.The team isolated 10,000 strains of uncultured soil bacteria and prepared extracts from them that could be tested against nasty pathogenic bacteria.Teixobactin emerged as the most promising drug.Mice infected with bacteria that cause upper  respiratory tract infections (including Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae) were treated with teixobactin, and the drug knocked out the infections with no noticeable toxic effects.It's likely that teixobactin is effective because of  the way it targets disease: The drug breaks down bacterial cell walls by attacking the lipid molecules that the cell creates organically. Many other antibiotics target the bacteria's proteins, and the genes that encode those proteins can mutate to 50 produce different structures.\section{Passage 2}Many good antibiotic families-penicillin, streptomycin, tetracycline-come from soil fungi and bacteria and it has long been suspected that, if we could grow more types of bacteria from soil-or55 from exotic environments, such as deep oceans-then we might find new natural antibiotics. In a recent study, researchers [Kim Lewis and others] found that they could isolate and grow individual soil bacteria-including types that can't normally be60 grown in the laboratory-in soil itself, which supplied critical nutrients and minerals. Once the bacteria reached a critical mass they could be transferred to the lab and their cultivation continued. This simple and elegant methodology is their most 65 important finding to my mind, for it opens a gateway to cultivating a wealth of potentially antibioticproducing bacteria that have never been grown before.The first new antibiotic that they've found by this 70 approach, teixobactin, from a bacterium called Eleftheria terrae, is less exciting to my mind, though it doesn't look bad. Teixobactin killed Gram-positive bacteria, such as S. aureus, in the laboratory, and cured experimental infection in mice. It also killed 75 the tuberculosis bacterium, which is important because there is a real problem with resistant tuberculosis in the developing world. It was also difficult to select teixobactin resistance.So, what are my caveats? Well, I see three. First, 80 teixobactin isn't a potential panacea. It doesn't kill the Gram-negative opportunists as it is too big to cross their complex cell wall. Secondly, scaling to commercial manufacture will be challenging, since the bacteria making the antibiotic are so difficult to85 grow. And, thirdly, it's early days yet. As with any antibiotic, teixobactin now faces the long haul of clinical trials: Phase I to see what dose you can safely give the patient, Phase II to see if it cures infections, and Phase III to compare its efficacy to that of 90 "standard of care treatment." That's going to take five years and $\pounds 500$ million and these are numbers we must find ways to reduce (while not compromising safety) if we're to keep ahead of bacteria, which can evolve far more swiftly and cheaply.
Question: Both passages make the point that teixobactin could be useful in
 A. standardizing the future development of antibiotics produced in laboratory environments.
 B. combating infections that are no longer responding to treatment with other antibiotics.
 C. controlling the spread of pathogenic soil fungi.
 D. shaping a new method of studying the effectiveness of antibiotics.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D

\section{Passage 1}"Pathogens are acquiring resistance faster than we can introduce new antibiotics, and this is causing a human health crisis," says biochemist Kim Lewis of  Northeastern University.Lewis is part of a team that recently unveiled a promising antibiotic, born from a new way to tap the powers of soil microorganisms. In animal tests, teixobactin proved effective at killing off a wide variety of disease-causing bacteria-even those thathave developed immunity to other drugs. The scientists' best efforts to create mutant bacteria with resistance to the drug failed, meaning teixobactin could function effectively for decades before pathogens naturally evolve resistance to it.Natural microbial substances from soil bacteria and fungi have been at the root of most antibiotic drug development during the past century. But only about one percent of these organisms can be grown in a lab. The rest, in staggering numbers, haveremained uncultured and of limited use to medical science, until now. "Instead of trying to figure out the ideal conditions for each and every one of the millions of organisms out there in the environment, to allow them to grow in the lab, we simply growthem in their natural environment where they already have the conditions they need for growth," Lewis says.To do this, the team designed a gadget that sandwiches a soil sample between two membranes,each perforated with pores that allow molecules like nutrients to diffuse through but don't allow the passage of cells. "We just use it to trick the bacteria into thinking that they are in their natural environment," Lewis says.The team isolated 10,000 strains of uncultured soil bacteria and prepared extracts from them that could be tested against nasty pathogenic bacteria.Teixobactin emerged as the most promising drug.Mice infected with bacteria that cause upper  respiratory tract infections (including Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae) were treated with teixobactin, and the drug knocked out the infections with no noticeable toxic effects.It's likely that teixobactin is effective because of  the way it targets disease: The drug breaks down bacterial cell walls by attacking the lipid molecules that the cell creates organically. Many other antibiotics target the bacteria's proteins, and the genes that encode those proteins can mutate to 50 produce different structures.\section{Passage 2}Many good antibiotic families-penicillin, streptomycin, tetracycline-come from soil fungi and bacteria and it has long been suspected that, if we could grow more types of bacteria from soil-or55 from exotic environments, such as deep oceans-then we might find new natural antibiotics. In a recent study, researchers [Kim Lewis and others] found that they could isolate and grow individual soil bacteria-including types that can't normally be60 grown in the laboratory-in soil itself, which supplied critical nutrients and minerals. Once the bacteria reached a critical mass they could be transferred to the lab and their cultivation continued. This simple and elegant methodology is their most 65 important finding to my mind, for it opens a gateway to cultivating a wealth of potentially antibioticproducing bacteria that have never been grown before.The first new antibiotic that they've found by this 70 approach, teixobactin, from a bacterium called Eleftheria terrae, is less exciting to my mind, though it doesn't look bad. Teixobactin killed Gram-positive bacteria, such as S. aureus, in the laboratory, and cured experimental infection in mice. It also killed 75 the tuberculosis bacterium, which is important because there is a real problem with resistant tuberculosis in the developing world. It was also difficult to select teixobactin resistance.So, what are my caveats? Well, I see three. First, 80 teixobactin isn't a potential panacea. It doesn't kill the Gram-negative opportunists as it is too big to cross their complex cell wall. Secondly, scaling to commercial manufacture will be challenging, since the bacteria making the antibiotic are so difficult to85 grow. And, thirdly, it's early days yet. As with any antibiotic, teixobactin now faces the long haul of clinical trials: Phase I to see what dose you can safely give the patient, Phase II to see if it cures infections, and Phase III to compare its efficacy to that of 90 "standard of care treatment." That's going to take five years and $\pounds 500$ million and these are numbers we must find ways to reduce (while not compromising safety) if we're to keep ahead of bacteria, which can evolve far more swiftly and cheaply.
Question: Both passages make the point that teixobactin could be useful in
 A. standardizing the future development of antibiotics produced in laboratory environments.
 B. combating infections that are no longer responding to treatment with other antibiotics.
 C. controlling the spread of pathogenic soil fungi.
 D. shaping a new method of studying the effectiveness of antibiotics.
Answer: B


Question:
Scientists believe that iron meteorites come from.the cores of asteroids that melted. But what happened.to the corresponding rocky material that formed the.mantles of these bodies? A few asteroids have spectra^1.that match those of mantle rocks, but they are very.rare. Some nonmetallic meteorites come from.asteroids that have partially or wholly melted, but.these do not match the minerals we would expect to.see in the missing mantles of the iron parent bodies..These exotic meteorites must come from some other.kind of parent body instead..The rarity of mantle rocks in our meteorite.collection and in the asteroid belt, known as the.“missing mantle problem,” is a long-standing puzzle..There are several reasons why iron fragments might.survive better than rocky fragments when asteroids.break apart. Iron lies in the core of a differentiated.asteroid, while rocky material lies near the surface..Thus, rocky material will be the first to be removed.when an asteroid is bombarded, while iron is the last.to be exposed. As a result, rocky fragments have to.survive in space for longer than iron ones. Most of the.rocky mantle may be peeled away in small fragments.—chips from the surface—while the iron core remains.as a single piece, making it harder to disrupt later. Last.and most important, iron is much stronger than rock:.a piece of iron is likely to survive in the asteroid belt at.least 10 times longer than a rocky fragment of the.same size..If most differentiated bodies broke apart early in.the solar system, perhaps all the mantle material has.been ground down to dust and lost over the billions of.years since then. This would mean that intact.differentiated asteroids are very rare in the asteroid.belt today. Perhaps Vesta [a differentiated asteroid.with a diameter of more than 300 miles] and a handful.of others are all that remain..However, collisional erosion cannot be the whole.story. Primitive asteroids, the parent bodies of.chondritic meteorites [the most common type of.meteorite found on Earth], are no stronger than the.mantle rocks from differentiated asteroids. How did.so many primitive asteroids survive when almost.none of the differentiated ones did? Part of the.explanation may simply be that differentiated bodies.were relatively rare to begin with and none have.survived. Still, if almost all differentiated bodies were.destroyed in violent collisions, how did Vesta survive.with only a single large crater on its surface?.Astronomer William Bottke and his colleagues.recently came up with a possible explanation: perhaps.the parent bodies of the iron meteorites formed closer.to the Sun, in the region that now contains the.terrestrial planets. Objects would have been more.tightly packed nearer the Sun, so collisions would.have been more frequent than in the asteroid belt..Many, perhaps most, differentiated bodies were.disrupted by violent collisions. Gravitational.perturbations from larger bodies scattered some of.these fragments into the asteroid belt. Both iron and.rocky fragments arrived in the asteroid belt, but only.the stronger iron objects have survived for the age of.the solar system. Later on, the parent bodies of.primitive meteorites formed in the asteroid belt. Most.of these objects survived, leaving an asteroid belt.today that is a mixture of intact primitive bodies and.fragments of iron..(^1) Characteristic wavelengths of light that asteroids reflect
Question: According to the passage, Bottke and his colleaguesexplain the presence of iron fragments in theasteroid belt by asserting that the fragments were
 A. remnants of differentiated asteroids that were destroyed in collisions in the asteroid belt.
 B. created relatively close to the Sun and ended up in the asteroid belt due to the gravity of large objects.
 C. formed on terrestrial planets and ejected into the asteroid belt by collisions with primitive asteroids.
 D. formed in the region of the terrestrial planets but knocked into the asteroid belt by collisions with the parent bodies of primitive asteroids.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D

Scientists believe that iron meteorites come from.the cores of asteroids that melted. But what happened.to the corresponding rocky material that formed the.mantles of these bodies? A few asteroids have spectra^1.that match those of mantle rocks, but they are very.rare. Some nonmetallic meteorites come from.asteroids that have partially or wholly melted, but.these do not match the minerals we would expect to.see in the missing mantles of the iron parent bodies..These exotic meteorites must come from some other.kind of parent body instead..The rarity of mantle rocks in our meteorite.collection and in the asteroid belt, known as the.“missing mantle problem,” is a long-standing puzzle..There are several reasons why iron fragments might.survive better than rocky fragments when asteroids.break apart. Iron lies in the core of a differentiated.asteroid, while rocky material lies near the surface..Thus, rocky material will be the first to be removed.when an asteroid is bombarded, while iron is the last.to be exposed. As a result, rocky fragments have to.survive in space for longer than iron ones. Most of the.rocky mantle may be peeled away in small fragments.—chips from the surface—while the iron core remains.as a single piece, making it harder to disrupt later. Last.and most important, iron is much stronger than rock:.a piece of iron is likely to survive in the asteroid belt at.least 10 times longer than a rocky fragment of the.same size..If most differentiated bodies broke apart early in.the solar system, perhaps all the mantle material has.been ground down to dust and lost over the billions of.years since then. This would mean that intact.differentiated asteroids are very rare in the asteroid.belt today. Perhaps Vesta [a differentiated asteroid.with a diameter of more than 300 miles] and a handful.of others are all that remain..However, collisional erosion cannot be the whole.story. Primitive asteroids, the parent bodies of.chondritic meteorites [the most common type of.meteorite found on Earth], are no stronger than the.mantle rocks from differentiated asteroids. How did.so many primitive asteroids survive when almost.none of the differentiated ones did? Part of the.explanation may simply be that differentiated bodies.were relatively rare to begin with and none have.survived. Still, if almost all differentiated bodies were.destroyed in violent collisions, how did Vesta survive.with only a single large crater on its surface?.Astronomer William Bottke and his colleagues.recently came up with a possible explanation: perhaps.the parent bodies of the iron meteorites formed closer.to the Sun, in the region that now contains the.terrestrial planets. Objects would have been more.tightly packed nearer the Sun, so collisions would.have been more frequent than in the asteroid belt..Many, perhaps most, differentiated bodies were.disrupted by violent collisions. Gravitational.perturbations from larger bodies scattered some of.these fragments into the asteroid belt. Both iron and.rocky fragments arrived in the asteroid belt, but only.the stronger iron objects have survived for the age of.the solar system. Later on, the parent bodies of.primitive meteorites formed in the asteroid belt. Most.of these objects survived, leaving an asteroid belt.today that is a mixture of intact primitive bodies and.fragments of iron..(^1) Characteristic wavelengths of light that asteroids reflect
Question: According to the passage, Bottke and his colleaguesexplain the presence of iron fragments in theasteroid belt by asserting that the fragments were
 A. remnants of differentiated asteroids that were destroyed in collisions in the asteroid belt.
 B. created relatively close to the Sun and ended up in the asteroid belt due to the gravity of large objects.
 C. formed on terrestrial planets and ejected into the asteroid belt by collisions with primitive asteroids.
 D. formed in the region of the terrestrial planets but knocked into the asteroid belt by collisions with the parent bodies of primitive asteroids.
Answer: B


Question:
“I’ve come to inquire if you have work for me. That is, if.my performance pleased you before.” A deliberate prompt. I.didn’t want to be hired because of my need or his kindness. I.wanted my talent to be the reason he wanted me back..“Indeed” was all he offered..What now to fill the suspended moment? His new.projects. I asked. His eyebrows leapt up in symmetrical.curves..“A Byzantine chapel for the World’s Columbian.Exposition in Chicago next year. Four times bigger than the.Paris Exposition Universelle. It will be the greatest assembly.of artists since the fifteenth century.” He counted on his.fingers and then drummed them on the desk. “Only fifteen.months away. In 1893 the name of Louis Comfort Tiffany.will be on the lips of millions!” He stood up and swung open.his arms wide enough to embrace the whole world..I sensed his open palm somewhere in the air behind the.small of my back, ushering me to his massive, carved.mahogany exhibit table to see his sketches and watercolors..“Two round windows, The Infancy of Christ and Botticelli’s.Madonna and Child, will be set off by a dozen scenic side.windows.”.A huge undertaking. How richly fortunate. Surely there.would be opportunity for me to shine..Practically hopping from side to side, he made a show of.slinging down one large watercolor after another onto the.Persian carpet, each one a precise, fine-edged rendering of.what he wanted the window to be..“Gracious! You’ve been on fire. Go slower! Give me a.chance to admire each one.”.He unrolled the largest watercolor. “An eight-foot.mosaic behind the altar depicting a pair of peacocks.surrounded by grapevines.”.My breath whistled between my open lips. Above the.peacocks facing each other, he had transformed the.standard Christian icon of a crown of thorns into a.shimmering regal headdress for God the King, the thorns.replaced by large glass jewels in true Tiffany style..Astonishing how he could get mere watercolors so deep.and saturated, so like lacquer that they vibrated together as.surely as chords of a great church pipe organ. Even the.names of the hues bore an exotic richness. The peacocks’.necks in emerald green and sapphire blue. The tail feathers.in vermilion, Spanish ocher, Florida gold. The jewels in the.crown mandarin yellow and peridot. The background in.turquoise and cobalt. Oh, to get my hands on those.gorgeous hues. To feel the coolness of the blue glass, like.solid pieces of the sea. To chip the gigantic jewels for the.crown so they would sparkle and send out shafts of light..To forget everything but the glass before me and make of it.something resplendent..When I could trust my voice not to show too much.eagerness, I said, “I see your originality is in good health..Only you would put peacocks in a chapel.”.“Don’t you know?” he said in a spoof of incredulity..“They symbolized eternal life in Byzantine art. Their flesh.was thought to be incorruptible.”.“What a lucky find for you, that convenient tidbit of.information.”.He chuckled, so I was on safe ground..He tossed down more drawings. “A marble-and-mosaic.altar surrounded by mosaic columns, and a baptismal font.of opaque leaded glass and mosaic.”.“This dome is the lid of the basin? In opaque leaded.glass?”.He looked at it with nothing short of love, and showed.me its size with outstretched arms as though he were.hugging the thing..I was struck by a tantalizing idea. “Imagine it reduced in.size and made of translucent glass instead. Once you figure.how to secure the pieces in a dome, that could be the.method and the shape of a lampshade. A wraparound.window of, say”—I looked around the room—“peacock.feathers.”.He jerked his head up with a startled expression, the.idea dawning on him as if it were his own..“Lampshades in leaded glass,” he said in wonder, his.blue eyes sparking..“Just think where that could go,” I whispered.
Question: Which choice best describes what happens in the passage?
 A. The narrator reflects on how the behavior of another character has changed.
 B. The narrator struggles to understand the motivations of another character.
 C. The narrator discusses shared professional interests with another character.
 D. The narrator recounts the events that led another character to support her project.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D

“I’ve come to inquire if you have work for me. That is, if.my performance pleased you before.” A deliberate prompt. I.didn’t want to be hired because of my need or his kindness. I.wanted my talent to be the reason he wanted me back..“Indeed” was all he offered..What now to fill the suspended moment? His new.projects. I asked. His eyebrows leapt up in symmetrical.curves..“A Byzantine chapel for the World’s Columbian.Exposition in Chicago next year. Four times bigger than the.Paris Exposition Universelle. It will be the greatest assembly.of artists since the fifteenth century.” He counted on his.fingers and then drummed them on the desk. “Only fifteen.months away. In 1893 the name of Louis Comfort Tiffany.will be on the lips of millions!” He stood up and swung open.his arms wide enough to embrace the whole world..I sensed his open palm somewhere in the air behind the.small of my back, ushering me to his massive, carved.mahogany exhibit table to see his sketches and watercolors..“Two round windows, The Infancy of Christ and Botticelli’s.Madonna and Child, will be set off by a dozen scenic side.windows.”.A huge undertaking. How richly fortunate. Surely there.would be opportunity for me to shine..Practically hopping from side to side, he made a show of.slinging down one large watercolor after another onto the.Persian carpet, each one a precise, fine-edged rendering of.what he wanted the window to be..“Gracious! You’ve been on fire. Go slower! Give me a.chance to admire each one.”.He unrolled the largest watercolor. “An eight-foot.mosaic behind the altar depicting a pair of peacocks.surrounded by grapevines.”.My breath whistled between my open lips. Above the.peacocks facing each other, he had transformed the.standard Christian icon of a crown of thorns into a.shimmering regal headdress for God the King, the thorns.replaced by large glass jewels in true Tiffany style..Astonishing how he could get mere watercolors so deep.and saturated, so like lacquer that they vibrated together as.surely as chords of a great church pipe organ. Even the.names of the hues bore an exotic richness. The peacocks’.necks in emerald green and sapphire blue. The tail feathers.in vermilion, Spanish ocher, Florida gold. The jewels in the.crown mandarin yellow and peridot. The background in.turquoise and cobalt. Oh, to get my hands on those.gorgeous hues. To feel the coolness of the blue glass, like.solid pieces of the sea. To chip the gigantic jewels for the.crown so they would sparkle and send out shafts of light..To forget everything but the glass before me and make of it.something resplendent..When I could trust my voice not to show too much.eagerness, I said, “I see your originality is in good health..Only you would put peacocks in a chapel.”.“Don’t you know?” he said in a spoof of incredulity..“They symbolized eternal life in Byzantine art. Their flesh.was thought to be incorruptible.”.“What a lucky find for you, that convenient tidbit of.information.”.He chuckled, so I was on safe ground..He tossed down more drawings. “A marble-and-mosaic.altar surrounded by mosaic columns, and a baptismal font.of opaque leaded glass and mosaic.”.“This dome is the lid of the basin? In opaque leaded.glass?”.He looked at it with nothing short of love, and showed.me its size with outstretched arms as though he were.hugging the thing..I was struck by a tantalizing idea. “Imagine it reduced in.size and made of translucent glass instead. Once you figure.how to secure the pieces in a dome, that could be the.method and the shape of a lampshade. A wraparound.window of, say”—I looked around the room—“peacock.feathers.”.He jerked his head up with a startled expression, the.idea dawning on him as if it were his own..“Lampshades in leaded glass,” he said in wonder, his.blue eyes sparking..“Just think where that could go,” I whispered.
Question: Which choice best describes what happens in the passage?
 A. The narrator reflects on how the behavior of another character has changed.
 B. The narrator struggles to understand the motivations of another character.
 C. The narrator discusses shared professional interests with another character.
 D. The narrator recounts the events that led another character to support her project.
Answer: C


Question:
The news is a form of public knowledge..Unlike personal or private knowledge (such as the.health of one’s friends and family; the conduct of a.Line private hobby; a secret liaison), public knowledge.increases in value as it is shared by more people. The.date of an election and the claims of rival candidates;.the causes and consequences of an environmental.disaster; a debate about how to frame a particular.law; the latest reports from a war zone—these are all.examples of public knowledge that people are.generally expected to know in order to be considered.informed citizens. Thus, in contrast to personal or.private knowledge, which is generally left to.individuals to pursue or ignore, public knowledge is.promoted even to those who might not think it.matters to them. In short, the circulation of public.knowledge, including the news, is generally regarded.as a public good which cannot be solely.demand-driven..The production, circulation, and reception.of public knowledge is a complex process. It is.generally accepted that public knowledge should.be authoritative, but there is not always.common agreement about what the public needs to.know, who is best placed to relate and explain it, and.how authoritative reputations should be determined.and evaluated. Historically, newspapers such as The.Times and broadcasters such as the BBC were widely.regarded as the trusted shapers of authoritative.agendas and conventional wisdom. They embodied.the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of.authority as the “power over, or title to influence, the.opinions of others.” As part of the general process of.the transformation of authority whereby there has.been a reluctance to uncritically accept traditional.sources of public knowledge, the demand has been.for all authority to make explicit the frames of value.which determine their decisions. Centres of news.production, as our focus groups show, have not been.exempt from this process. Not surprisingly perhaps.some news journalists feel uneasy about this.renegotiation of their authority:.Editors are increasingly casting a glance at the.“most read” lists on their own and other websites.to work out which stories matter to readers and.viewers. And now the audience—which used to.know its place—is being asked to act as a kind of.journalistic ombudsman, ruling on our.credibility (broadcast journalist, 2008)..The result of democratising access to TV news.could be political disengagement by the majority.and a dumbing down through a popularity.contest of stories (online news editor, 2007)..Despite the rhetorical bluster of these statements,.they amount to more than straightforward.professional defensiveness. In their reference to an.audience “which used to know its place” and.conflation between democratisation and “dumbing.down,” they are seeking to argue for a particular.mode of public knowledge: one which is shaped by.experts, immune from populist pressures; and.disseminated to attentive, but mainly passive.recipients. It is a view of citizenship that closes down.opportunities for popular involvement in the making.of public knowledge by reinforcing the professional.claims of experts. The journalists quoted above are.right to feel uneasy, for there is, at almost every.institutional level in contemporary society,.scepticism towards the epistemological authority of.expert elites. There is a growing feeling, as expressed.by several of our focus group participants, that the.news media should be “informative rather than.authoritative”; the job of journalists should be to.“give the news as raw as it is, without putting their.slant on it”; and people should be given “sufficient.information” from which “we would be able to form.opinions of our own.”.At stake here are two distinct conceptions of.authority. The journalists we have quoted are.resistant to the democratisation of news:.the supremacy of the clickstream (according to.which editors raise or lower the profile of stories.according to the number of readers clicking on them.online); the parity of popular culture with “serious”.news; the demands of some audience members for.raw news rather than constructed narratives.
Question: The authors indicate that the public is coming to believethat journalists’ reports should avoid
 A. personal judgments about the events reported.
 B. more information than is absolutely necessary.
 C. quotations from authorities on the subject matter.
 D. details that the subjects of news reports wish to keep private.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D

The news is a form of public knowledge..Unlike personal or private knowledge (such as the.health of one’s friends and family; the conduct of a.Line private hobby; a secret liaison), public knowledge.increases in value as it is shared by more people. The.date of an election and the claims of rival candidates;.the causes and consequences of an environmental.disaster; a debate about how to frame a particular.law; the latest reports from a war zone—these are all.examples of public knowledge that people are.generally expected to know in order to be considered.informed citizens. Thus, in contrast to personal or.private knowledge, which is generally left to.individuals to pursue or ignore, public knowledge is.promoted even to those who might not think it.matters to them. In short, the circulation of public.knowledge, including the news, is generally regarded.as a public good which cannot be solely.demand-driven..The production, circulation, and reception.of public knowledge is a complex process. It is.generally accepted that public knowledge should.be authoritative, but there is not always.common agreement about what the public needs to.know, who is best placed to relate and explain it, and.how authoritative reputations should be determined.and evaluated. Historically, newspapers such as The.Times and broadcasters such as the BBC were widely.regarded as the trusted shapers of authoritative.agendas and conventional wisdom. They embodied.the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of.authority as the “power over, or title to influence, the.opinions of others.” As part of the general process of.the transformation of authority whereby there has.been a reluctance to uncritically accept traditional.sources of public knowledge, the demand has been.for all authority to make explicit the frames of value.which determine their decisions. Centres of news.production, as our focus groups show, have not been.exempt from this process. Not surprisingly perhaps.some news journalists feel uneasy about this.renegotiation of their authority:.Editors are increasingly casting a glance at the.“most read” lists on their own and other websites.to work out which stories matter to readers and.viewers. And now the audience—which used to.know its place—is being asked to act as a kind of.journalistic ombudsman, ruling on our.credibility (broadcast journalist, 2008)..The result of democratising access to TV news.could be political disengagement by the majority.and a dumbing down through a popularity.contest of stories (online news editor, 2007)..Despite the rhetorical bluster of these statements,.they amount to more than straightforward.professional defensiveness. In their reference to an.audience “which used to know its place” and.conflation between democratisation and “dumbing.down,” they are seeking to argue for a particular.mode of public knowledge: one which is shaped by.experts, immune from populist pressures; and.disseminated to attentive, but mainly passive.recipients. It is a view of citizenship that closes down.opportunities for popular involvement in the making.of public knowledge by reinforcing the professional.claims of experts. The journalists quoted above are.right to feel uneasy, for there is, at almost every.institutional level in contemporary society,.scepticism towards the epistemological authority of.expert elites. There is a growing feeling, as expressed.by several of our focus group participants, that the.news media should be “informative rather than.authoritative”; the job of journalists should be to.“give the news as raw as it is, without putting their.slant on it”; and people should be given “sufficient.information” from which “we would be able to form.opinions of our own.”.At stake here are two distinct conceptions of.authority. The journalists we have quoted are.resistant to the democratisation of news:.the supremacy of the clickstream (according to.which editors raise or lower the profile of stories.according to the number of readers clicking on them.online); the parity of popular culture with “serious”.news; the demands of some audience members for.raw news rather than constructed narratives.
Question: The authors indicate that the public is coming to believethat journalists’ reports should avoid
 A. personal judgments about the events reported.
 B. more information than is absolutely necessary.
 C. quotations from authorities on the subject matter.
 D. details that the subjects of news reports wish to keep private.
Answer: A


Question:
Miss Grace Spivey arrived in Threestep, Georgia, in August 1938. She stepped off the train wearing a pair of thick-soled boots suitable for hiking, a navyblue dress, and a little white tam that rode the wavesof her red hair at a gravity-defying angle. August was a hellish month to step off the train in Georgia, although it was nothing, she said, compared to the 119 degrees that greeted her when she arrived one time in Timbuktu, which, she assured us, was a real 10 place in Africa. I believe her remark irritated some of the people gathered to welcome her on the burned grass alongside the tracks. When folks are sweating through their shorts, they don't like to hear that this is nothing compared to someplace else. Irritated or15 not, the majority of those present were inclined to see the arrival of the new schoolteacher in a positive light. Hard times were still upon us in 1938, but, like my momma said, "We weren't no poorer than we'd ever been," and the citizens of Threestep were in the 20 mood for a little excitement.Miss Spivey looked like just the right person to give it to them. She was, by almost anyone's standards, a woman of the world. She'd gone to boarding schools since she was six years old; she'd 25 studied French in Paris and drama in London; and during what she called a "fruitful intermission" in her formal education, she had traveled extensively in the Near East and Africa with a friend of her grandmother's, one Janet Miller, who was a medical30 doctor from Nashville, Tennessee. After her travels with Dr. Miller, Miss Spivey continued her education by attending Barnard College in New York City. She told us all that at school the first day. When my little brother Ralphord asked what did she study at35 Barnyard College, Miss Spivey explained that Barnard, which she wrote on the blackboard, was the sister school of Columbia University, of which, she expected, we all had heard.It was there, she told us, in the midst of trying to 40 find her true mission in life, that she wandered one afternoon into a lecture by the famous John Dewey, who was talking about his famous book, Democracy and Education. Professor Dewey was in his seventies by then, Miss Spivey said, but he still liked to chat45 with students after a lecture-especially female students, she added-sometimes over coffee, and see in their eyes the fire his words could kindle. It was after this lecture and subsequent coffee that Miss Spivey had marched to the Teacher's College and 50 signed up, all aflame. Two years later, she told a cheery blue-suited woman from the $\mathrm{WPA}^{1}$ that she wanted to bring democracy and education to the poorest, darkest, most remote and forgotten corner of America.55 They sent her to Threestep, Georgia.Miss Spivey paused there for questions, avoiding my brother Ralphord's eye.What we really wanted to know about-all twenty-six of us across seven grade levels in the one 60 room-was the pearly white button hanging on a string in front of the blackboard behind the teacher's desk up front. That button on a string was something new. When Mavis Davis (the only bona fide seventh grader, at age thirteen) asked what it was for, Miss65 Spivey gave the string a tug, and to our astonishment, the whole world-or at least a wrinkled map of it-unfolded before our eyes. Her predecessor, Miss Chandler, had never once made use of that map, which was older than our fathers, and until that70 moment, not a one of us knew it was there.Miss Spivey showed us on the map how she and Dr. Janet Miller had sailed across the Atlantic Ocean and past the Rock of Gibraltar into theMediterranean Sea. Using the end of a ruler, she75 gently tapped such places as Morocco and Tunis and Algiers to mark their route along the top of Africa. They spent twenty hours on the train to Baghdad, she said, swathed in veils against the sand that crept in every crack and crevice.80 "And can you guess what we saw from the train?" Miss Spivey asked. We could not. "Camels!" she said. "We saw a whole caravan of camels." She looked around the room, waiting for us to be amazed and delighted at the thought.85 We all hung there for a minute, thinking hard, until Mavis Davis spoke up."She means like the three kings rode to Bethlehem," Mavis said, and she folded her hands smugly on her seventh-grade desk in the back of the 90 room.Miss Spivey made a mistake right then. Instead of beaming upon Mavis the kind of congratulatory smile that old Miss Chandler would have bestowed on her for having enlightened the rest of us, Miss95 Spivey simply said, "That's right."1 The Works Progress Administration (WPA) was a government agency that hired people for public and cultural development projects and services.
Question: In the passage, Threestep is mainly presented as a
 A. summer retreat for vacationers.
 B. small rural town.
 C. town that is home to a prominent university.
 D. comfortable suburb.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D

Miss Grace Spivey arrived in Threestep, Georgia, in August 1938. She stepped off the train wearing a pair of thick-soled boots suitable for hiking, a navyblue dress, and a little white tam that rode the wavesof her red hair at a gravity-defying angle. August was a hellish month to step off the train in Georgia, although it was nothing, she said, compared to the 119 degrees that greeted her when she arrived one time in Timbuktu, which, she assured us, was a real 10 place in Africa. I believe her remark irritated some of the people gathered to welcome her on the burned grass alongside the tracks. When folks are sweating through their shorts, they don't like to hear that this is nothing compared to someplace else. Irritated or15 not, the majority of those present were inclined to see the arrival of the new schoolteacher in a positive light. Hard times were still upon us in 1938, but, like my momma said, "We weren't no poorer than we'd ever been," and the citizens of Threestep were in the 20 mood for a little excitement.Miss Spivey looked like just the right person to give it to them. She was, by almost anyone's standards, a woman of the world. She'd gone to boarding schools since she was six years old; she'd 25 studied French in Paris and drama in London; and during what she called a "fruitful intermission" in her formal education, she had traveled extensively in the Near East and Africa with a friend of her grandmother's, one Janet Miller, who was a medical30 doctor from Nashville, Tennessee. After her travels with Dr. Miller, Miss Spivey continued her education by attending Barnard College in New York City. She told us all that at school the first day. When my little brother Ralphord asked what did she study at35 Barnyard College, Miss Spivey explained that Barnard, which she wrote on the blackboard, was the sister school of Columbia University, of which, she expected, we all had heard.It was there, she told us, in the midst of trying to 40 find her true mission in life, that she wandered one afternoon into a lecture by the famous John Dewey, who was talking about his famous book, Democracy and Education. Professor Dewey was in his seventies by then, Miss Spivey said, but he still liked to chat45 with students after a lecture-especially female students, she added-sometimes over coffee, and see in their eyes the fire his words could kindle. It was after this lecture and subsequent coffee that Miss Spivey had marched to the Teacher's College and 50 signed up, all aflame. Two years later, she told a cheery blue-suited woman from the $\mathrm{WPA}^{1}$ that she wanted to bring democracy and education to the poorest, darkest, most remote and forgotten corner of America.55 They sent her to Threestep, Georgia.Miss Spivey paused there for questions, avoiding my brother Ralphord's eye.What we really wanted to know about-all twenty-six of us across seven grade levels in the one 60 room-was the pearly white button hanging on a string in front of the blackboard behind the teacher's desk up front. That button on a string was something new. When Mavis Davis (the only bona fide seventh grader, at age thirteen) asked what it was for, Miss65 Spivey gave the string a tug, and to our astonishment, the whole world-or at least a wrinkled map of it-unfolded before our eyes. Her predecessor, Miss Chandler, had never once made use of that map, which was older than our fathers, and until that70 moment, not a one of us knew it was there.Miss Spivey showed us on the map how she and Dr. Janet Miller had sailed across the Atlantic Ocean and past the Rock of Gibraltar into theMediterranean Sea. Using the end of a ruler, she75 gently tapped such places as Morocco and Tunis and Algiers to mark their route along the top of Africa. They spent twenty hours on the train to Baghdad, she said, swathed in veils against the sand that crept in every crack and crevice.80 "And can you guess what we saw from the train?" Miss Spivey asked. We could not. "Camels!" she said. "We saw a whole caravan of camels." She looked around the room, waiting for us to be amazed and delighted at the thought.85 We all hung there for a minute, thinking hard, until Mavis Davis spoke up."She means like the three kings rode to Bethlehem," Mavis said, and she folded her hands smugly on her seventh-grade desk in the back of the 90 room.Miss Spivey made a mistake right then. Instead of beaming upon Mavis the kind of congratulatory smile that old Miss Chandler would have bestowed on her for having enlightened the rest of us, Miss95 Spivey simply said, "That's right."1 The Works Progress Administration (WPA) was a government agency that hired people for public and cultural development projects and services.
Question: In the passage, Threestep is mainly presented as a
 A. summer retreat for vacationers.
 B. small rural town.
 C. town that is home to a prominent university.
 D. comfortable suburb.
Answer: B


Question:
\section{Passage 1}"Pathogens are acquiring resistance faster than we can introduce new antibiotics, and this is causing a human health crisis," says biochemist Kim Lewis of  Northeastern University.Lewis is part of a team that recently unveiled a promising antibiotic, born from a new way to tap the powers of soil microorganisms. In animal tests, teixobactin proved effective at killing off a wide variety of disease-causing bacteria-even those thathave developed immunity to other drugs. The scientists' best efforts to create mutant bacteria with resistance to the drug failed, meaning teixobactin could function effectively for decades before pathogens naturally evolve resistance to it.Natural microbial substances from soil bacteria and fungi have been at the root of most antibiotic drug development during the past century. But only about one percent of these organisms can be grown in a lab. The rest, in staggering numbers, haveremained uncultured and of limited use to medical science, until now. "Instead of trying to figure out the ideal conditions for each and every one of the millions of organisms out there in the environment, to allow them to grow in the lab, we simply growthem in their natural environment where they already have the conditions they need for growth," Lewis says.To do this, the team designed a gadget that sandwiches a soil sample between two membranes,each perforated with pores that allow molecules like nutrients to diffuse through but don't allow the passage of cells. "We just use it to trick the bacteria into thinking that they are in their natural environment," Lewis says.The team isolated 10,000 strains of uncultured soil bacteria and prepared extracts from them that could be tested against nasty pathogenic bacteria.Teixobactin emerged as the most promising drug.Mice infected with bacteria that cause upper  respiratory tract infections (including Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae) were treated with teixobactin, and the drug knocked out the infections with no noticeable toxic effects.It's likely that teixobactin is effective because of  the way it targets disease: The drug breaks down bacterial cell walls by attacking the lipid molecules that the cell creates organically. Many other antibiotics target the bacteria's proteins, and the genes that encode those proteins can mutate to 50 produce different structures.\section{Passage 2}Many good antibiotic families-penicillin, streptomycin, tetracycline-come from soil fungi and bacteria and it has long been suspected that, if we could grow more types of bacteria from soil-or55 from exotic environments, such as deep oceans-then we might find new natural antibiotics. In a recent study, researchers [Kim Lewis and others] found that they could isolate and grow individual soil bacteria-including types that can't normally be60 grown in the laboratory-in soil itself, which supplied critical nutrients and minerals. Once the bacteria reached a critical mass they could be transferred to the lab and their cultivation continued. This simple and elegant methodology is their most 65 important finding to my mind, for it opens a gateway to cultivating a wealth of potentially antibioticproducing bacteria that have never been grown before.The first new antibiotic that they've found by this 70 approach, teixobactin, from a bacterium called Eleftheria terrae, is less exciting to my mind, though it doesn't look bad. Teixobactin killed Gram-positive bacteria, such as S. aureus, in the laboratory, and cured experimental infection in mice. It also killed 75 the tuberculosis bacterium, which is important because there is a real problem with resistant tuberculosis in the developing world. It was also difficult to select teixobactin resistance.So, what are my caveats? Well, I see three. First, 80 teixobactin isn't a potential panacea. It doesn't kill the Gram-negative opportunists as it is too big to cross their complex cell wall. Secondly, scaling to commercial manufacture will be challenging, since the bacteria making the antibiotic are so difficult to85 grow. And, thirdly, it's early days yet. As with any antibiotic, teixobactin now faces the long haul of clinical trials: Phase I to see what dose you can safely give the patient, Phase II to see if it cures infections, and Phase III to compare its efficacy to that of 90 "standard of care treatment." That's going to take five years and $\pounds 500$ million and these are numbers we must find ways to reduce (while not compromising safety) if we're to keep ahead of bacteria, which can evolve far more swiftly and cheaply.
Question: The author of Passage 1 suggests that an advantage of the method Lewis's team used to grow microorganisms is that it
 A. identifies the requirements for soil bacteria to thrive and replicates those features in artificial soil.
 B. enables soil bacteria to take in more nutrients than they typically consume in natural settings.
 C. directly affects the cell walls of bacteria rather than the proteins those bacteria produce.
 D. allows researchers to make use of soil bacteria that they had previously been unable to exploit.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D

\section{Passage 1}"Pathogens are acquiring resistance faster than we can introduce new antibiotics, and this is causing a human health crisis," says biochemist Kim Lewis of  Northeastern University.Lewis is part of a team that recently unveiled a promising antibiotic, born from a new way to tap the powers of soil microorganisms. In animal tests, teixobactin proved effective at killing off a wide variety of disease-causing bacteria-even those thathave developed immunity to other drugs. The scientists' best efforts to create mutant bacteria with resistance to the drug failed, meaning teixobactin could function effectively for decades before pathogens naturally evolve resistance to it.Natural microbial substances from soil bacteria and fungi have been at the root of most antibiotic drug development during the past century. But only about one percent of these organisms can be grown in a lab. The rest, in staggering numbers, haveremained uncultured and of limited use to medical science, until now. "Instead of trying to figure out the ideal conditions for each and every one of the millions of organisms out there in the environment, to allow them to grow in the lab, we simply growthem in their natural environment where they already have the conditions they need for growth," Lewis says.To do this, the team designed a gadget that sandwiches a soil sample between two membranes,each perforated with pores that allow molecules like nutrients to diffuse through but don't allow the passage of cells. "We just use it to trick the bacteria into thinking that they are in their natural environment," Lewis says.The team isolated 10,000 strains of uncultured soil bacteria and prepared extracts from them that could be tested against nasty pathogenic bacteria.Teixobactin emerged as the most promising drug.Mice infected with bacteria that cause upper  respiratory tract infections (including Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae) were treated with teixobactin, and the drug knocked out the infections with no noticeable toxic effects.It's likely that teixobactin is effective because of  the way it targets disease: The drug breaks down bacterial cell walls by attacking the lipid molecules that the cell creates organically. Many other antibiotics target the bacteria's proteins, and the genes that encode those proteins can mutate to 50 produce different structures.\section{Passage 2}Many good antibiotic families-penicillin, streptomycin, tetracycline-come from soil fungi and bacteria and it has long been suspected that, if we could grow more types of bacteria from soil-or55 from exotic environments, such as deep oceans-then we might find new natural antibiotics. In a recent study, researchers [Kim Lewis and others] found that they could isolate and grow individual soil bacteria-including types that can't normally be60 grown in the laboratory-in soil itself, which supplied critical nutrients and minerals. Once the bacteria reached a critical mass they could be transferred to the lab and their cultivation continued. This simple and elegant methodology is their most 65 important finding to my mind, for it opens a gateway to cultivating a wealth of potentially antibioticproducing bacteria that have never been grown before.The first new antibiotic that they've found by this 70 approach, teixobactin, from a bacterium called Eleftheria terrae, is less exciting to my mind, though it doesn't look bad. Teixobactin killed Gram-positive bacteria, such as S. aureus, in the laboratory, and cured experimental infection in mice. It also killed 75 the tuberculosis bacterium, which is important because there is a real problem with resistant tuberculosis in the developing world. It was also difficult to select teixobactin resistance.So, what are my caveats? Well, I see three. First, 80 teixobactin isn't a potential panacea. It doesn't kill the Gram-negative opportunists as it is too big to cross their complex cell wall. Secondly, scaling to commercial manufacture will be challenging, since the bacteria making the antibiotic are so difficult to85 grow. And, thirdly, it's early days yet. As with any antibiotic, teixobactin now faces the long haul of clinical trials: Phase I to see what dose you can safely give the patient, Phase II to see if it cures infections, and Phase III to compare its efficacy to that of 90 "standard of care treatment." That's going to take five years and $\pounds 500$ million and these are numbers we must find ways to reduce (while not compromising safety) if we're to keep ahead of bacteria, which can evolve far more swiftly and cheaply.
Question: The author of Passage 1 suggests that an advantage of the method Lewis's team used to grow microorganisms is that it
 A. identifies the requirements for soil bacteria to thrive and replicates those features in artificial soil.
 B. enables soil bacteria to take in more nutrients than they typically consume in natural settings.
 C. directly affects the cell walls of bacteria rather than the proteins those bacteria produce.
 D. allows researchers to make use of soil bacteria that they had previously been unable to exploit.
Answer: D


Question:
Voters need to understand the prosaic details of.complex policies. Most have staked out positions on.these issues, but they are not often reasoned.positions, which take hard intellectual work. Most.citizens opt instead for simplistic explanations,.assuming wrongly that they comprehend the nuances.of issues..Psychological scientists have a name for this.easy, automatic, simplistic thinking: the illusion of.explanatory depth. We strongly believe that we.understand complex matters, when in fact we are.clueless, and these false and extreme beliefs.shape our preferences, judgments, and actions—.including our votes..Is it possible to shake such deep-rooted.convictions? That’s the question that Philip.Fernbach, a psychological scientist at the University.of Colorado’s Leeds School of Business, wanted to.explore. Fernbach and his colleagues wondered if.forcing people to explain complex policies in.detail—not cheerleading for a position but really.considering the mechanics of implementation—.might force them to confront their ignorance and.thus weaken their extremist stands on issues. They.ran a series of lab experiments to test this idea..They started by recruiting a group of volunteers in.their 30s—Democrats, Republicans, and.Independents—and asking them to state their.positions on a variety of issues, from a national flat.tax to a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions..The volunteers indicated how strongly they felt about.each issue and also rated their own understanding of.the issues. Then the volunteers were instructed to.write elaborate explanations of two issues. If the issue.was cap and trade, for example, they would first.explain precisely what cap and trade means, how it is.implemented, whom it benefits and whom it could.hurt, the sources of carbon emissions, and so forth..They were not asked for value judgments about the.policy or about the environment or business, but.only for a highly detailed description of the.mechanics of the policy in action..Let’s be honest: Most of us never do this..Fernbach’s idea was that such an exercise would.force many to realize just how little they really know.about cap and trade, and confronted with their own.ignorance, they would dampen their own.enthusiasm. They would be humbled and as a result.take less extreme positions. And that’s just what.happened. Trying—and failing—to explain complex.policies undermined the extremists’ illusions about.being well-informed. They became more moderate in.their views as a result..Being forced to articulate the nuts and bolts of a.policy is not the same as trying to sell that policy..In fact, talking about one’s views can often.strengthen them. Fernbach believes it’s the slow,.cognitive work—the deliberate analysis—that.changes people’s judgments, but he wanted to check.this in another experiment. This one was very similar.to the first, but some volunteers, instead of.explaining a policy, merely listed reasons for liking it..The results were clear. Those who simply listed.reasons for their positions—articulating their.values—were less shaken in their views. They.continued to think they understood the policies in.their complexity, and, notably, they remained.extreme in their passion for their positions..Polarization tends to reinforce itself. People are.unaware of their own ignorance, and they seek out.information that bolsters their views, often without.knowing it. They also process new information in.biased ways, and they hang out with people like.themselves. All of these psychological forces increase.political extremism, and no simple measure will.change that. But forcing the candidates to provide.concrete and elaborate plans might be a start; it gives.citizens a starting place.
Question: A central idea discussed in the passage is that
 A. articulating the reasons for holding an opinion can cause people to decide that they are wrong.
 B. the process of describing an issue in detail can make people more moderate in their views about the issue.
 C. most people are not truly interested in understanding complex ideas.
 D. people are likely to understate their most passionately held positions to avoid offending others.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D

Voters need to understand the prosaic details of.complex policies. Most have staked out positions on.these issues, but they are not often reasoned.positions, which take hard intellectual work. Most.citizens opt instead for simplistic explanations,.assuming wrongly that they comprehend the nuances.of issues..Psychological scientists have a name for this.easy, automatic, simplistic thinking: the illusion of.explanatory depth. We strongly believe that we.understand complex matters, when in fact we are.clueless, and these false and extreme beliefs.shape our preferences, judgments, and actions—.including our votes..Is it possible to shake such deep-rooted.convictions? That’s the question that Philip.Fernbach, a psychological scientist at the University.of Colorado’s Leeds School of Business, wanted to.explore. Fernbach and his colleagues wondered if.forcing people to explain complex policies in.detail—not cheerleading for a position but really.considering the mechanics of implementation—.might force them to confront their ignorance and.thus weaken their extremist stands on issues. They.ran a series of lab experiments to test this idea..They started by recruiting a group of volunteers in.their 30s—Democrats, Republicans, and.Independents—and asking them to state their.positions on a variety of issues, from a national flat.tax to a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions..The volunteers indicated how strongly they felt about.each issue and also rated their own understanding of.the issues. Then the volunteers were instructed to.write elaborate explanations of two issues. If the issue.was cap and trade, for example, they would first.explain precisely what cap and trade means, how it is.implemented, whom it benefits and whom it could.hurt, the sources of carbon emissions, and so forth..They were not asked for value judgments about the.policy or about the environment or business, but.only for a highly detailed description of the.mechanics of the policy in action..Let’s be honest: Most of us never do this..Fernbach’s idea was that such an exercise would.force many to realize just how little they really know.about cap and trade, and confronted with their own.ignorance, they would dampen their own.enthusiasm. They would be humbled and as a result.take less extreme positions. And that’s just what.happened. Trying—and failing—to explain complex.policies undermined the extremists’ illusions about.being well-informed. They became more moderate in.their views as a result..Being forced to articulate the nuts and bolts of a.policy is not the same as trying to sell that policy..In fact, talking about one’s views can often.strengthen them. Fernbach believes it’s the slow,.cognitive work—the deliberate analysis—that.changes people’s judgments, but he wanted to check.this in another experiment. This one was very similar.to the first, but some volunteers, instead of.explaining a policy, merely listed reasons for liking it..The results were clear. Those who simply listed.reasons for their positions—articulating their.values—were less shaken in their views. They.continued to think they understood the policies in.their complexity, and, notably, they remained.extreme in their passion for their positions..Polarization tends to reinforce itself. People are.unaware of their own ignorance, and they seek out.information that bolsters their views, often without.knowing it. They also process new information in.biased ways, and they hang out with people like.themselves. All of these psychological forces increase.political extremism, and no simple measure will.change that. But forcing the candidates to provide.concrete and elaborate plans might be a start; it gives.citizens a starting place.
Question: A central idea discussed in the passage is that
 A. articulating the reasons for holding an opinion can cause people to decide that they are wrong.
 B. the process of describing an issue in detail can make people more moderate in their views about the issue.
 C. most people are not truly interested in understanding complex ideas.
 D. people are likely to understate their most passionately held positions to avoid offending others.
Answer: B


Question:
Even then my only friends were made of paper and ink. At school I had learned to read and write long before the other children. Where my school  friends saw notches of ink on incomprehensiblepages, I saw light, streets, and people. Words and the mystery of their hidden science fascinated me, and I saw in them a key with which I could unlock a boundless world, a safe haven from that home, those streets, and those troubled days in which even Icould sense that only a limited fortune awaited me. My father didn't like to see books in the house. There was something about them-apart from the letters he could not decipher-that offended him. He used to tell me that as soon as I was ten he would 15 send me off to work and that I'd better get rid of all my scatterbrained ideas if I didn't want to end up a loser, a nobody. I used to hide my books under the mattress and wait for him to go out or fall asleep so that I could read. Once he caught me reading at night20 and flew into a rage. He tore the book from my hands and flung it out of the window."If I catch you wasting electricity again, reading all this nonsense, you'll be sorry."My father was not a miser and, despite the 25 hardships we suffered, whenever he could he gave me a few coins so that I could buy myself some treats like the other children. He was convinced that I spent them on licorice sticks, sunflower seeds, or sweets, but I would keep them in a coffee tin under the bed, 30 and when I'd collected four or five reales I'd secretly rush out to buy myself a book.My favorite place in the whole city was the Sempere \& Sons bookshop on Calle Santa Ana. It smelled of old paper and dust and it was my35 sanctuary, my refuge. The bookseller would let me sit on a chair in a corner and read any book I liked to my heart's content. He hardly ever allowed me to pay for the books he placed in my hands, but when he wasn't looking I'd leave the coins I'd managed to 40 collect on the counter before I left. It was only small change-if I'd had to buy a book with that pittance, I would probably have been able to afford only a booklet of cigarette papers. When it was time for me to leave, I would do so dragging my feet, a weight on $45 \mathrm{my}$ soul. If it had been up to me, I would have stayed there forever.One Christmas Sempere gave me the best gift I have ever received. It was an old volume, read and experienced to the full.50 "Great Expectations, by Charles Dickens," I read on the cover.I was aware that Sempere knew a few authors who frequented his establishment and, judging by the care with which he handled the volume, I thought 55 perhaps this Mr. Dickens was one of them."A friend of yours?""A lifelong friend. And from now on, he's your friend too." That afternoon I took my new friend home, 60 hidden under my clothes so that my father wouldn't see it. It was a rainy winter, with days as gray as lead, and I read Great Expectations about nine times, partly because I had no other book at hand, partly because I did not think there could be a better one in 65 the whole world and I was beginning to suspect that Mr. Dickens had written it just for me. Soon I was convinced that I didn't want to do anything else in life but learn to do what Mr. Dickens had done.
Question: It can reasonably be inferred from the passage that the main reason that the narrator considers Great Expectations to be the best gift he ever received is because
 A. reading the book convinced him that he wanted to be a writer.
 B. he'd only ever been given sweets and snacks as gifts in the past.
 C. the gift meant that Sempere held him in high regard.
 D. Sempere was a friend of the book's author.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D

Even then my only friends were made of paper and ink. At school I had learned to read and write long before the other children. Where my school  friends saw notches of ink on incomprehensiblepages, I saw light, streets, and people. Words and the mystery of their hidden science fascinated me, and I saw in them a key with which I could unlock a boundless world, a safe haven from that home, those streets, and those troubled days in which even Icould sense that only a limited fortune awaited me. My father didn't like to see books in the house. There was something about them-apart from the letters he could not decipher-that offended him. He used to tell me that as soon as I was ten he would 15 send me off to work and that I'd better get rid of all my scatterbrained ideas if I didn't want to end up a loser, a nobody. I used to hide my books under the mattress and wait for him to go out or fall asleep so that I could read. Once he caught me reading at night20 and flew into a rage. He tore the book from my hands and flung it out of the window."If I catch you wasting electricity again, reading all this nonsense, you'll be sorry."My father was not a miser and, despite the 25 hardships we suffered, whenever he could he gave me a few coins so that I could buy myself some treats like the other children. He was convinced that I spent them on licorice sticks, sunflower seeds, or sweets, but I would keep them in a coffee tin under the bed, 30 and when I'd collected four or five reales I'd secretly rush out to buy myself a book.My favorite place in the whole city was the Sempere \& Sons bookshop on Calle Santa Ana. It smelled of old paper and dust and it was my35 sanctuary, my refuge. The bookseller would let me sit on a chair in a corner and read any book I liked to my heart's content. He hardly ever allowed me to pay for the books he placed in my hands, but when he wasn't looking I'd leave the coins I'd managed to 40 collect on the counter before I left. It was only small change-if I'd had to buy a book with that pittance, I would probably have been able to afford only a booklet of cigarette papers. When it was time for me to leave, I would do so dragging my feet, a weight on $45 \mathrm{my}$ soul. If it had been up to me, I would have stayed there forever.One Christmas Sempere gave me the best gift I have ever received. It was an old volume, read and experienced to the full.50 "Great Expectations, by Charles Dickens," I read on the cover.I was aware that Sempere knew a few authors who frequented his establishment and, judging by the care with which he handled the volume, I thought 55 perhaps this Mr. Dickens was one of them."A friend of yours?""A lifelong friend. And from now on, he's your friend too." That afternoon I took my new friend home, 60 hidden under my clothes so that my father wouldn't see it. It was a rainy winter, with days as gray as lead, and I read Great Expectations about nine times, partly because I had no other book at hand, partly because I did not think there could be a better one in 65 the whole world and I was beginning to suspect that Mr. Dickens had written it just for me. Soon I was convinced that I didn't want to do anything else in life but learn to do what Mr. Dickens had done.
Question: It can reasonably be inferred from the passage that the main reason that the narrator considers Great Expectations to be the best gift he ever received is because
 A. reading the book convinced him that he wanted to be a writer.
 B. he'd only ever been given sweets and snacks as gifts in the past.
 C. the gift meant that Sempere held him in high regard.
 D. Sempere was a friend of the book's author.
Answer: A