3 English and 3 math
Here are 6 random questions to try. Takers earning below 75% are unlikely to receive an offer. You have 1 minute 48 seconds per question on the real exam.
Question 1 of 6
2026 Practice Test D English, question 10Passage Excerpt from “How We Made the First Flight”
Excerpt from “How We Made the First Flight”
by Orville Wright
In 1903 brothers Wilbur and Orville Wright conducted experiments related to flying machines. These experiments would eventually lead to air travel becoming a reliable form of transportation.
During the night of December 16, 1903, a strong cold wind blew from the north. When we arose on the morning of the 17th, the puddles of water, which had been standing about camp since the recent rains, were covered with ice. The wind had a velocity of 10 to 12 meters per second (22 to 27 miles an hour). We thought it would die down before long, and so remained indoors the early part of the morning. But when ten o’clock arrived, and the wind was as brisk as ever, we decided that we had better get the machine out and attempt a flight. We hung out the signal for the men of the Life Saving Station.1 We thought that by facing the flyer into a strong wind, there ought to be no trouble in launching it from the level ground about camp. We realized the difficulties of flying in so high a wind, but estimated that the added dangers in flight would be partly compensated for by the slower speed in landing.
Final Preparations
We laid the track on a smooth stretch of ground about one hundred feet north of the new building. The biting cold wind made work difficult, and we had to warm up frequently in our living room, where we had a good fire in an improvised stove made of a large carbide2 can. By the time all was ready, J. T. Daniels, W. S. Dough and A. D. Etheridge, members of the Kill Devil3 Life Saving Station; W. C. Brinkley of Manteo, and Johnny Moore, a boy from Nags Head,4 had arrived.
We had a “Richard” hand anemometer with which we measured the velocity of the wind. Measurements made just before starting the first flight showed velocities of 11 to 12 meters per second, or 24 to 27 miles per hour. . . .
Audacity—and Calculation
Wilbur having used his turn in the unsuccessful attempt on the 14th, the right to the first trial now belonged to me. After running the motor a few minutes to heat it up, I released the wire that held the machine to the track, and the machine started forward in the wind. Wilbur ran at the side of the machine, holding the wing to balance it on the track. Unlike the start on the 14th, made in a calm, the machine, facing a 27-mile wind, started very slowly. Wilbur was able to stay with it till it lifted from the track after a forty-foot run. One of the Life Saving men snapped the camera for us, taking a picture just as the machine had reached the end of the track and had risen to a height of about two feet. The slow forward speed of the machine over the ground is clearly shown in the picture by Wilbur’s attitude. He stayed along beside the machine without any effort.
Flight
The course of the flight up and down was exceedingly erratic, partly due to the irregularity of the air, and partly to lack of experience in handling this machine. The control of the front rudder was difficult on account of its being balanced too near the center. This gave it a tendency to turn itself when started; so that it turned too far on one side and then too far on the other. As a result the machine would rise suddenly to about ten feet, and then as suddenly dart for the ground. A sudden dart when a little over a hundred feet from the end of the track, or a little over 120 feet from the point at which it rose into the air, ended the flight. As the velocity of the wind was over 35 feet per second and the speed of the machine over the ground against this wind ten feet per second, the speed of the machine relative to the air was over 45 feet per second, and the length of the flight was equivalent to a flight of 540 feet made in calm air. This flight lasted only 12 seconds, but it was nevertheless the first in the history of the world in which a machine carrying a man had raised itself by its own power into the air in full flight, had sailed forward without reduction of speed and had finally landed at a point as high as that from which it started.
From “How We Made the First Flight” by Orville Wright—Public Domain/Federal Aviation Administration
1Life Saving Station: one of the rescue stations along the Atlantic coastline that provided assistance to mariners in distress
2carbide: a very hard material composed of carbon and other heavy metals
3Kill Devil: the town of Kill Devil Hills in eastern North Carolina
4Nags Head: a town in eastern North Carolina
Question
The photograph mentioned in paragraph 4 is significant because it
- Adocuments that the machine rose into the air as soon as the tethering wire was released.
- Bprovides proof of the critical moment the machine took flight.
- Cdocuments that the wind reduced the speed of the plane at the start of the flight.
- Dprovides proof that the pilot had to gradually increase the height of the plane in the air.
Show the answer
Correct answer: B
The question asks why the photograph mentioned in paragraph 4 is significant.
A. Incorrect. According to paragraph 4, the photograph was not taken immediately after the tethering wire was released but rather after an intervening period during which “Wilbur ran at the side of the machine, holding the wing to balance it on the track.” The picture was not taken until “the machine had reached the end of the track,” which occurred after a “forty-foot run” (paragraph 4).
B. CORRECT. The photograph mentioned in paragraph 4 is significant because it provides proof that the machine did, in fact, take flight: “One of the Life Saving men snapped the camera for us, taking a picture just as the machine had reached the end of the track and had risen to a height of about two feet. The slow forward speed of the machine over the ground is clearly shown in the picture by Wilbur’s attitude. He stayed along beside the machine without any effort.”
C. Incorrect. The photograph mentioned in paragraph 4 is described as showing the plane moving forward through the air at a height of two feet, but while the effect of the wind may be visible, it is not why the photo is significant. Instead, the photograph provides proof that the plane is, in fact, moving through the air (“One of the Life Saving men snapped the camera for us, taking a picture just as the machine had reached the end of the track and had risen to a height of about two feet. The slow forward speed of the machine over the ground is clearly shown in the picture by Wilbur’s attitude”).
D. Incorrect. Although the plane is shown at a height of two feet in the photograph mentioned in paragraph 4, the picture documents only one moment of the plane’s flight and does not provide proof that the pilot had to gradually increase the height of the plane in the air.
Question analysis
This question on Orville Wright’s account of the first airplane flight asks why the photograph mentioned in paragraph 4, taken by one of the Life Saving men, is significant. The photograph itself is not printed with the excerpt, so students must work from Orville’s description of the moment it was taken. Several choices describe the machine’s movement, so each must be checked against that description.
- Grade level
- Grade 8 reading and task
- Compared with grade 7
- Above grade 7 Grade 7 readers often explain why a detail matters. This photograph is not printed, so students must picture it from Orville’s description, which uses “attitude” in an old sense meaning posture, and then judge why the picture mattered.
- Estimated difficulty
- Hard: combines ideas, needs a plan, and has more than one tempting wrong answer.
- Thinking it demands
- Depth of knowledge 2, skills and concepts · mainly analyze
- What makes it hard
- Reading between the lines moderate
- The right answer is reworded moderate
- Hard words minor
- Evidence
- Answered from one paragraph or stanza
- Reading level
- Passage: about grade 7, 816 words; question and choices: about grade 7, 68 words.
- Students, last 30 days
- Not enough answers yet to show (it takes 10).
Why it is hard, traps and wrong answers (shows the answer)
Why it is hard
The photograph is not printed, so students work from three sentences of description, and the last two tell what Orville thinks the picture shows: the machine’s slow speed, visible in Wilbur’s easy pace. That stated detail is the strongest lure. The question asks for significance instead, which the excerpt leaves unstated; students must link the moment captured, the machine just off the track at the end of its run, to paragraph 5’s closing claim that this was the first such flight in history.
Reading between the lines moderate Working it out
Orville never says why the picture matters; students must notice it was taken “just as the machine had reached the end of the track and had risen to a height of about two feet,” the instant of lift-off. (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994; Kintsch, 1998)
The right answer is reworded moderate Choosing the answer
The key’s “critical moment the machine took flight” appears nowhere, while the wrong choices echo the paragraph’s released wire, the slow speed Orville says the picture shows, and the “height of about two feet.” (Freedle & Kostin, 1993; Kirsch & Mosenthal, 1990)
Hard words minor Understanding the question
Orville says the slow speed shows “by Wilbur’s attitude,” using attitude in an old sense, Wilbur’s posture as he keeps pace, which students must decode to follow the description of the picture. (Perfetti, 2007; Freedle & Kostin, 1993)
Strategy: Reread the three sentences about the picture in paragraph 4, note when it was taken and what Orville says it shows, then weigh which choice explains why such a picture would matter.
Traps
- True but not the answer: A choice says something accurate about the text that does not answer this question.
- Twists what the text says: Uses the text's topic and ideas but changes what it says: who did it, how much, when, or why.
- Reads too much in: A reasonable-sounding conclusion that goes further than the text allows.
The wrong answers, classified
A Twists what the text says (King et al., 2004)
Collapses the release of the wire and the lift-off into one moment, skipping Wilbur’s run beside the machine; it rose only after a forty-foot run, when the picture was taken.
C True but not the answer (King et al., 2004; Embretson & Wetzel, 1987)
Takes Orville’s own remark that the picture shows “the slow forward speed of the machine” as its significance, but that is a detail in the picture, not why a picture of this moment matters.
D Reads too much in (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994)
Treats the two-foot height as one step in a steady climb, though a single picture catches one instant and paragraph 5 describes sudden rises to ten feet and darts toward the ground.
Working it out, step by step
Figure out what the question asks
This asks why the photograph in paragraph 4 matters. The photograph is not printed with the excerpt. You have to picture it from Orville’s words. Find when it was taken. Then ask why a picture of that moment would be important.
Read the description of the photograph
Paragraph 4 says “One of the Life Saving men snapped the camera for us, taking a picture just as the machine had reached the end of the track and had risen to a height of about two feet.” The next sentences say “The slow forward speed of the machine over the ground is clearly shown in the picture by Wilbur’s attitude. He stayed along beside the machine without any effort.”
Work out what the picture shows
The machine had just left the track and was two feet in the air. So the picture caught the moment it lifted off. Here “attitude” means the way Wilbur held his body. He kept up with the machine easily, so it was moving slowly. Paragraph 5 says this flight was “the first in the history of the world” of its kind. A photo of that lift-off is proof that it really happened.
Check each choice
- A does not fit. The machine did not rise at once. It lifted “after a forty-foot run.”
- B fits. The picture caught the moment the machine first took flight.
- C does not fit. The picture does show the slow speed. But that is a detail in the photo, not why the photo matters.
- D does not fit. One picture shows one moment. It cannot show a steady climb. In fact, paragraph 5 says the machine rose and dropped suddenly.
Watch out: C is tempting because Orville himself says the slow speed is “clearly shown in the picture.” But the question asks why the picture is significant, which means important.
Choose the answer
The photo captured the very moment the first flight began. So the answer is B, “provides proof of the critical moment the machine took flight.”
Why this answer and not the closest wrong one
C is the closest wrong choice. Orville does say the picture shows the machine’s slow speed. But slow speed is not what makes this photo special. It was taken just as the machine “had risen to a height of about two feet” at the end of the track. That is proof of the first moment of flight, as B says.
More questions like this
The original DOE question

The passage “Excerpt from “How We Made the First Flight”” as printed (pages 13–14)


Question 2 of 6
2026 Practice Test B English, question 22Passage Excerpt from In Search of the Unknown
Excerpt from In Search of the Unknown
by Robert W. Chambers
It was at that time the policy of the trustees and officers of the Zoological Gardens neither to employ collectors nor to send out expeditions in search of specimens. The society decided to depend upon voluntary contributions, and I was always busy, part of the day, in dictating answers to correspondents who wrote offering their services as hunters of big game, collectors of all sorts of fauna, trappers, snarers, and also to those who offered specimens for sale, usually at exorbitant rates.
To the proprietors of . . . mangy lynxes, moth-eaten coyotes, and dancing bears I returned courteous but uncompromising refusals—of course, first submitting all such letters, together with my replies, to Professor Farrago.
One day towards the end of May, however, just as I was leaving Bronx Park to return to town, Professor Lesard, of the reptilian department, called out to me that Professor Farrago wanted to see me a moment; so I . . . retraced my steps to the temporary, wooden building occupied by Professor Farrago, general superintendent of the Zoological Gardens. The professor, who was sitting at his desk before a pile of letters and replies submitted for approval by me, pushed his glasses down and looked over them at me with a whimsical smile that suggested amusement, impatience, annoyance, and perhaps a faint trace of apology.
“Now, here’s a letter,” he said, with a deliberate gesture towards a sheet of paper impaled on a file—“a letter that I suppose you remember.” He disengaged the sheet of paper and handed it to me.
“Oh yes,” I replied, with a shrug; “of course the man is mistaken—or—”
“Or what?” demanded Professor Farrago, tranquilly, wiping his glasses.
“—Or a liar,” I replied.
After a silence he leaned back in his chair and bade me read the letter to him again, and I did so with a contemptuous tolerance for the writer, who must have been either a very innocent victim or a very stupid swindler. I said as much to Professor Farrago, but, to my surprise, he appeared to waver.
“I suppose,” he said, with his near-sighted, embarrassed smile, “that nine hundred and ninety-nine men in a thousand would throw that letter aside and condemn the writer as a liar or a fool?”
“In my opinion,” said I, “he’s one or the other.”
“He isn’t—in mine,” said the professor, placidly.
“What!” I exclaimed. “Here is a man living all alone on a strip of rock and sand between the wilderness and the sea, who wants you to send somebody to take charge of a bird that doesn’t exist!”
“How do you know,” asked Professor Farrago, “that the bird in question does not exist?”
“It is generally accepted,” I replied, sarcastically, “that the great auk has been extinct for years. Therefore I may be pardoned for doubting that our correspondent possesses a pair of them alive.”
“Oh, you young fellows,” said the professor, smiling wearily, “you embark on a theory for destinations that don’t exist.”
He leaned back in his chair, his amused eyes searching space for the imagery that made him smile.
“Like swimming squirrels, you navigate with the help of Heaven and a stiff breeze, but you never land where you hope to—do you?”
Rather red in the face, I said: “Don’t you believe the great auk to be extinct?”
“Audubon saw the great auk.”
“Who has seen a single specimen since?”
“Nobody—except our correspondent here,” he replied, laughing.
I laughed, too, considering the interview at an end, but the professor went on, coolly:
“Whatever it is that our correspondent has—and I am daring to believe that it is the great auk itself—I want you to secure it for the society.”
When my astonishment subsided my first conscious sentiment was one of pity. Clearly, Professor Farrago was on the verge of dotage—ah, what a loss to the world!
I believe now that Professor Farrago perfectly interpreted my thoughts, but he betrayed neither resentment nor impatience. I drew a chair up beside his desk—there was nothing to do but to obey, and this fool’s errand was none of my conceiving.
Together we made out a list of articles necessary for me and itemized the expenses I might incur, and I set a date for my return, allowing no margin for a successful termination to the expedition.
“Never mind that,” said the professor. “What I want you to do is to get those birds here safely. Now, how many men will you take?”
“None,” I replied, bluntly; “it’s a useless expense, unless there is something to bring back. If there is I’ll wire you, you may be sure.”
“Very well,” said Professor Farrago, good-humoredly, “you shall have all the assistance you may require. Can you leave to-night?”
The old gentleman was certainly prompt. I nodded, half-sulkily, aware of his amusement.
“So,” I said, picking up my hat, “I am to start north to find a place called Black Harbor, where there is a man named Halyard who possesses, among other household utensils, two extinct great auks—”
We were both laughing by this time. I asked him why on earth he credited the assertion of a man he had never before heard of.
“I suppose,” he replied, with the same half-apologetic, half-humorous smile, “it is instinct. I feel, somehow, that this man Halyard has got an auk—perhaps two. I can’t get away from the idea that we are on the eve of acquiring the rarest of living creatures. It’s odd for a scientist to talk as I do; doubtless you’re shocked—admit it, now!”
But I was not shocked; on the contrary, I was conscious that the same strange hope that Professor Farrago cherished was beginning, in spite of me, to stir my pulses, too.
“If he has—” I began, then stopped.
The professor and I looked hard at each other in silence.
“Go on,” he said, encouragingly.
But I had nothing more to say, for the prospect of beholding with my own eyes a living specimen of the great auk produced a series of conflicting emotions within me which rendered speech profanely superfluous.
From IN SEARCH OF THE UNKNOWN by Robert W. Chambers—Public Domain
Audubon: John James Audubon, an ornithologist and artist who created scientific illustrations of birds
dotage: a loss of reasoning brought about by old age
Question
How does the author develop the contrast between the narrator’s point of view and the professor’s point of view?
- Aby providing both the narrator’s and professor’s thoughts on how age and experience influence each other’s reasoning
- Bby using the conversation between the narrator and the professor to emphasize their reactions to the letter
- Cby describing the professor’s persistent efforts to change the narrator’s mind about the letter
- Dby including dialogue that explains why the professor is the supervisor and the narrator is his subordinate
Show the answer
Correct answer: B
The question asks how the author develops the contrast between the narrator’s point of view and the professor’s point of view.
A. Incorrect. The excerpt does not describe the narrator’s thoughts about how age and experience influence the professor’s reasoning in enough detail to fully contrast them against the thoughts about the narrator that the professor expresses in paragraphs 15–17. The narrator’s idea that the professor might be “on the verge of dotage” (paragraph 24) is meant in a humorous way.
B. CORRECT. The primary conflict of the excerpt revolves around the narrator’s disagreement with the professor about whether the letter about the great auks could be true. As the two men converse, their contrasting attitudes toward the letter become clear: the narrator dismisses the possibility of great auks out of hand (“ ‘of course the man is mistaken’ ” [paragraph 5]; “ ‘here is a man . . . who wants you to send somebody to take charge of a bird that doesn’t exist!’ ” [paragraph 12]), while the professor calmly admits that although “ ‘nine hundred and ninety-nine men in a thousand would throw that letter aside and condemn the writer’ ” (paragraph 9), he himself believes that the writer could be telling the truth (“ ‘How do you know,’ asked Professor Farrago, ‘that the bird in question does not exist?’ ” [paragraph 13]).
C. Incorrect. The professor explains why he disagrees with the narrator (paragraphs 19–21), but he does not make persistent efforts to convince the narrator to change his mind about the letter. Instead he states that the narrator will go on an expedition to retrieve “ ‘whatever it is that our correspondent has’ ” (paragraph 23), thereby requiring the narrator to go collect the great auks whether the narrator believes in them or not.
D. Incorrect. The point of the dialogue is not to explain the subordinate-supervisor relationship between the narrator and the professor but rather to contrast what each character believes about the contents of the letter.
Question analysis
This point-of-view question asks how Robert W. Chambers develops the contrast between the narrator’s outlook and Professor Farrago’s in the excerpt from In Search of the Unknown. Students must step back from single lines and judge the author’s method across the whole excerpt. The choices describe techniques in general terms, and several connect to real moments in the story.
- Grade level
- Grade 8 reading and task
- Compared with grade 7
- Above grade 7 Analyzing how an author contrasts two characters’ points of view is the grade 7 standard itself, but here students must judge the main method across the whole excerpt, and each choice names an abstract method that touches something in the text.
- Estimated difficulty
- Hard: combines ideas, needs a plan, and has more than one tempting wrong answer.
- Thinking it demands
- Depth of knowledge 3, strategic thinking · mainly analyze
- What makes it hard
- How, not what major
- A very close wrong answer moderate
- Evidence in several places moderate
- Evidence
- Answered from the whole text
- Reading level
- Passage: about grade 9, 1066 words; question and choices: about grade 11, 84 words.
- Students, last 30 days
- Not enough answers yet to show (it takes 10).
Why it is hard, traps and wrong answers (shows the answer)
Why it is hard
The right choice is plain enough to seem too obvious, so students look for something more specific. The excerpt offers a candidate: the professor teases “you young fellows,” and the narrator decides the old man is near “dotage,” which makes age look like the method. Those remarks are passing jokes, while the men’s opposite reactions to Halyard’s letter run through the whole conversation. The question rewards judging what carries the contrast from start to end rather than what is most striking.
How, not what major Working it out
The question asks for the author’s method across the whole excerpt, and every choice names an abstract technique, so students must step back from single lines to see that the dialogue carries the contrast. (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001)
A very close wrong answer moderate Choosing the answer
The choice about age and experience and the right one both describe the two men’s opposed views as they come out in the excerpt; they part on the subject, their ages or the letter. (Embretson & Wetzel, 1987; Gorin & Embretson, 2006; Ascalon et al., 2007)
Evidence in several places moderate Working it out
The contrast builds from the narrator’s “of course the man is mistaken” in paragraph 5 to the professor’s appeal to “instinct” in paragraph 33, so no single passage shows the method. (Kirsch & Mosenthal, 1990; Gorin & Embretson, 2006)
Strategy: For each choice, find where the excerpt does what the choice describes, and ask whether that method carries the contrast through the whole excerpt or appears only once or twice.
Traps
- Too narrow: A single detail offered as the central idea or a summary, or a summary that keeps minor details and leaves out an essential part.
- Twists what the text says: Uses the text's topic and ideas but changes what it says: who did it, how much, when, or why.
- Wrong purpose or structure: Names a purpose, structure or effect that the part does not serve, or describes what a part says when the question asks what it does.
The wrong answers, classified
A Too narrow (King et al., 2004)
Notices the jab at “you young fellows” and the narrator’s thought of “dotage,” but two passing remarks about age are not how the author builds the contrast across the excerpt.
C Twists what the text says (King et al., 2004)
Overstates the professor’s role, since he asks a few calm questions and then simply assigns the trip, never working to win the narrator over.
D Wrong purpose or structure (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001)
Knows that the professor is the superior, but no line of dialogue explains how either man got his position; the talk is about the letter, not their ranks.
Working it out, step by step
Figure out what the question asks
This asks about the author’s method. How does the author show that the two men see things differently? Look at how the whole excerpt is built, not just one line.
Notice how the excerpt is told
Most of the excerpt is a conversation. The two men talk back and forth about the letter. Each answer shows how one man reacts to it. So their reactions to the letter are where the contrast shows up. A contrast is a clear difference between two things.
Find the two reactions
The narrator says “of course the man is mistaken” (paragraph 5). He laughs at the idea of “a bird that doesn’t exist!” (paragraph 12). The professor stays open. In paragraph 13 he asks how the narrator can be sure “that the bird in question does not exist.” In paragraph 23, he is “daring to believe” it is the great auk.
Check each choice
- A does not fit. Age comes up only twice: “you young fellows” and the narrator’s thought about “dotage.” Two short remarks do not build the contrast.
- B fits. The talk about the letter shows their opposite reactions.
- C does not fit. The professor asks a few calm questions and then simply sends the narrator. He does not keep trying to change his mind.
- D does not fit. No line explains how either man got his job.
Watch out: A is tempting because those remarks about age are real. But they are passing moments, not the author’s main method.
Choose the answer
The author builds the contrast through the two men’s talk about the letter. So the answer is B, “by using the conversation between the narrator and the professor to emphasize their reactions to the letter.”
Why this answer and not the closest wrong one
A is the closest wrong choice. The professor does tease “you young fellows,” and the narrator does think of “dotage.” But those are two quick remarks. From paragraph 5 to paragraph 33, the two men keep reacting to the letter in opposite ways. That steady back-and-forth builds the contrast, so B fits.
More questions like this
The original DOE question

The passage “Excerpt from In Search of the Unknown” as printed (page 21)

Question 3 of 6
2026 Practice Test D English, question 17Passage Wolves of the Sea
Wolves of the Sea
The cool and misty landscape of the Great Bear Rainforest can be found along the coast of British Columbia, Canada, and its nearby islands, from Vancouver Island to the Alaskan border. Within this protected area, wolves roam the forests, islands, and beaches. When biologist Chris Darimont began to study these wolves, he wanted to confer with local First Nations groups, as aboriginal Canadians are known, in order to learn what they knew about these wolves. He spoke with Chester Starr, an elder of the Heiltsuk Nation that has occupied the Great Bear Rainforest for thousands of years. What Starr had to say about the wolves changed Darimont’s perception of the animals.
Starr asked Darimont which wolves he and his team were going to study—the timber wolves (mainland wolves) or the coastal wolves on the islands. The question took Darimont by surprise. Biologists had always believed that the wolves that are sometimes spotted swimming between islands and eating salmon are the same wolves that live on the mainland. Darimont was intrigued by Starr’s classification of the wolves as two different groups. At first, he was hesitant to accept the idea. The distances between the mainland and the islands are small, less than a mile. Why would the wolves on the islands be any different from the wolves on the mainland? To find out, Darimont and his research team studied the wolves on the islands and in the densely forested territory of the Great Bear Rainforest for ten years.
Throughout the study, Darimont recorded several significant, observable differences between the “sea wolves,” as they are nicknamed, and the mainland wolves. Compared with the mainland wolves, the sea wolves are smaller in size and are strong swimmers. In 1996 sea wolves were spotted on an island nearly eight miles from any other land formation. While mainland wolves almost exclusively eat meat, such as deer and elk, and teach their young to hunt for land animals, sea wolves get as much as 90 percent of their nutrition from the sea and teach their young to dig for clams and to catch fish. Sea wolves regularly swim between islands and have been known to sneak up on a seal sunning itself on a rock and make a leaping attack from the water. Some salmon-eating mainland wolves come and go from the islands with the fish-spawning season, but the sea wolves are full-time island residents. Darimont suspects that some sea wolves live their entire life on the islands.
The sea wolves displayed not only physical and behavioral differences but also genetic variations from the mainland wolves. After collecting and analyzing the DNA in 800 samples of gray fur and wolf waste, researchers could produce hard biological evidence that sea wolves had genetic markers that made them distinct from the mainland wolves. A genetic marker is a variation in a DNA sequence that can be used to identify individuals or a species because it is passed down to offspring. Darimont hypothesizes that a change in habitat led to the eventual genetic differences between sea wolves and mainland wolves. Many years ago, loss of habitat and food sources forced some mainland wolves out to the islands. They learned to eat everything from kelp and fish eggs to the remains of sea creatures that washed up on the beach. Wolves living on the islands and mainland wolves became more isolated and rarely mated with each other. Over time the two types of wolves became more distinct.
It turned out that Chester Starr was right all along. “It sounded totally bizarre at first,” admits Darimont, “that there could be two versions of the species.” But he now realizes that this skepticism “definitely reflected my ignorance of indigenous knowledge at the time.” Learning to trust the wisdom of the Heiltsuk people opened Darimont up to knowledge accumulated over millennia and positioned him so that he could gather new scientific evidence about one of British Columbia’s most elusive species, the sea wolf.
Question
Read this sentence from paragraph 4.
After collecting and analyzing the DNA in 800 samples of gray fur and wolf waste, researchers could produce hard biological evidence that sea wolves had genetic markers that made them distinct from the mainland wolves.
The phrase “hard biological evidence” conveys that the goal of the research team was to
- Adevelop a procedure in order to ensure their study yielded plentiful data about the wolves.
- Bseek definitive scientific proof of the number of wolf species present in the area of the study.
- Cconduct a study to evaluate multiple theories about the diets of different wolf species.
- Ddiscover if the new data would provide information different from that of previous studies.
Show the answer
Correct answer: B
The question asks what the phrase “hard biological evidence” in the sentence from paragraph 4 conveys about the goal of the research team.
A. Incorrect. Although the research team followed a labor-intensive procedure, the phrase “hard biological evidence” refers to the product of their scientific research (the genetic markers revealed within the DNA samples), not the process by which they collected it. Their goal was not to develop a procedure for data collection but to determine precisely how many species of wolf were present in the area.
B. CORRECT. The research team wanted to prove or disprove the theory that two separate groups of wolves were present in the area, an idea that was already supported by the observations of scientists and local indigenous people. The phrase “hard biological evidence” conveys that the scientists wanted to bolster their observations of the wolves with concrete scientific data about the wolves’ biological makeup. The goal of the researchers was to use the data to prove how many species of wolf were present in the area of the study.
C. Incorrect. The research team gathered extensive data during their study (“After collecting and analyzing the DNA in 800 samples of gray fur and wolf waste” [paragraph 4]), and their goal in doing so was to evaluate a single theory about the wolves: that the wolves had evolved into two separate and genetically distinct species. The research team did not conduct the study in order to evaluate multiple theories about the diets of the wolves.
D. Incorrect. The phrase “hard biological evidence” does not suggest that the research team was hoping to discover if the new data would provide information that was different from previous studies. In fact, the goal of the research team was to use the genetic data to supplement their initial sources of information about the wolves and their own observations from the field.
Question analysis
This word-in-context question quotes a sentence from paragraph 4 of “Wolves of the Sea” about DNA taken from 800 samples of gray fur and wolf waste, and asks what the phrase “hard biological evidence” shows about the research team’s goal. Students must work out what the phrase says about the evidence and then turn that into a statement of purpose, choosing among four plausible aims for a study.
- Grade level
- Grade 8 reading and task
- Compared with grade 7
- Above grade 7 Grade 7 students regularly interpret a phrase in context. Here the phrase must be turned into a claim about the team’s purpose, which the passage never states outright, and the four choices are abstract research goals that each sound reasonable.
- Estimated difficulty
- Hard: combines ideas, needs a plan, and has more than one tempting wrong answer.
- Thinking it demands
- Depth of knowledge 2, skills and concepts · mainly understand
- What makes it hard
- Reading between the lines moderate
- Hard words moderate
- Evidence in several places minor
- Evidence
- Answered from several paragraphs or stanzas
- Reading level
- Passage: about grade 10, 662 words; question and choices: about grade 10, 114 words.
- Students, last 30 days
- Not enough answers yet to show (it takes 10).
Why it is hard, traps and wrong answers (shows the answer)
Why it is hard
The question asks for a purpose, but the phrase it quotes describes a result, so students have to reason from the kind of evidence produced to what the team wanted it for. Readers who take “hard” as difficult drift toward a goal about procedure, and those who remember that biologists had long thought the wolves were one group are drawn to a goal of overturning earlier studies. The key’s “number of wolf species” is looser than the passage’s “two versions of the species,” which can make careful readers hesitate.
Reading between the lines moderate Working it out
The passage never states the team’s goal, so students must work back from “hard biological evidence” to the question paragraph 2 set up: whether island and mainland wolves are really two groups. (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994; Kintsch, 1998)
Hard words moderate Understanding the question
“Hard” here means solid and conclusive, as in hard evidence, not difficult; students who know only the everyday sense connect it to the labor of analyzing 800 samples of fur and waste. (Perfetti, 2007; Freedle & Kostin, 1993)
Evidence in several places minor Working it out
The goal the phrase points to lies two paragraphs back, in Starr’s two-group question and Darimont’s ten-year study “to find out,” not in the sentence the stem quotes. (Kirsch & Mosenthal, 1990; Gorin & Embretson, 2006)
Strategy: Replace “hard” with a word that fits evidence produced by DNA analysis, then ask what the team wanted that kind of evidence for, recalling the question Darimont set out to answer.
Traps
- Dictionary meaning, not meaning here: A common meaning of the word that does not fit its use in this text.
- Reads too much in: A reasonable-sounding conclusion that goes further than the text allows.
- Wrong part of the text: A choice is true of another paragraph, stanza or speaker than the one asked about.
The wrong answers, classified
A Dictionary meaning, not meaning here (Perfetti, 2007)
Reads “hard” as difficult and ties it to the labor of analyzing 800 samples, so takes the goal to be a thorough procedure rather than conclusive proof.
C Wrong part of the text (Kirsch & Mosenthal, 1990)
Brings in the diet differences of paragraph 3, clams, fish and seals, as theories under test, though the DNA work in paragraph 4 asked whether two groups exist.
D Reads too much in (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994)
Knows that biologists “had always believed” the wolves were one group and assumes the team set out to contradict earlier studies, which the phrase about solid proof does not suggest.
Working it out, step by step
Figure out what the question asks
This asks what a phrase shows about the team’s goal. A goal is what you are trying to get. The phrase names the kind of evidence the team got. Work back from that to what they wanted it for.
Read the sentence with the phrase
In paragraph 4, the team studied “800 samples of gray fur and wolf waste.” Then they “could produce hard biological evidence that sea wolves had genetic markers that made them distinct from the mainland wolves.” A genetic marker is a small difference in the DNA that parents pass to their young. Distinct means clearly different.
Work out what “hard” means
Here “hard” does not mean difficult. Hard evidence is solid proof that is tough to argue with. Biological means it comes from living things and their bodies. So the team wanted firm proof from the wolves’ own bodies.
Connect the proof to the question
What did they want to prove? Go back to paragraph 2. Starr said there were two groups of wolves. Darimont was unsure. “To find out,” his team studied the wolves. The DNA gave a firm answer: the sea wolves really are a separate group. So the goal was solid proof of how many groups of wolves live there.
Check each choice
- A is wrong. It reads “hard” as hard work. The phrase is about how firm the proof is, not about a procedure.
- B is right. Definitive means final and settled. The team wanted settled proof of how many groups of wolves live there. B says “species,” which goes further than the passage. Darimont speaks only of “two versions of the species.”
- C is wrong. Diets come up in paragraph 3. The DNA work tested whether there were two groups.
- D is wrong. The phrase says nothing about earlier studies.
Watch out: D is tempting because biologists “had always believed” the wolves were one group. But “hard” evidence is about firm proof, not about beating old studies.
Choose the answer
“Hard biological evidence” shows the team wanted firm, scientific proof. So the answer is B, “seek definitive scientific proof of the number of wolf species present in the area of the study.”
Why this answer and not the closest wrong one
D is the closest wrong answer. Biologists had thought the wolves were one group, so D can seem to fit. But the phrase “hard biological evidence” is about how firm the proof is. It says nothing about earlier studies. B matches that: the team wanted settled proof of how many groups there were.
More questions like this
The original DOE question

The passage “Wolves of the Sea” as printed (pages 23–24)


Question 4 of 6
2024 Test B Math, question 41Question
A bag contains 2 green, 4 blue, and 3 yellow disks. Alana selects 4 disks from the bag at random, one at a time, without replacing them. What is the probability that she selects all 4 blue disks?
- A
- B
- C
- D
Show the answer
Correct answer: B
If Alana picks 4 blue disks in a row, the number of blue disks and the total number of disks will both decrease by 1 after each selection.
For the first selection, there are 4 blue disks out of 9 total disks, so the probability of selecting the first blue disk is .
The probabilities of selecting blue for the next three selections are , , and .
Question analysis
A bag holds green, blue and yellow disks, and Alana draws four of them one at a time without putting any back. Students find the probability that all four disks are blue. It tests the probability of dependent events, and the difficulty is keeping track of how the bag changes after each draw.
- NYS standards
- Grade level
- Grade 7 content, by NYS standard
- Compared with grade 7
- Above grade 7 Grade 7 compound probability is usually found with lists or tree diagrams for two stages. Four dependent draws, each changing the counts, are too many to list and need the multiplication rule, which grade 7 does not formally teach.
- Estimated difficulty
- Hard: combines ideas, needs a plan, and has more than one tempting wrong answer.
- Thinking it demands
- Depth of knowledge 2, skills and concepts · mainly apply
- What makes it hard
- Something you must already know moderate
- Error-prone arithmetic moderate
- Solution
- 3 steps
- Reading level
- Question and choices: about grade 5, 37 words.
- Students, last 30 days
- Not enough answers yet to show (it takes 10).
Why it is hard, traps and wrong answers (shows the answer)
Why it is hard
Students who know the multiplication rule for successive draws still have two adjustments to make on every draw, and each wrong choice skips at least one of them. Leaving the bag at 9 disks, or putting each disk back, both produce fractions over 6,561 that look as exact as the right one. Writing the four fractions in a row before multiplying, and cancelling as you go, keeps the arithmetic small.
Something you must already know moderate Working it out
The rule for successive draws without replacement is assumed: each draw's chance is multiplied in, with both the blue count and the total lowered by one. (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001)
Error-prone arithmetic moderate Working it out
The product 4/9 × 3/8 × 2/7 × 1/6 = 24/3,024 has to be reduced to 1/126, and two wrong choices hide behind 9 to the fourth power, 6,561. (Brown & Burton, 1978; Junker & Sijtsma, 2001)
Strategy: Write the chance of blue for each of the four draws in turn, lowering both the blue count and the total by one each time, and multiply.
Traps
- Without replacement: In a second pick there is one fewer item, which changes the probability.
- Wrong operation: Adds instead of multiplying, divides the wrong way round, turns a ratio or rate upside down, or undoes a step in the wrong direction (subtracts what should be added back).
The wrong answers, classified
A Without replacement (Fischbein & Schnarch, 1997)
Lowers the blue count on each draw but keeps all 9 disks in the bag, 4 × 3 × 2 × 1 over 9 × 9 × 9 × 9, which is 24/6,561 = 8/2,187.
C Without replacement (Fischbein & Schnarch, 1997)
Uses 4/9 for every draw, (4/9) to the fourth power = 256/6,561, as if each disk were put back before the next draw.
D Wrong operation (Hegarty, Mayer & Monk, 1995; King et al., 2004)
Adds the first draw's 4/9 four times, or multiplies it by 4, instead of multiplying the draws' chances, and misses that a probability cannot exceed 1.
Worked solution, step by step
Formulas used
- Probability
- P is the probability, the chance that something happens. It is a number from 0 to 1. The top counts the results you want. The bottom counts all the results that can happen. It works when every result is equally likely.
- Chance of events in a row
- A and B are two events that happen one after the other. P(A) is the chance of the first. P(B after A) is the chance of the second, counting only what is left after the first. You multiply because the second must also happen inside the share of times the first did.
Sort out the question
The bag holds 2 green, 4 blue and 3 yellow disks. That is 9 disks in all. Alana takes 4 disks, one at a time.
“Without replacing them” means a disk she takes does not go back in the bag. You need the chance that all 4 disks are blue.
Find the chance for each pick
For all 4 to be blue, each pick must be blue. After each blue pick, one blue disk is gone. One disk is gone from the total, too. So the top and the bottom each go down by 1.
Pick Blue disks left Disks left Chance of blue 1st 4 9 2nd 3 8 3rd 2 7 4th 1 6 Multiply the four chances
All four picks must go right, one after another. Use the rule for events in a row and multiply.
Simplify the fraction
Divide the top and the bottom by 24. That keeps the value the same.
Watch out: Using for every pick gives , choice C. That is right only if each disk goes back in. Keeping 9 on the bottom each time gives , choice A. Choice D is more than 1, and no chance can be more than 1.
So the answer is B, .
Check your answer
Cancel before you multiply. On top, cancels the 8 on the bottom. That leaves . Divide the top and bottom by 3 to get again.
More questions like this
The original DOE question

Question 5 of 6
2018 Test A Math, question 44Question
![]()
On the number line above, points , , , and are integers, and . What is the value of ?
- A8
- B11
- C12
- D18
Show the answer
Correct answer: C
Convert the ratios into fractions of . Use the sum of the ratios for the denominator.
The part of that is is the sum of those fractions:
Find the length of :
The value of is .
Question analysis
This number line question places integer points W, X, Y and Z on a line and gives the ratio of the segments WX, XY and YZ as 4 to 2 to 3. Students find the whole length from W to Z, split it by the ratio, and add the parts that make up WY. Mixing up a part with the whole is the main risk.
- Grade level
- Grade 7 content, by NYS standard
- Compared with grade 7
- Above grade 7 Grade 7 students find distances on a number line and use part-to-whole ratios, usually separately. This item joins them: a negative endpoint, a three-term ratio and a choice of which segments to combine.
- Estimated difficulty
- Hard: combines ideas, needs a plan, and has more than one tempting wrong answer.
- Thinking it demands
- Depth of knowledge 2, skills and concepts · mainly apply
- What makes it hard
- Combines ideas moderate
- Reading a figure, table or graph moderate
- Many steps minor
- Solution
- 3 steps
- Reading level
- Question and choices: about grade 10, 21 words.
- Corrected from the DOE handbook
- Equations in the explanation that mixed up a fraction of a length with the length itself were corrected.
- Students, last 30 days
- Not enough answers yet to show (it takes 10).
Why it is hard, traps and wrong answers (shows the answer)
Why it is hard
Each step is routine, but the question keeps asking for a different piece of the line: the whole WZ, the part WX, and finally WY, which is two parts added together. Two of the wrong choices are exactly those other pieces. Students who mark the actual positions, X at −2 and Y at 2, can check the ratio before answering.
Combines ideas moderate Working it out
A three-part ratio, 4:2:3, must be applied to a length found from a negative endpoint, 8 − (−10) = 18, joining ratio and number-line distance. (Embretson, 1998; Daniel & Embretson, 2010)
Reading a figure, table or graph moderate Understanding the question
Only W at −10 and Z at 8 are labeled, and the drawing is not to scale: Y is drawn nearer 5 than 2, so reading WY from the picture fails. (Lesh, Post & Behr, 1987; Kirsch & Mosenthal, 1990)
Many steps minor Working it out
Find WZ, split it into 9 equal parts of 2, then add the 4 parts of WX and the 2 parts of XY. (Daniel & Embretson, 2010; Enright, Morley & Sheehan, 2002)
Strategy: Find the length WZ from the endpoints on the number line, divide it by the total number of ratio parts, and multiply by the parts from W to Y.
Traps
- Stops one step early: A choice is a number from partway through the solution.
- Answers a different question: A choice is right for another quantity: the other unknown, the rest instead of the part, the part instead of the whole.
- Counting the ends: Inclusive or exclusive ends, fence posts, consecutive numbers: an answer that is one too many or too few, or an endpoint drawn open where it belongs closed (or the reverse).
The wrong answers, classified
A Stops one step early (King et al., 2004; Gierl et al., 2017)
Finds WX, 4/9 of 18 = 8, and stops without adding XY's 4 to reach Y; 8 also matches Z's label.
B Counting the ends (Brown & Burton, 1978)
Places Y at 2 but counts the integers strictly between −10 and 2, which are −9 through 1, getting 11 instead of the distance 12.
D Answers a different question (King et al., 2004; Hegarty, Mayer & Monk, 1995)
Gives the whole length WZ, 8 − (−10) = 18, instead of the part from W to Y.
What was corrected from the DOE handbook, and why
- Explanation: The handbook writes WX = 4/9, XY = 2/9 and WY = 2/3, and then says “The value of WY is 2/3(18) = 12”. Those fractions are parts of WZ, not the lengths themselves (WX is 8 and WY is 12), so WY cannot be both 2/3 and 12. The lines now read WX = 4/9 WZ, XY = 2/9 WZ and WY = 2/3 WZ. The method and the answer are unchanged.
Worked solution, step by step
Formulas used
- Distance on a number line
- d is the distance between two points. b is the point on the right and a is the point on the left. Subtracting left from right always gives a positive distance. It works even when a is negative.
- Size of one part of a ratio
- u is the size of one part. L is the whole length being shared. p is the total number of parts, found by adding the numbers in the ratio. Every part is the same size, so you share the length equally.
Sort out what you know
W is at −10 and Z is at 8. X and Y are between them. The ratio 4:2:3 means WX is 4 parts, XY is 2 parts and YZ is 3 parts. All the parts are the same size.
You need the length WY, from W to Y. The drawing is not exact, so use the numbers, not the picture.
Find the whole length WZ
WZ is 18 units long. Subtracting a negative number is the same as adding.
Find the size of one part
Add the ratio numbers to get the number of parts:
Share the 18 units equally among 9 parts:
Each part is 2 units long.
Find WY
WY is WX and XY together, so it has 4 + 2 = 6 parts:
Watch out: WX alone is 4 × 2 = 8, which is choice A. And 18 is the whole line, choice D. So the answer is C, 12.
Check your answer
Place the points. W is at −10. X is 8 units to the right, at −2. Y is 4 more, at 2. Z is 6 more, at 8, which matches its label. And the distance from −10 to 2 is 2 − (−10) = 12.
More questions like this
The original DOE question

Question 6 of 6
2018 Test B Math, question 42Question
There are 1,000 cubic centimeters in 1 liter, and 1,000 cubic millimeters in 1 milliliter. How many cubic millimeters are there in 1,000 cubic centimeters?
- A1,000
- B10,000
- C100,000
- D1,000,000
Show the answer
Correct answer: D
If 1 L = 1,000 cu cm, then 1 L = 1,000 mL. Set up a proportion, letting = the amount of cubic millimeters in 1,000 cubic centimeters.
Solve for : 1,000,000 cubic millimeters are in 1,000 cubic centimeters.
Question analysis
The question gives two metric facts, cubic centimeters per liter and cubic millimeters per milliliter, and asks how many cubic millimeters are in 1,000 cubic centimeters. It tests chaining unit conversions with volume units. The hard part is that the two facts do not connect without a link the question leaves out.
- NYS standards
- 6.RP.3d converting measurement units
- Grade level
- Grade 6 content, by NYS standard
- Compared with grade 7
- Above grade 7 Grade 6 and 7 students convert units with one given factor. This needs three linked conversions, one using a fact the question does not state, and involves cubic units, which most grade 7 students find unfamiliar.
- Estimated difficulty
- Hard: combines ideas, needs a plan, and has more than one tempting wrong answer.
- Thinking it demands
- Depth of knowledge 2, skills and concepts · mainly apply
- What makes it hard
- Something you must already know moderate
- Many steps moderate
- Solution
- 3 steps
- Reading level
- Question and choices: about grade 13, 20 words.
- Corrected from the DOE handbook
- The units in the explanation’s proportion were corrected.
- Students, last 30 days
- Not enough answers yet to show (it takes 10).
Why it is hard, traps and wrong answers (shows the answer)
Why it is hard
The question gives two conversion facts that do not connect until the student supplies the link between liters and milliliters. Students who instead reach for 1 centimeter = 10 millimeters often scale a volume like a length or an area and land short by a factor of 10 or 100. Writing the unit at every step, so the units cancel, keeps both factors of 1,000 in view.
Something you must already know moderate Working it out
The chain needs 1 liter = 1,000 milliliters, which the stem never states, yet it is the only link between its two conversion facts. (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001)
Many steps moderate Working it out
Three conversions in a row, cubic centimeters to liters, liters to milliliters and milliliters to cubic millimeters, multiply out to 1,000 × 1,000. (Daniel & Embretson, 2010; Enright, Morley & Sheehan, 2002)
Strategy: Build a chain from cubic centimeters to liters, liters to milliliters, and milliliters to cubic millimeters, writing the units at every step so they cancel.
Traps
- Units or scale: The answer is wanted in other units, or a rate or scale must be converted first.
- Stops one step early: A choice is a number from partway through the solution.
The wrong answers, classified
A Stops one step early (King et al., 2004; Gierl et al., 2017)
Converts 1,000 cubic centimeters to 1 liter, or 1,000 milliliters, and stops before the last step from milliliters to cubic millimeters.
B Units or scale (King et al., 2004)
Uses the length factor 1 cm = 10 mm for cubic units, multiplying 1,000 by 10 instead of by 10 × 10 × 10.
C Units or scale (King et al., 2004)
Squares the length factor, treating 1 cubic centimeter as 100 cubic millimeters, which is right for area but not for volume.
What was corrected from the DOE handbook, and why
- Explanation: The handbook’s proportion is 1,000 cu mm / 1 L = x cu mm / 1,000 cu mm. But 1,000 cubic millimeters make 1 milliliter, not 1 liter, and the second denominator should be the 1,000 mL that equal 1,000 cubic centimeters. The site uses 1,000 cu mm / 1 mL = x cu mm / 1,000 mL, which gives x = 1,000,000 cubic millimeters.
Worked solution, step by step
Formulas used
- Volume of a cube
- V is the volume, the space inside the cube. s is the length of one side. A cube has the same length, width and height, so you multiply the side by itself three times.
Sort out what you know
You are told two facts. 1 liter (L) is 1,000 cubic centimeters (cu cm). 1 milliliter (mL) is 1,000 cubic millimeters (cu mm). You need the number of cu mm in 1,000 cu cm.
One fact is missing. 1 liter is 1,000 milliliters. The word milli means one thousandth.
Change cubic centimeters to liters
The first fact says 1,000 cu cm is exactly 1 liter. So the amount in the question is 1 liter of space.
Change liters to milliliters
One liter is 1,000 milliliters. So 1,000 cu cm is the same as 1,000 mL.
Watch out: you are not done yet. The question asks for cubic millimeters. Stopping at 1,000 gives choice A.
Change milliliters to cubic millimeters
Each milliliter is 1,000 cu mm. There are 1,000 milliliters, so multiply.
So 1,000 cu cm is 1,000,000 cu mm. The answer is D, 1,000,000.
Check your answer
Use the cube formula. A cube 1 cm on each side is 10 mm on each side. Its volume is cu mm. So 1,000 cu cm is cu mm. Using only one 10 gives choice B. Using two 10s gives choice C.
More questions like this
The original DOE question
