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
How does paragraph 5 fit into the overall structure of the passage and contribute to the development of ideas?
- AIt introduces a problem with the results of the study at Lund University, suggesting that some scientists believe that further research will not lead to a clear answer.
- BIt summarizes the final steps of the study at Lund University, emphasizing the difficulties researchers had in differentiating between true planning and practiced actions.
- CIt provides a conclusion to the information about the Lund University study, indicating that some scientists think further research is needed in order to prove the idea.
- DIt lists the effects of the study at Lund University, implying that researchers should have designed experiments that better differentiated between planning and instinct.
Show the answer
Correct answer: C
The question asks how paragraph 5 fits into the overall structure of the passage and contributes to the development of ideas.
A. Incorrect. While paragraph 5 states that “more evidence needs to be gathered before scientists can fully conclude that ravens can plan for the future,” this statement suggests that more research is needed, not that the results of the Lund University study are problematic.
B. Incorrect. Paragraph 5 does not discuss steps of the study or emphasize difficulties in determining whether the behaviors shown in the study were planned or practiced; instead it simply suggests that more study is required to make such a determination.
C. CORRECT. Paragraph 5 notes that some doubt remains (“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”) and that more experimentation is needed; the author concludes that there is reason to believe the originally stated theory that ravens are quite smart and can give thought to how future events may affect them.
D. Incorrect. Paragraph 5 does not list the effects of the study or criticize the experiment for not differentiating between planning and instinct. The paragraph explains why the results of the experiments are not conclusive and emphasizes that more research is needed.
Question analysis
This text-structure question asks how the last paragraph of the article “The Best Laid Plans of Ravens” fits into the passage and develops its ideas. Students must see what that paragraph does once the experiments have been described. Each long choice names a role and then adds a claim, so a choice can begin well and end wrong.
- Grade level
- Grade 7 reading and task
- Compared with grade 7
- At grade 7 Explaining the role of a final paragraph is regular grade 7 structure work. The choices are long, though, and each pairs a role with a claim about scientists’ views, so both halves must be checked against a paragraph that mixes doubt with enthusiasm.
- Estimated difficulty
- Moderate: several steps, or a close reading with one strong distractor.
- Thinking it demands
- Depth of knowledge 2, skills and concepts · mainly analyze
- What makes it hard
- A very close wrong answer moderate
- How, not what moderate
- A lot to read minor
- Evidence
- Answered from several paragraphs or stanzas
- Reading level
- Passage: about grade 11, 599 words; question and choices: about grade 15, 121 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
Paragraph 5 makes three moves, excitement, doubt and a hopeful conclusion, and each wrong choice builds on one of them and then goes too far. Students who notice the doubt but read past “before scientists can fully conclude” pick the claim that research will never settle the question. Summing up the paragraph before reading the choices, and then checking the second half of each, is what earns the point.
A very close wrong answer moderate Choosing the answer
The choice about a problem with the results matches the right one in its first half, a doubt raised in paragraph 5, and differs only in claiming that more research will not give a clear answer. (Embretson & Wetzel, 1987; Gorin & Embretson, 2006; Ascalon et al., 2007)
How, not what moderate Working it out
The question asks what paragraph 5 does in the article, closing the account of the Lund study, so students must name its role rather than repeat its caution about training. (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001)
A lot to read minor Understanding the question
The choices run 24 to 28 words, and each pairs a role with a second claim about what scientists or researchers think or did, so both halves of every choice have to be checked. (Kintsch, 1998; Gorin & Embretson, 2006; Freedle & Kostin, 1993)
Strategy: Sum up paragraph 5 in one sentence of your own, then check both parts of each choice, the job it names and the idea it attributes to scientists, against that summary.
Traps
- Half right: One half of a two-part choice is right and the other is not.
- 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 Half right (King et al., 2004; Thissen, Steinberg & Fitzpatrick, 1989)
Rightly sees that paragraph 5 raises a doubt about the results, but adds that more research will not settle it, when the paragraph says more evidence is needed to reach a conclusion.
B Twists what the text says (King et al., 2004)
Turns the objection some scientists raise, that the birds may simply be trained, into the Lund researchers’ own struggle, though the paragraph describes no steps of the study.
D Reads too much in (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994)
Reads the call for more evidence as a verdict that the experiments were badly designed, though the author calls the results “exciting” and faults no one.
Working it out, step by step
Figure out what the question asks
This asks about structure: what job paragraph 5 does in the article. Each choice has two parts, a job and an idea about scientists. Both parts must be right.
See where paragraph 5 sits
Paragraphs 3 and 4 describe the Lund University experiments. Paragraph 5 is the last paragraph. It comes after the whole study has been described. So it is the place where the author sums up what the study means.
Read what paragraph 5 says
It opens: “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.” Next, it says some scientists think the ravens may just be trained. Then it says “Regardless,” the experiments show ravens “could be much smarter than first believed.” Regardless means “even so.”
Put the paragraph in your words
Paragraph 5 wraps up the study. The results are exciting but not proven yet. More research is needed to be sure. A conclusion is the ending part that sums things up. So paragraph 5 is the conclusion to the study, and it says more evidence is needed.
Check each choice
- A does not fit. Paragraph 5 does raise a doubt. But it never says more research will fail to give a clear answer.
- B does not fit. Paragraph 5 describes no steps of the study.
- C fits. It wraps up the study and says more research is needed.
- D does not fit. It lists no effects and blames no one. The author calls the results “exciting.”
Choose the answer
Paragraph 5 ends the story of the study and calls for more evidence. So the answer is C.
Why this answer and not the closest wrong one
A is the closest wrong choice, because its first half is right: paragraph 5 raises a doubt. But A says more research will not lead to a clear answer. The paragraph says more evidence is needed “before scientists can fully conclude,” so research is the way to an answer. C says this.
More questions like this
The original DOE question

The passage “The Best Laid Plans of Ravens” as printed (page 12)
