shifty_eyed wrote:I was discussing PT47 with another TLSer, and we both had difficult with question 5 on the RC section. I'd like to hear what the experts think about that question and the answer choices. It's from the passage about ministers involved in the Downstate campaign.
The nice thing about RC questions is that we're always able to find the answer there in the passage: Every question is asking us what the passage says.
(A) In the middle of the second paragraph, we're told that they'd been working for years to achieve full civil rights. This action, then, did not represent a significant departure from their overall goals. Though it may have indicated a shift in strategy
- tending for this project away from mediation and toward activism - this shift doesn't indicate a change in their general goals
; just in the means of achieving them.
(B) Certainly other ministers did (the last line of the passage), and it's reasonable to assume that these guys may have, too, but the passage doesn't say that they did
. So this cannot be our answer.
(C) Take out "in the construction industry" and we'd have a winner. Nothing here, though, about prior work in that industry.
(D) That "some... activists" considered the agreement incomplete doesn't tell us (A) which activists/groups in particular thought that way, nor (B) whether those activists/groups criticized
the ministers for it. Passage doesn't say it, so it's out.
(E) It's possible that some
hadn't, but the whole second paragraph exists to tell us that many of them had
been so involved, and to describe some of the ways in which they had (mediation, running for office, etc.).
And the cool part is that it's always this way - the answer is the thing that the passage says