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 B English, question 17Passage 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
The professor’s observations in paragraphs 15–17 create tension in the excerpt by causing the narrator to feel
- Aflustered by the professor’s criticism of his logic.
- Bannoyed by the professor’s sarcasm about his inexperience.
- Cconfused by the professor’s lack of respect for his opinion.
- Dfrustrated by the professor’s lack of interest in his theory.
Show the answer
Correct answer: A
The question asks how the professor’s observations in paragraphs 15–17 create tension in the excerpt.
A. CORRECT. The professor criticizes “ ‘you young fellows’ ” (paragraph 15), suggesting that the ideas of young scientists like the narrator are unsupported (“ ‘like swimming squirrels’ ” [paragraph 17]) and inaccurate (“ ‘but you never land where you hope to—do you?’ ” [paragraph 17] and “ ‘you embark on a theory for destinations that don’t exist’ ” [paragraph 15]). The narrator then becomes “red in the face” (paragraph 18), indicating that the narrator is upset by the professor’s criticism, and asks the professor about the great auk in an attempt to defend himself.
B. Incorrect. While the narrator does experience a negative reaction to the professor’s words, the professor is being genuine, not sarcastic. In fact, the sarcasm comes from the narrator in paragraph 14 (“ ‘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’ ”), not from the professor.
C. Incorrect. The professor’s observations cause the narrator to blush with embarrassment (“rather red in the face” [paragraph 18]), but the narrator understands the point that the professor is making about the narrator’s acceptance of the idea that great auks do not exist. The narrator recognizes that the professor is criticizing his youthful ideas, not his opinion.
D. Incorrect. The professor shows amusement with the narrator’s perspective. The narrator is embarrassed and upset by the professor’s words, but the narrator does not display frustration with the professor’s lack of interest in a commonly held view of the existence of a certain species of bird.
Question analysis
In this question on In Search of the Unknown, Professor Farrago makes remarks about “you young fellows,” comparing them to swimming squirrels that never land where they hope. Students must decide how these remarks in paragraphs 15–17 make the narrator feel and so create tension. The comparison is odd and old-fashioned, and the four choices name similar negative feelings with different causes.
- Grade level
- Grade 8 reading and task
- Compared with grade 7
- Above grade 7 Grade 7 students infer feelings from a character’s reactions, usually from plainly stated emotions. Here the cause is a puzzling figurative jab about “swimming squirrels,” the reaction is shown only through a physical sign, and the choices offer four close negative feelings.
- 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
- Figurative or literary language major
- A very close wrong answer moderate
- Reading between the lines moderate
- Evidence
- Answered from several paragraphs or stanzas
- Reading level
- Passage: about grade 9, 1066 words; question and choices: about grade 9, 52 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 professor’s two images are odd, and students must decode them as a comment on how the narrator reasons before they can say why he blushes. Every choice names an unpleasant feeling, so the decision rests on its cause. “You young fellows” makes sarcasm about inexperience the natural guess, but the sarcasm in this scene is the narrator’s own, and the professor smiles “wearily” and speaks in earnest. The narrator’s pointed reply shows he followed the criticism, not that it confused him.
Figurative or literary language major Understanding the question
The criticism comes in images: young men who “embark on a theory for destinations that don’t exist” and who, like swimming squirrels, “never land where you hope to,” a picture of reasoning that goes astray. (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994; Kintsch, 1998)
A very close wrong answer moderate Choosing the answer
The choice about annoyance at sarcasm and the right one both name a bad reaction to the professor’s remarks; they part on the cause, sincere criticism of his logic or mockery of his youth. (Embretson & Wetzel, 1987; Gorin & Embretson, 2006; Ascalon et al., 2007)
Reading between the lines moderate Working it out
The narrator never names his feeling; it shows only in “Rather red in the face” and in the defensive question that follows about whether the great auk is extinct. (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994; Kintsch, 1998)
Strategy: Paraphrase what the professor says about “you young fellows” in paragraphs 15–17, find how the narrator reacts in paragraph 18, and choose the feeling and the cause that both fit.
Traps
- Wrong tone or attitude: Misjudges the tone, attitude or point of view, such as reading admiration as criticism, or taking a character's or subject's feelings for the author's.
- 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.
- Word match: Repeats striking words or phrases from the text, so it looks supported, but its meaning does not fit the question.
The wrong answers, classified
B Wrong tone or attitude (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994)
Hears mockery in “Oh, you young fellows,” but the professor is sincere; the sarcasm belongs to the narrator, who “sarcastically” insists in paragraph 14 that the great auk is extinct.
C Twists what the text says (King et al., 2004)
Takes the blush in paragraph 18 as confusion, though the narrator answers at once with a pointed question, which shows he understood the professor’s point well enough to push back.
D Word match (Freedle & Kostin, 1993)
Is drawn by “theory” in paragraph 15 and calls the professor uninterested, though he engages the narrator’s view closely enough to answer it with two vivid images.
Working it out, step by step
Figure out what the question asks
This asks how the professor’s words in paragraphs 15–17 make the narrator feel. Tension is a feeling of strain between characters. Each choice names a feeling and a cause. Both parts must be right.
Read what the professor says
In paragraph 15 he says, “Oh, you young fellows,” and “you embark on a theory for destinations that don’t exist.” To embark means to set out on a trip. He means young men set out with an idea toward places that are not there. Their reasoning leads them to wrong answers. In paragraph 17 he adds, “Like swimming squirrels, you navigate with the help of Heaven and a stiff breeze, but you never land where you hope to—do you?”
Understand the picture
A swimming squirrel can’t really steer. It drifts with luck and the wind. The professor is saying the narrator’s thinking drifts the same way and misses the truth. That is a criticism of his logic, or reasoning. In paragraph 18, the narrator is “Rather red in the face.” He is flustered, which means embarrassed and upset.
Check each choice
- A fits. He turns red after the professor criticizes his reasoning.
- B does not fit. Sarcasm is saying the opposite of what you mean in order to mock. The professor means what he says. The sarcastic one is the narrator, in paragraph 14.
- C does not fit. He is not confused. He fires back a sharp question right away.
- D does not fit. The professor answers the narrator’s idea closely, so he is interested in it.
Watch out: B is tempting because “you young fellows” points to the narrator’s youth. But the professor is sincere, not sarcastic.
Choose the answer
The professor says the narrator’s reasoning goes astray, and the narrator turns red. So the answer is A, “flustered by the professor’s criticism of his logic.”
Why this answer and not the closest wrong one
B is the closest wrong choice. Both A and B say the narrator feels bad. But B blames sarcasm. Paragraph 14 says the narrator “replied, sarcastically,” so the sarcasm is his own. The professor means his words seriously. A names the real cause: criticism of the narrator’s thinking.
More questions like this
The original DOE question
The passage “Excerpt from In Search of the Unknown” as printed (page 21)
Question 2 of 6
2024 Test B English, question 48Passage Snowy Mountains
Snowy Mountains
by John Gould Fletcher
Higher and still more high,
Palaces made for cloud,
Above the dingy city-roofs
Blue-white like angels with broad wings,
Pillars of the sky at rest
The mountains from the great plateau
Uprise.
But the world heeds them not;
They have been here now for too long a time.
The world makes war on them,
Tunnels their granite cliffs,
Splits down their shining sides,
Plasters their cliffs with soap-advertisements,
Destroys the lonely fragments of their peace.
Vaster and still more vast,
Peak after peak, pile after pile,
Wilderness still untamed,
To which the future is as was the past,
Barrier spread by Gods,
Sunning their shining foreheads,
Barrier broken down by those who do not need
The joy of time-resisting storm-worn stone,
The mountains swing along
The south horizon of the sky;
Welcoming with wide floors of blue-green ice
The mists that dance and drive before the sun.
“Snowy Mountains” by John Gould Fletcher—Public Domain
Question
How do the details in the third stanza (lines 15–26) most contribute to the development of a theme of the poem?
- Aby reflecting nature’s capacity to resist change
- Bby showing that nature is capable of influencing human will
- Cby exposing how a lack of awareness leads to nature’s ruin
- Dby explaining why people must respect nature
Show the answer
Correct answer: A
The question asks how the details in the third stanza most contribute to the development of a theme of the poem.
A. CORRECT. In the third stanza, phrases such as “Wilderness still untamed” (line 17), “time-resisting storm-worn stone” (line 22), and “The mountains swing along” (line 23) convey the message that in spite of the destruction described in the second stanza, the mountains manage to maintain their wild magnificence.
B. Incorrect. While the phrase “Barrier broken down” (line 21) conveys the idea that people can have some effect on the natural landscape, it does not convey how nature affects people.
C. Incorrect. The phrase “those who do not need” (line 21) implies a choice to damage nature and not a lack of awareness or understanding.
D. Incorrect. The third stanza is not a call to humanity to respect the mountains but a description of the untamed, welcoming mountains and the joy they provide for those who appreciate them.
Question analysis
Students trace how the details of the third and final stanza of “Snowy Mountains,” lines 15–26, most contribute to developing a theme of the poem. Because the stanza is a single sentence that runs from line 15 to the poem’s last word, students must keep its whole movement in mind before deciding what it adds.
- Grade level
- Grade 8 reading and task
- Compared with grade 7
- Above grade 7 Grade 7 theme questions usually rest on a few clear details. Here students must hold a twelve-line stanza of inverted, piled-up phrases in mind and pick among four reasonable lessons about nature, a heavier load closer to grade 8.
- 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
- Complex sentences moderate
- Figurative or literary language moderate
- Evidence in several places moderate
- Evidence
- Answered from one paragraph or stanza
- Reading level
- Passage: 161 words (a poem; reading level not measured); question and choices: about grade 7, 55 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 final stanza holds both endurance and damage, and the stem’s “most” asks which of the two its details build. Students who fix on the broken barrier choose ruin, a reading the second stanza seems to confirm, while those who tally the stanza’s details find untamed wilderness, time-resisting stone and mountains swinging at ease. Because the stanza is one long, inverted sentence, that tally is slow, which is what makes the question hard.
Complex sentences moderate Understanding the question
Lines 15–26 are one sentence in which phrase after phrase, from “Vaster and still more vast” to “storm-worn stone,” comes before its subject, “The mountains,” in line 23. (Abedi & Lord, 2001; Freedle & Kostin, 1993; Messick, 1989)
Figurative or literary language moderate Understanding the question
The message of endurance is carried by personification: the peaks have “shining foreheads,” are “spread by Gods,” and “swing along” the horizon welcoming the mists. (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994; Kintsch, 1998)
Evidence in several places moderate Working it out
The theme has to be assembled from details scattered over twelve lines, “Wilderness still untamed,” “the future is as was the past,” “time-resisting,” and weighed against the single line of damage. (Kirsch & Mosenthal, 1990; Gorin & Embretson, 2006)
Strategy: Read lines 15–26 as one long sentence, find its main subject and verb, and sum up its message in a phrase; then check each choice against the whole stanza, not a single line.
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.
- Outside knowledge: A choice is plausible in the real world but not supported by this text.
- Reversed relationship: Cause and effect, or the order of events, turned around.
The wrong answers, classified
B Reversed relationship (King et al., 2004)
Turns the influence around: in this stanza people break down the barrier while the peaks endure, and nothing shows the mountains shaping what people want.
C Too narrow (King et al., 2004)
Builds on line 21’s “Barrier broken down,” the stanza’s one line of damage, and lets it stand for twelve lines that mostly celebrate the mountains as wild and lasting.
D Outside knowledge (King et al., 2004; Recht & Leslie, 1988)
States the lesson a nature poem is expected to teach, that people must respect nature, but the stanza describes the mountains and never tells readers what to do.
Working it out, step by step
Figure out what the question asks
This asks about theme, the big message of the poem. You need to see what the details of the third stanza, lines 15 to 26, add to that message. The word “most” matters. Pick the idea that most of the details support, not just one line.
Gather the details in lines 15 to 26
The peaks grow “Vaster and still more vast” (line 15). They are a “Wilderness still untamed” (line 17). For them, the future is “as was the past” (line 18). Their stone is “time-resisting” (line 22). In the last four lines, “The mountains swing along” the sky and welcome the mists. Only line 21 shows damage: the barrier is “broken down.”
Find what the details share
Untamed means still wild, not controlled by people. If the future is the same as the past, the mountains are not changing. Time-resisting means they hold out against the years. And at the end of the stanza, they are still moving along at ease. Nearly every detail shows the same thing. The mountains last and stay wild, which is nature’s power to resist change.
Check each choice
- A fits. Wild, unchanging, time-resisting mountains show nature holding out against change.
- B does not fit. It turns things around. In this stanza, people affect the mountains. Nothing shows the mountains changing what people want.
- C does not fit. Line 21 shows damage, but it is one line out of twelve. The stanza does not end in ruin either: the mountains still swing along and welcome the mists.
- D does not fit. These lines paint a picture of the peaks. They give readers no orders and no reasons to behave a certain way.
Choose the answer
Most of the third stanza shows mountains that stay wild and lasting. So the answer is A.
Why this answer and not the closest wrong one
C is the closest trap, because line 21 does show the barrier “broken down,” and the second stanza is full of harm. But this question is about the third stanza, and it asks what the details most add. Most of the other lines there show mountains that are vast, wild and lasting. That builds A, not ruin.
More questions like this
The original DOE question
The passage “Snowy Mountains” as printed (page 142)
Question 3 of 6
2024 Test A English, question 55Passage Excerpt from “It’s Time to Stop Thinking That All Non-Native Species Are Evil”
Excerpt from “It’s Time to Stop Thinking That All Non-Native Species Are Evil”
by Emma Marris
The author of this opinion article attended a symposium, or conference, in Missoula, Montana, at which biologists and other scientists discussed species of plants and animals that are not native to the areas in which they live.
Invasive species are scary. It was ecologist Charles Elton, back in the 1950s, who introduced the militaristic “invasion” metaphor to describe exotic plants and animals—but there’s no question some can be extremely destructive.
The brown tree snake has eaten a dozen kinds of forest birds in Guam to extinction; zebra mussels clog pipes around the Great Lakes; the common house cat turns out to be, in Australia, a mercilessly effective killer of cute, fluffy marsupials like the bilby and the numbat.
As scientists have sounded the alarm about these pests, the public has gotten the message. Citizen groups rip out non-native plants. Native gardens have become increasingly popular, both as ways to celebrate the unique flora of each region and as tiny hot spots of diversity. Native trees provide food for native bugs, which feed native birds. Food chains developed over thousands of years of co-evolution unfold in our backyards. . . .
So we’ve learned, scientists and laypeople alike, that native species are good and non-natives are bad.
Julian Olden, a biologist at the University of Washington, Seattle, who co-organized the symposium, recently polled nearly 2,000 ecologists. Among his findings: a substantial number of them said they would immediately eradicate a hypothetical non-native forest plant, even if it were shown to have no effect on the forest. Olden calls this the “guilty even when proven innocent” approach.
That kind of approach is not very useful on a rapidly changing planet.
Exotics Are Everywhere
Climate change is making it harder even to decide who the invaders are.
How, scientists at the symposium wondered, do you define “native” on a warming planet, when plants and animals are already moving toward the poles or up mountainsides in search of climate conditions they can tolerate? Should we consider them “invasive” in their new homes? Regardless of what we label them, conservationists will be reluctant to remove them from their new environs—to do so would stymie1 their chances of adapting to the warmer future we’re creating.
And then there are the non-natives that we actually like. Most domestic crops are exotic in most of the places they’re grown, but there are even wild exotics that “do good,” forming useful relationships with native species.
Edwin Grosholz of the University of California, Davis, told the recent symposium about one such relationship. On beaches in his state, non-native spartina grass has become important habitat for the endangered California clapper rail, a plump shorebird with a downward curving bill more at home on land than in the air. A project to rip out and poison the spartina—which grows in dense swaths that exclude many other shorebirds—saw clapper rail numbers go tumbling downward.
There are other examples like that. The endangered southwestern willow flycatcher nests in “invasive” tamarisk shrubs. Many native (and beautiful) Hawaiian flowers are now pollinated by the Japanese white-eye bird—because the native pollinators have been driven extinct by other non-native species.
Should we impose further risk on already endangered natives by severing these relationships? Or should we admire the resilience of nature and let such “well-behaved” exotics stay? . . .
Leave them alone, more and more conservationists are arguing, and stop focusing obsessively on categorizing species as native or non-native. Mark Davis, an ecologist at Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota, once considered himself an “invasion biologist”—but not anymore. “I am actively trying to get the field to retire the invader narrative,” he said in Missoula.
A Good Thing, Not the Only Thing
After all, nativeness is just one environmental value, and arguably not as important as preventing extinctions and preserving biodiversity. In some cases we can best serve biodiversity by leaving the non-natives alone or even—brace yourself, now—introducing them on purpose.
This is the thinking behind, for example, installing the Aldabra tortoise on the islands of Mauritius. The islands lost their own large tortoises, and the fruiting plants that formerly had their seeds moved around by these fruit-loving reptiles have been on the decline. A tortoise that’s related to the island’s large tortoises—a non-native from the Seychelles in the Indian Ocean that was intentionally introduced in 2004—is now handling some of that work.
Most of the time, for the time being, conserving species still means focusing on supporting them in their historical habitats, planting natives and removing non-natives. We can and should do that in places where it is feasible and important to us.
From “It’s Time to Stop Thinking That All Non-Native Species Are Evil” by Emma Marris from NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC MAGAZINE, July 24, 2014. Copyright © 2014 by National Geographic Society.
1stymie: hinder or interfere with
Question
The details in the section “A Good Thing, Not the Only Thing” convey a central idea of the excerpt by suggesting that
- Asome non-native species can replace native species that are unable to survive on their own.
- Bdecisions about whether to keep non-native species should be considered on an individual basis.
- Cthe scientists who study rapidly changing ecosystems agree that non-native species enhance biodiversity.
- Da natural habitat that is healthy should be able to support a blend of native and non-native species.
Show the answer
Correct answer: B
The question asks how the details in the section “A Good Thing, Not the Only Thing” convey a central idea of the excerpt.
A. Incorrect. While paragraph 15 does discuss introducing non-native Aldabra tortoises to replace native tortoises that no longer exist, the real point of this section is to show that non-native species can sometimes help support native species that still exist but are struggling. In this case, the Aldabra tortoises are now moving seeds around for the fruiting plants on the islands where the tortoises have been introduced.
B. CORRECT. This section discusses situations in which non-native species should be kept (as in the example of the Aldabra tortoises in paragraph 15) but also asserts that “most of the time . . . conserving species still means focusing on supporting them in their historical habitats, planting natives and removing non-natives” (paragraph 16). This section makes the point that the issue of non-natives needs to be considered on a case-by-case basis.
C. Incorrect. This section does not claim that non-native species always or even usually enhance biodiversity; rather, it states that “in some cases we can best serve biodiversity by leaving the non-natives alone or even—brace yourself, now—introducing them on purpose” (paragraph 14), later adding that “most of the time . . . conserving species still means focusing on supporting them in their historical habitats, planting natives and removing non-natives” (paragraph 16).
D. Incorrect. While the section happens to give a good example of a habitat that supports both native and non-native species (the islands of Mauritius), it never suggests that being able to do so is a defining characteristic of healthy habitats.
Question analysis
This central-idea question asks how the details in the final section of an article on non-native species, titled “A Good Thing, Not the Only Thing,” convey a central idea of the excerpt. Students must sum up the section as a whole, including its example of a tortoise brought to the islands of Mauritius, and match it to the article's larger argument.
- Grade level
- Grade 8 reading and task
- Compared with grade 7
- Above grade 7 Explaining how a section conveys a central idea is grade 7 work, but this section mixes an argument, an example and a closing paragraph, and the choices differ in how far they generalize from it, which demands more than typical.
- 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 understand
- What makes it hard
- The right answer is reworded moderate
- Evidence in several places moderate
- Evidence
- Answered from several paragraphs or stanzas
- Reading level
- Passage: about grade 11, 815 words; question and choices: about grade 11, 82 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 section's most memorable content is an example, the Aldabra tortoise doing the work of the islands' lost tortoises, and a choice built on it is the strongest pull. The central idea sits instead in the qualifiers at the start and end of the section: some cases favor non-natives, most still call for removing them. Students who summarize all three paragraphs in a sentence, including the last, arrive at the case-by-case reading.
The right answer is reworded moderate Choosing the answer
The right choice's “on an individual basis” appears nowhere in the section, while the wrong choices echo it: a non-native standing in for natives, “biodiversity”, natives alongside non-natives. (Freedle & Kostin, 1993; Kirsch & Mosenthal, 1990)
Evidence in several places moderate Working it out
The case-by-case idea comes only from joining paragraph 14's “In some cases” to paragraph 16's “Most of the time” and “where it is feasible and important to us”. (Kirsch & Mosenthal, 1990; Gorin & Embretson, 2006)
Strategy: Sum up the section's three paragraphs in one sentence of your own, including its example and its final paragraph, then compare that sentence with each choice.
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.
- Too broad or too strong: A choice overstates, generalizes, or uses absolute words the text does not support.
- Reads too much in: A reasonable-sounding conclusion that goes further than the text allows.
The wrong answers, classified
A Too narrow (King et al., 2004)
Builds on the Aldabra tortoise standing in for Mauritius's lost tortoises, a single example, and misses the closing point that most conservation still means removing non-natives.
C Too broad or too strong (King et al., 2004)
Turns “In some cases” into a consensus that non-natives enhance biodiversity, though the section limits the claim and the article shows ecologists divided over it.
D Reads too much in (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994)
Draws a rule about healthy habitats from the Mauritius example, though the section never defines a healthy habitat or says it should hold a mix of species.
Working it out, step by step
Know what the question asks
A section is a part of an article under its own heading. This one runs from paragraph 14 to paragraph 16. You need to sum up the whole section, including its last paragraph. Then match that summary to a central idea.
Read paragraph 14
It says that “in some cases” we help nature most “by leaving the non-natives alone.” We might even bring them in “on purpose.” The words “in some cases” are the key. They mean sometimes, not always.
Read the example and the ending
Paragraph 15 gives an example. A non-native tortoise was brought to Mauritius to spread the seeds of fruiting plants. Then paragraph 16 says that “most of the time,” saving species still means “planting natives and removing non-natives.” We should do that “where it is feasible and important to us.” Feasible means possible.
Put the section together
Sometimes it is best to keep a non-native species. Most of the time it is best to remove it. So each case has to be judged on its own. That is what “on an individual basis” means.
Check each choice
- B fits: deciding case by case matches both “in some cases” and “most of the time.”
- A is wrong because the tortoise is one example, and the section ends by saying removal is still the usual choice.
- C is wrong because the section never says scientists agree, and “in some cases” is far from always.
- D is wrong because the section never says what a healthy habitat should hold.
Watch out: A is built on the section’s most memorable detail. But the main idea comes from the words that limit the claim.
Choose the answer
The section says to keep non-natives in some cases and remove them in others. So the answer is B.
Why this answer and not the closest wrong one
A comes closest, because the Aldabra tortoise really does take over work the lost tortoises once did. But that is one case. The section ends by saying that most of the time we still remove non-natives. B covers both sides: some cases call for keeping them, and others call for removing them.
More questions like this
The original DOE question
The passage “Excerpt from “It’s Time to Stop Thinking That All Non-Native Species Are Evil”” as printed (pages 68–70)
Question 4 of 6
2024 Test B Math, question 28Question
A community center has two 30-member exercise groups. The director recorded the ages of each group’s members in the box plots.
Which statement about the two groups can be verified based on the box plots?
- ABoth groups have at least one member who is exactly 29 years old.
- BGroup P has more members who are at least 17 years old than Group Q has.
- CBoth groups have an equal number of members who are between 21 and 24 years old.
- DGroup Q has fewer members who are between 19 and 27 years old than Group P has.
Show the answer
Correct answer: B
Groups P and Q have an equal number of members. All the members of Group P are 17 or older, but only about of the members of Group Q are 17 or older.
Question analysis
Box plots show the ages of the members of two 30-member exercise groups at a community center, Group P and Group Q. Students decide which statement comparing the groups can be verified from the plots alone. The challenge is knowing what a box plot guarantees about individual ages and counts, and what it leaves unknown.
- NYS standards
- Grade level
- Grade 7 content, by NYS standard
- Compared with grade 7
- Above grade 7 Grade 7 students read box plots and compare medians and spreads. Deciding which claims two box plots can prove, from what the five key values guarantee about counts, is a harder reasoning task than typical grade 7 work.
- 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 evaluate
- What makes it hard
- Every choice must be checked major
- Something you must already know moderate
- Reading a figure, table or graph moderate
- Solution
- 3 steps
- Reading level
- Question and choices: about grade 5, 91 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
This is a question about evidence: the right statement is the only one the box plots guarantee, while the others may or may not be true. Students who treat the plots as pictures of every member, assuming ages fill each whisker or spread evenly through each box, find support for claims that cannot be checked. Asking what must hold for any 30 ages with these summaries separates the verifiable claim from the merely plausible ones.
Every choice must be checked major Choosing the answer
Three of the statements are not false but unverifiable, so each must be tested against what the five-number summaries guarantee, and none can be dismissed at a glance. (Embretson & Wetzel, 1987)
Something you must already know moderate Working it out
Students must know that the minimum and maximum are actual ages, that each quarter of a plot holds about a quarter of the 30 members, and that a whisker shows nothing in between. (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001)
Reading a figure, table or graph moderate Understanding the question
The scale is labeled only every 3 years, so values such as 17, 19, 26 and 29 have to be read from unlabeled ticks on two separate plots. (Lesh, Post & Behr, 1987; Kirsch & Mosenthal, 1990)
Strategy: List each group's minimum, first quartile, median, third quartile and maximum, then test every statement against only what those five values guarantee about the 30 ages.
Traps
- Misunderstands the concept: A wrong belief about a concept: that percents can be added, that area grows like length, that averages can be averaged, that a bigger denominator means a bigger fraction.
- Numbers taken from the question: Combines the numbers in the question without a model of the situation, or is simply a number that appears in the question.
The wrong answers, classified
A Misunderstands the concept (Smith, diSessa & Roschelle, 1993; De Bock et al., 1998; Ni & Zhou, 2005)
Sees that Group Q's maximum is exactly 29 and that 29 also lies in Group P's upper whisker, assuming someone in Group P is that age.
C Numbers taken from the question (Hegarty, Mayer & Monk, 1995)
Matches the two medians, 21 and 24, and assumes the stretch between them holds the same number of members in both groups.
D Misunderstands the concept (Smith, diSessa & Roschelle, 1993; De Bock et al., 1998; Ni & Zhou, 2005)
Knows Group P's box from 19 to 27 holds half its members, then assumes ages spread evenly so Group Q has fewer there, which its plot cannot show.
Worked solution, step by step
Formulas used
- Members in each part of a box plot
- n is the number of members in a group, here 30. A box plot splits the data into four parts at the minimum, Q1, the median, Q3 and the maximum. Each part holds about one fourth of the data. It does not show how the ages spread out inside a part.
Read the two box plots
A box plot shows five numbers. The minimum is the youngest age, and the maximum is the oldest. Q1 is the left edge of the box, and Q3 is the right edge. The median is the line inside the box.
Group Min Q1 Median Q3 Max P 17 19 24 27 33 Q 15 17 21 26 29 Each group has 30 members.
Know what can be verified
To verify a statement means to know for sure that it is true. A box plot shows only five numbers, not every age. The minimum and maximum are real ages of real members. The other ages are hidden inside the box and whiskers.
Check choice B
In Group P, the youngest member is 17. So all 30 members are at least 17. In Group Q, the youngest member is 15, and 15 is under 17. So at most 29 members of Group Q are at least 17.
Group P has 30 such members, and Group Q has 29 or fewer. So choice B is true for sure.
Rule out choices A and C
A: Group Q’s oldest member is 29, so Group Q has a 29-year-old. But in Group P, 29 is inside the right whisker. A whisker does not show single ages. Watch out: 29 is in Group P’s range, but maybe no one in Group P is exactly 29.
C: The plots do not show how many members are between 21 and 24 in either group.
Rule out choice D and answer
Group P’s box, from 19 to 27, is two of its four parts.
So about 15 members of Group P are between 19 and 27. But 19 and 27 fall in the middle of Group Q’s parts, and ages inside a part can bunch up in any way. Group Q could have more or fewer. Watch out: D assumes the ages are spread out evenly, and a box plot never tells you that.
So the answer is B.
Check your answer
Choice B uses only the two minimums, which are real ages. Group P’s youngest member is 17, and Group Q’s is 15. That alone proves it. Each other choice needs ages inside a box or whisker, which a box plot does not show.
More questions like this
The original DOE question
Question 5 of 6
2024 Test B Math, question 44Question
Which inequality is equivalent to ?
- A
- B
- C
- D
Show the answer
Correct answer: D
Distribute the coefficient −2 on the right-hand side:
Subtract from both sides:
Add 10 to both sides:
Divide both sides by 5:
This is equivalent to
Question analysis
Students choose the simplest equivalent form of a linear inequality that has x on both sides and a negative number multiplied into parentheses. It tests distributing, combining like terms and solving inequalities. Sign errors in the distribution, and reading the direction of the final inequality, are where most mistakes happen.
- NYS standards
- Grade level
- Grade 8 content, by NYS standard
- Compared with grade 7
- Above grade 7 Grade 7 inequalities have the form px + q < r. This one has x on both sides and a negative factor to distribute across a subtraction, steps that belong to grade 8 equation work, so it is harder than typical grade 7 practice.
- Estimated difficulty
- Hard: combines ideas, needs a plan, and has more than one tempting wrong answer.
- Thinking it demands
- Depth of knowledge 1, recall and reproduction · mainly apply
- What makes it hard
- Error-prone arithmetic moderate
- A very close wrong answer moderate
- Many steps minor
- Solution
- 4 steps
- Reading level
- Question and choices: about grade 16+, 10 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
Every move is standard algebra, but the inequality is built so that small slips change the answer completely. The −2 has to reach both terms in the parentheses, and once the boundary −2 is found its direction still has to be read correctly, since the variable ends up on the right as −2 < x. Rewriting that as x > −2, or substituting x = 0 into the original, catches the trap.
Error-prone arithmetic moderate Working it out
Distributing −2 over (5 − 3x) gives −10 + 6x, two sign decisions in one move, and the x terms then sit on both sides of the inequality. (Brown & Burton, 1978; Junker & Sijtsma, 2001)
A very close wrong answer moderate Choosing the answer
x < −2 and x > −2 share the boundary and differ only in direction, which depends on reading −2 < x correctly or flipping the sign when dividing by a negative. (Embretson & Wetzel, 1987; Gorin & Embretson, 2006; Ascalon et al., 2007)
Many steps minor Working it out
Four moves follow one another, distributing, collecting 5x + 6x, moving the x terms and dividing by 5, and a slip at any of them changes the result. (Daniel & Embretson, 2010; Enright, Morley & Sheehan, 2002)
Strategy: Distribute the −2 to both terms in the parentheses, combine the x terms on the right, then gather the x terms on the side that keeps their coefficient positive.
Traps
- Order of operations: Working left to right, or distributing a minus sign wrongly, gives a choice.
- Negatives and direction: Arithmetic with negative numbers, the order of a subtraction, or direction on a number line. (Moving a term across the equals sign without changing its sign is a faulty procedure.)
- A faulty procedure: A systematic but wrong procedure: adding fractions straight across, applying an exponent to each term of a sum, dropping a sign when moving a term.
The wrong answers, classified
A A faulty procedure (Brown & Burton, 1978; Tatsuoka, 1983)
Treats 5 − 3x as 2, combining a number with an x term, so the right side becomes 5x − 4 and the solution x < 16.
B Order of operations (Brown & Burton, 1978)
Multiplies the −2 by the 5 but not by the −3x, writing 5x − 10 − 3x, which leads to 4x < 10 and x < 5/2.
C Negatives and direction (Brown & Burton, 1978)
Finds the boundary −2 but points the inequality the wrong way, by misreading −2 < x or by not flipping the sign after dividing by −5.
Worked solution, step by step
Formulas used
- Distributive property
- a is the number outside the parentheses. b and c are the terms inside. Multiply a by each one. A minus sign inside counts as a negative term, so 5 − 3x is 5 + (−3x). A negative times a negative is positive.
- Keeping an inequality true
- a and b are the two sides, and c is any number. Adding or subtracting the same number on both sides keeps the inequality true. Dividing both sides by a positive number also keeps it true. Only multiplying or dividing by a negative number flips the sign.
Sort out the question
An inequality compares two sides with a sign like <, which means is less than. To solve it, you get x alone on one side.
You need the short inequality that has the same answers as the long one.
Distribute the −2
Multiply −2 by both terms inside the parentheses, 5 and −3x.
A negative times a negative is positive, so the second part is +6x. Watch out: If the −2 multiplies only the 5, you end up with , choice B.
Combine the x terms
The right side is now 5x − 10 + 6x. Put the x terms together: 5x + 6x = 11x.
Gather the x terms on one side
Subtract 6x from both sides. That leaves the x terms on the right, where they stay positive.
Get x by itself
Add 10 to both sides. Then divide both sides by 5.
You divided by a positive 5, so the sign does not flip.
Read it with x first
says −2 is less than x. That is the same as saying x is greater than −2, just as 3 < 5 means 5 > 3.
Watch out: , choice C, has the same number but points the wrong way.
So the answer is D, .
Check your answer
Test x = 0, which is greater than −2. The left side is . The right side is . And −20 < −10 is true. Now test x = −3. The left side is −38 and the right side is −43. That is false, as it should be.
More questions like this
The original DOE question
Question 6 of 6
2018 Test A Math, question 1Question
In the figure above, PQRS is a parallelogram. What is the value of ?
Grid-in question: work out the answer and enter it as a number.
Show the answer
Correct answer: 162
First, find the measure of angle PQR. The measure of angle PQR is equal to the measure of angle PSR.
m∠PSR = 180 − 72 = 108.
So, the measure of angle PQR is also 108.
108 + 90 + x = 360
198 + x = 360
x = 162
Question analysis
A grid-in geometry question about angles around a parallelogram PQRS. A 72° angle sits outside corner S on the extended base, and at corner Q a right angle and the unknown angle x complete the turn around the point. Students chain three angle facts, and the angle asked for lies outside the shape, not inside it.
- NYS standards
- Grade level
- Grade 8 content, by NYS standard
- Compared with grade 7
- Above grade 7 Grade 7 angle work usually applies one or two facts, such as supplementary or vertical angles, to find an angle. This chains three, and needs the equal opposite angles of a parallelogram, which rest on grade 8 parallel-line facts.
- 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
- Reading a figure, table or graph major
- Combines ideas moderate
- An answer in an unexpected form minor
- Solution
- 3 steps
- Reading level
- Question and choices: about grade 7, 14 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 arithmetic is two subtractions; the difficulty is seeing which angles the marks refer to. Students lose points by treating the 72° as the parallelogram's own angle at S, or by stopping at angle PQR, the most natural number to grid. The question rewards tracing a route from S to Q before computing anything, and checking at the end that x is the angle outside the shape that the arc marks.
Reading a figure, table or graph major Understanding the question
The 72° is marked outside the parallelogram, between side SR and the base extended past S, and x sits outside corner Q, between QP and a vertical ray that meets QR at a right-angle mark. (Lesh, Post & Behr, 1987; Kirsch & Mosenthal, 1990)
Combines ideas moderate Working it out
Three angle facts have to be chained: a straight line gives the angle inside S, opposite angles of a parallelogram carry it to Q, and the angles around Q make a full 360° turn. (Embretson, 1998; Daniel & Embretson, 2010)
An answer in an unexpected form minor Choosing the answer
As a grid-in there are no choices to check against, so a student who stops at angle PQR, inside the parallelogram, gets no signal that the job is unfinished. (Enright, Morley & Sheehan, 2002)
Strategy: Use the straight line at S to find the parallelogram's angle there, carry it to the opposite corner Q, then take that angle and the right angle away from 360.
Traps
- Stops one step early: A choice is a number from partway through the solution.
The wrong answers, classified
108 Stops one step early (King et al., 2004; Gierl et al., 2017)
Finds angle PSR = 180 − 72 = 108 and carries it to angle PQR, then grids that interior angle instead of the angle x outside it.
198 Misreads the figure (Lesh, Post & Behr, 1987; Kirsch & Mosenthal, 1990)
Reads the 72° as the parallelogram's interior angle at S, so takes angle PQR as 72 and grids 360 − 90 − 72 = 198.
252 Misreads the figure (Lesh, Post & Behr, 1987; Kirsch & Mosenthal, 1990)
Overlooks the right-angle mark at Q and subtracts only the 108° angle PQR from 360, giving 252.
Worked solution, step by step
Formulas used
- Angles on a straight line
- a and b are two angles side by side on a straight line. Together they make a half turn, so they always add up to 180 degrees. Use it when an angle you need shares a straight line with an angle you know.
- Opposite angles of a parallelogram
- The symbol ∠ means angle. ∠PQR is the angle at corner Q, between sides QP and QR. ∠PSR is the angle at the opposite corner, S. In a parallelogram, opposite corners always have equal angles, because the shape leans the same way at both.
- Angles around a point
- a, b and c are angles that fit around one point with no gaps and no overlaps. Going all the way around is a full turn, which is 360 degrees. So the angles add up to 360.
Sort out what the figure shows
PQRS is a parallelogram. That is a four-sided shape whose opposite sides are parallel, which means they never meet. You need the value of x, in degrees.
Look closely at the marks. The 72° angle is outside the shape, at S. It sits between side SR and the base line, which keeps going past S. At Q, a vertical line meets side QR. The small square means a right angle, 90°. The angle x is outside the shape too. It runs from that vertical line around to side QP.
Find the angle inside corner S
Angle PSR is the shape’s own angle at S. It sits right next to the 72° angle, on the same straight base line. So the two angles add up to 180°.
So angle PSR is 108°. Watch out: 72° is not the inside angle at S. Using 72 as the inside angle leads to the wrong answer 198.
Carry the angle over to Q
Corners Q and S are opposite each other. In a parallelogram, opposite angles are equal. So angle PQR matches angle PSR.
So angle PQR is 108°. Watch out: this is not x. Angle PQR is inside the shape, and x is outside it. Stopping here and gridding 108 is the most common mistake.
Add the angles around Q
Three angles fill the space all the way around point Q. They are the right angle (90°), angle PQR (108°) and x. Together they make a full turn.
Watch out: don’t skip the right angle at Q. Leaving out the 90 gives 252.
Solve for x
Subtract 198 from 360 to find what is left for x.
So x is 162°. So you would grid 162.
Check your answer
Add the three angles at Q: . That is a full turn. Also, the arc for x is wider than a right angle but not as wide as a straight line. So x should be between 90° and 180°, and 162° is.
More questions like this
The original DOE question
