Passage The Best Laid Plans of Ravens
The Best Laid Plans of Ravens
In Edgar Allan Poe’s poem “The Raven,” a raven visits a lonely man’s home and responds to the man’s pleading questions with only the word “nevermore.” The poem’s narrator interprets the word as a prediction of doom for his future. A talking, prophetic raven may seem to be the wild imaginings of the poet, but a new study published in the journal Science hints that one particular idea behind the poem might not be as far-fetched as it seems. For most of human history, people assumed that animals do not understand the passage of time in the same way people do. Some people believed that animals might remember events from the past and that instinct might drive them to make preparations in order to guarantee survival, but most people did not think that animals had the ability to plan. At Lund University in Sweden, researchers argue that ravens may be able to think ahead and even plan for the future.
It can be difficult to test an animal’s ability to plan because human observers must be certain they are not mistaking instinctual behavior for intentional planning. For example, many animals hoard food so that they will not run out later, but scientists who study animals would not call hoarding a decision to plan for the future. This action is merely instinctual. Cognitive scientists argue that in order for an animal’s behavior to qualify as preparing for the future, the animal must use specific decision-making skills to solve a problem.
To avoid mistaking instinctual behavior for evidence of decision-making, the Lund University researchers designed two experiments to test ravens’ ability to plan. Ravens belong to the corvid family, a group of birds known for their intelligence. A study in 2007 showed that corvids have the tendency to save only certain types of food, which suggests that they are planning for the future rather than acting on instinct. In order to investigate that theory, the researchers had to design experiments that would achieve results that could not be explained by an instinctual behavior of food hoarding. Therefore, the ravens were taught two behaviors that they do not normally perform in the wild.
For the first experiment, the researchers showed the birds how to use a small stone to open a box and get treats. Once the ravens learned the behavior, the researchers presented the birds with four stones. Only one stone was the right size to open the box. The birds learned to select that stone and set it aside until the researchers presented the box. The second experiment involved bartering. A researcher would trade the ravens a large treat for a bottle cap. Later, the researchers presented the ravens with a group of items, including small treats and the bottle cap. The ravens chose the bottle cap over the treats and waited for the original researcher to trade with them again so that they could get more treats. In both experiments, the ravens waited patiently for up to seventeen hours for the researcher to return.
The results of these experiments are exciting, but more evidence needs to be gathered before scientists can fully conclude that ravens can plan for the future. Some scientists argue that the ravens might be choosing the stone and bottle cap because the ravens have been trained to do so, not necessarily because the ravens are thinking ahead. Regardless, like other recent advances in animal science, these experiments show that ravens could be much smarter than first believed, and scientists now believe that ravens do actually think about their own future.
Question
The author conveys a point of view on the study of animal intelligence mainly by
- Asharing details about experiments that tested the ability of an animal to plan for the future.
- Bcomparing the results of different experiments that were designed to test animal intelligence.
- Ccritiquing experiments that aimed to demonstrate that certain animals are capable of planning for the future.
- Dexplaining how modern experiments show that previously held beliefs about animal intelligence are inaccurate.
Show the answer
Correct answer: A
The question asks how the author conveys a point of view on the study of animal intelligence.
A. CORRECT. Paragraphs 3 and 4 focus on the process and details of the experiments that scientists conducted. This detailed information from the author provides a sense of how the ravens demonstrated planning abilities beyond natural instinct. The author supports the claims from the experiments, calling the findings “exciting” and stating in the conclusion that “these experiments show that ravens could be much smarter than first believed” (paragraph 5).
B. Incorrect. Although two experiments are described in the passage, the description presents the experiments as building on each other and does not compare their results. The passage states that “these experiments show that ravens could be much smarter than first believed, and scientists now believe that ravens do actually think about their own future” (paragraph 5).
C. Incorrect. The author presents information from the experiments and the results that were gathered from them; while there is an admission that “more evidence needs to be gathered before scientists can fully conclude that ravens can plan for the future” (paragraph 5), the author does not criticize the experiments that are presented.
D. Incorrect. While the author does discuss some previously held beliefs about animal intelligence in paragraph 1, the focus of the passage is that experiments indicate that there is reason to question these beliefs, since “these experiments show that ravens could be much smarter than first believed” (paragraph 5). The previously held beliefs are not considered inaccurate by the discussion in the passage because only one example—the raven—is provided. The passage does not state that beliefs about animal intelligence as a whole are inaccurate.
Question analysis
This author’s point-of-view question asks how the writer of “The Best Laid Plans of Ravens” mainly conveys a view of research into animal intelligence. Students must look at the article as a whole and decide how it presents that view. The choices describe ways of writing in abstract terms, which makes them easy to blur together.
- Grade level
- Grade 8 reading and task
- Compared with grade 7
- Above grade 7 Grade 7 point-of-view questions usually ask what an author thinks. This one asks how the author mainly conveys a view across the whole article, and the choices name methods that sound alike, closer to grade 8 work on how authors handle differing views.
- 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
- Reading between the lines moderate
- Every choice must be checked minor
- Evidence
- Answered from the whole text
- Reading level
- Passage: about grade 11, 599 words; question and choices: about grade 13, 74 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 sounds too plain to carry a point of view, which is exactly what makes this question hard. Students expect a view to be argued, so they reach for the choice that says the experiments prove old beliefs wrong, an overstatement of the author’s hedged “could be,” or for criticism, which belongs to other scientists. The article persuades by reporting the experiments in detail and calling them exciting.
How, not what major Working it out
The question asks how the view comes across, not what it is, and the answer is a method: the author lets the detailed account of the experiments in paragraphs 3–4 carry a favorable view. (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001)
Reading between the lines moderate Working it out
The author never states an opinion outright; the view must be pieced together from words such as “exciting” and “could be much smarter than first believed” in paragraph 5. (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994; Kintsch, 1998)
Every choice must be checked minor Choosing the answer
The choices name ways of writing in abstract terms, sharing, comparing, critiquing and explaining, so each must be held against what the whole article actually does. (Embretson & Wetzel, 1987)
Strategy: Settle first on how the author regards the raven research, then check each choice against what the article actually does from beginning to end, not against a single paragraph.
Traps
- Too broad or too strong: A choice overstates, generalizes, or uses absolute words the text does not support.
- 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.
The wrong answers, classified
B Twists what the text says (King et al., 2004)
Notices that two experiments are described and assumes they are set side by side, but the article reports the stone test and the bartering test in turn without comparing results.
C Wrong tone or attitude (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994)
Takes the doubt that “some scientists” raise about training for the author’s own criticism, though the author calls the results “exciting” and moves past the objection.
D Too broad or too strong (King et al., 2004)
Builds on the point that ravens may be smarter than believed but overstates it: the author hedges with “could be,” discusses only ravens, and never calls older beliefs wrong.
Working it out, step by step
Figure out what the question asks
This asks about the author’s point of view, what the author thinks about studying animal intelligence. It also asks how the author mainly shows that view. Think about the whole article, not one paragraph.
Find the author’s view
In paragraph 5, the author says the results “are exciting.” The author also says the experiments “show that ravens could be much smarter than first believed.” So the author is interested in this research and hopeful about it.
See how the article is built
Most of the article explains the experiments. Paragraph 3 tells why the researchers planned two of them. Paragraph 4 gives the details step by step: the stone, the box, the bottle cap, the trades and the long wait. The author lets these details show why the research matters. Then the author calls the results exciting.
Check each choice
- A fits. The author shares details of experiments that tested whether an animal can plan.
- B does not fit. The two experiments are told one after the other. Their results are never compared.
- C does not fit. The doubt comes from “some scientists,” not the author. The author answers it with “Regardless.”
- D does not fit. It goes too far. The author says ravens “could be” smarter, which means maybe. The article never calls old beliefs wrong.
Watch out: D is tempting because paragraph 1 describes old beliefs. But “could be” is not the same as “are.”
Choose the answer
The author shows a view mostly through details of the experiments. So the answer is A.
Why this answer and not the closest wrong one
D is the closest wrong choice. The author does think ravens may be smarter than people believed. But the author is careful and says they “could be.” D says experiments prove old beliefs wrong, which is too strong. What the author mostly does is share the experiments’ details. That is A.
More questions like this
The original DOE question
The passage “The Best Laid Plans of Ravens” as printed (page 12)
