Practice Test

Why it is hard

The error is in the first sentence, but it hides behind a comma that sounds like an ordinary pause, while the later spots carry features that look riskier: a transition word, a clause beginning “much of which,” the phrase “in fact.” Students who test each spot for a complete sentence on both sides find the splice at once. Those who look for a revision that merely sounds polished are drawn to the semicolon, which is correct but fixes nothing.

1. A rule that doesn't sound wrong moderate Working it out

   The comma after “continents” joins two complete sentences, and because “at one time” sounds like an introductory phrase continuing the thought, the splice reads as a natural pause. (Connors & Lunsford, 1988)

2. Every choice must be checked minor Choosing the answer

   Each revision changes only punctuation at one underlined spot, and the semicolon one is correct English, so students must ask whether each spot was wrong to begin with, not only whether the change looks right. (Embretson & Wetzel, 1987)

3. Complex sentences minor Understanding the question

   The paragraph’s sentences are long, with the appositive “known as Pangaea” and the clause “much of which were,” whose odd-sounding verb draws suspicion to a spot that is correctly punctuated. (Abedi & Lord, 2001; Freedle & Kostin, 1993; Messick, 1989)

Strategy: At each underlined spot, read the words on both sides and ask whether each side could stand as a sentence, then pick the revision that leaves every sentence correctly joined or separated.

Traps

• Fixes what isn't broken: Changes a part of the sentence that was already correct, while the real error stays; or, where the question asks which sentence has an error or should go, picks one that is correct and belongs.
• Fragment or run-on: Creates or keeps a sentence fragment, a run-on sentence or a comma splice.

The wrong answers, classified

• B Fixes what isn't broken (Connors & Lunsford, 1988)

  Reveals partial knowledge Expected pull: strong

  Knows a semicolon can join two clauses before “additionally” and picks that tidy-looking change, though the period it replaces was already correct and the comma splice up front remains.

• C Fragment or run-on (Connors & Lunsford, 1988)

  Reveals a misconception Expected pull: moderate

  Treats the long second sentence as a run-on and splits it after “Panthalassa,” leaving “Much of which were in Earth’s Southern Hemisphere” as a fragment with no main clause.

• D Fragment or run-on (Connors & Lunsford, 1988)

  Reveals a misconception Expected pull: weak

  Thinks “in fact” belongs inside the sentence before it, set off by commas, which joins two complete sentences with only a comma and creates the error the paragraph already has.

What was corrected from the DOE handbook, and why

• Explanation: The DOE’s explanation of Option C says a period after “Panthalassa” would separate the dependent clause “much of which were in Earth’s Southern Hemisphere” “from its subject: ‘ocean waters called Panthalassa.’” The clause has a subject of its own, “much”; “ocean waters called Panthalassa” is its antecedent, the noun phrase that “which” refers to. The explanation also calls the clause “an adjective for ‘ocean waters’”; a clause is not an adjective but an adjective (relative) clause, which modifies the noun. The site now says “from its antecedent” and “an adjective clause that modifies ‘ocean waters.’” The reasoning and the answer, A, are unchanged.

How the questions are analyzed, and the research behind it

Why it is hard

Every choice makes the same kind of change, so the question comes down to telling one real comma splice from three commas doing legitimate work. The most dangerous spot is after “race,” where a subject and verb sit on both sides of the comma, just as at the real error, and only the word “Once” marks the first part as dependent. Students who test each side for a complete thought, not just for a subject and a verb, find the splice in the opening sentence quickly.

1. A rule that doesn't sound wrong moderate Working it out

   The run-on hides behind the short phrase “at that time,” which makes the comma after “name” sound like an ordinary pause; only checking that each side can stand alone exposes the comma splice. (Connors & Lunsford, 1988)

2. Every choice must be checked minor Choosing the answer

   All four revisions swap a comma for a period, so every underlined spot needs the same test: could the words before it and the words after it each stand as a sentence? (Embretson & Wetzel, 1987)

3. Complex sentences minor Understanding the question

   The three correct commas guard three different structures, an opening “Once” clause, a participial phrase beginning with “paving” and an appositive after “261,” and each has to be recognized as unable to stand alone. (Abedi & Lord, 2001; Freedle & Kostin, 1993; Messick, 1989)

Strategy: At each underlined comma, read the words before it and the words after it as separate pieces and ask whether each could stand alone as a sentence; that shows where a period belongs.

Traps

• Fragment or run-on: Creates or keeps a sentence fragment, a run-on sentence or a comma splice.

The wrong answers, classified

• B Fragment or run-on (Connors & Lunsford, 1988)

  Reveals partial knowledge Expected pull: strong

  Finds a subject and verb on both sides of the comma after “race” and calls it a splice, missing that “Once” makes the first part a dependent clause that cannot stand alone.

• C Fragment or run-on (Connors & Lunsford, 1988)

  Reveals a misconception Expected pull: weak

  Treats the long third sentence as a run-on and ends it after “hours,” leaving “Paving the way for the official rule change” as a fragment with no subject or main verb.

• D Fragment or run-on (Connors & Lunsford, 1988)

  Reveals partial knowledge Expected pull: moderate

  Spots the subject and verb “she had worn” after the comma following “261,” but they sit inside a phrase that renames the number, so the new sentence would be a fragment.

What was corrected from the DOE handbook, and why

• Stem and explanation: The handbook spells the runner’s name “Katherine Switzer” in the paragraph and twice in the explanation. She is Kathrine Switzer, who entered the 1967 Boston Marathon as “K. V. Switzer,” so the site now spells her name that way, in the question’s title too. No answer depends on the spelling.
• Explanation: The DOE’s explanation of Option C calls “paving the way for the official rule change that allowed for the inclusion of women” a dependent clause, and on that basis calls the sentence a complex sentence. The words have no subject or finite verb of their own: they are a participial phrase, which the site now calls them, and the site no longer calls the sentence complex for that reason. Its explanation of Option D calls “the same number she had worn in that first run in 1967” a modifying clause; it is an appositive phrase, a noun phrase that renames “number 261,” and the site now says so. Neither phrase can stand alone as a sentence, so Options C and D are still wrong, and the answer, Option A, is unchanged.

How the questions are analyzed, and the research behind it