Reading comp PrepTest 142 · Section 3 · Question 23
Passage
Questions 22-27 This passage is adapted from a review of a 1991 book. . In a recent study, Mario Garcia
Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Social Science
Paragraph 1
Garcia's evidence is persuasive that the Mexican American Generation anticipated the Chicano reforms, but his argument that they were more radical and politically diverse than previously thought has two flaws.
Key Lines:
Lines 7-10 - The Author concedes an accuracy in Garcia's argument
Lines 10-11 - The Author brings up two flaws in Garcia's thesis, showing her opinion and previewing the passage's structure
Lines 12-15 - The first flaw is defined
Lines 30-36 - The Author highlights the main point of her rebuttal to this flaw
Lines 37-40 - The second flaw is defined
Lines 51-52 - The Author's rebuttal is stated
Lines 57-60 - The Author highlights an assumption of Garcia's argument
Meta-Structure:
Traditional View/New View - The Author brings up Garcia's argument, which states that the Mexican American Generation was "more radical and politically diverse" than previously thought. So there's a traditional view that is being challenged by a new view. Normally, the Author is in favor of the new view, or at least neutral, but here . . .
Rebuttal - The Author actually rebuts Garcia's view, highlighting two flaws in it.
Last Thoughts:
It's going to be really important that we understand the two flaws as highlighted by the Author, so let's make sure we understand them.
The first flaw is that Garcia's evidence of political diversity is not consistent. So we need to know where the contradiction in it is. What's inconsistent about it? Well, on the one hand, he's arguing that there were a lot of different viewpoints—after all, that's what political diversity is. However, Garcia also argues that the differences were "insignificant" (Lines 27-28). He can't have it both ways—either these differences are significant and thus show that there was political diversity in the Mexican American Generation, or the differences are insignificant.
The second flaw comes down to an assumption the Author points out in Garcia's argument—he assumes that "an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase in the ethnic Mexican population's activism" (Lines 57-60). However, there's no evidence this is true, and the Author brings up a number of factors that could prevent it from being true.
So the first criticism shows that Garcia treats differences as both significant and insignificant, highlighting an inconsistency; and that he assumes a representativeness that isn't established.
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- A traditional view, a view challenging that, and the Author's opinion of the latter are offered
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Garcia (and traditional implied) Mexican American Generation political activists (1930-1960) were more radical and politically diverse than previously thought
- Author - Garcia's evidence is persuasive that they anticipated reforms of "more militant Chicanos"
- Author - Garcia's study has two flaws
- Paragraph note
- Author - Garcia's study has two flaws
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Evidence for political diversity not consistent
- Ex - Debate over assimilation (League of United Latin American Citizens) versus cultural maintenance (Congress of Spanish-Speaking People)
- Garcia - The differences were insignificant - their focus was liberal reform
- Author - No, this was an intense debate, not consensus
- Paragraph note
- Flaw 2 - Activists might not have been representative
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Trend - By 1930, percentage of Mexican American population born in US had gone up
- Garcia - They were acculturated and more politically active, influenced by discrimination and WWII, and wanted full civil rights
- Author - This assumes the trend resulted in more politically active people, but factors in ethnic consciousness mean this is a bad assumption
Garcia's evidence is persuasive that the Mexican American Generation anticipated the Chicano reforms, but his argument that they were more radical and politically diverse than previously thought has two flaws.
Key Lines:
Lines 7-10 - The Author concedes an accuracy in Garcia's argument
Lines 10-11 - The Author brings up two flaws in Garcia's thesis, showing her opinion and previewing the passage's structure
Lines 12-15 - The first flaw is defined
Lines 30-36 - The Author highlights the main point of her rebuttal to this flaw
Lines 37-40 - The second flaw is defined
Lines 51-52 - The Author's rebuttal is stated
Lines 57-60 - The Author highlights an assumption of Garcia's argument
Meta-Structure:
Traditional View/New View - The Author brings up Garcia's argument, which states that the Mexican American Generation was "more radical and politically diverse" than previously thought. So there's a traditional view that is being challenged by a new view. Normally, the Author is in favor of the new view, or at least neutral, but here . . .
Rebuttal - The Author actually rebuts Garcia's view, highlighting two flaws in it.
Last Thoughts:
It's going to be really important that we understand the two flaws as highlighted by the Author, so let's make sure we understand them.
The first flaw is that Garcia's evidence of political diversity is not consistent. So we need to know where the contradiction in it is. What's inconsistent about it? Well, on the one hand, he's arguing that there were a lot of different viewpoints—after all, that's what political diversity is. However, Garcia also argues that the differences were "insignificant" (Lines 27-28). He can't have it both ways—either these differences are significant and thus show that there was political diversity in the Mexican American Generation, or the differences are insignificant.
The second flaw comes down to an assumption the Author points out in Garcia's argument—he assumes that "an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase in the ethnic Mexican population's activism" (Lines 57-60). However, there's no evidence this is true, and the Author brings up a number of factors that could prevent it from being true.
So the first criticism shows that Garcia treats differences as both significant and insignificant, highlighting an inconsistency; and that he assumes a representativeness that isn't established.
Question prompt
It can be inferred
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: A
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Social Science
Answer choices
-
ASome of their concerns Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A matches the stem
Correct. Question Type:
Must Be True
Strategy Overview: Find the section talking about the activists of the Ô30s and Ô40s, then find an answer aligning with that information
Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines: Here's a little trick for the LSAT—if the question asks you about something with a number in it (or an italicized phrase), you can quickly find it by scanning through the passage. Our brains are very good at finding numbers in a field of letters (and italicized words).
With that in mind, we can scan through the passage to find the 1930s and 1940s. While the 1930s are mentioned several times, the 1940s show up only once, in Line 8. While a correct answer could be supported by one of the places where the 1930s are mentioned, that's very unlikely, as that time period in other sections talks about the activists from 1930 to 1960, and we can't infer anything about what happened in the first 10 years of that block based on what happened in the entire three decades. There's one exception to that, in Line 34, where it talks about activists "since 1930," but that sentence reflects the Author's view, not Garcia's.
So let's head to Line 8. There, the Author brings up something that Garcia "persuasive[ly]" proves. However, this question is asking about Garcia's viewpoint, so we don't actually care that the Author agrees!
Here, it states that Garcia argues the activists in the Ô30s and Ô40s "anticipated" reforms of the more militant Chicanos of the Ô60s and Ô70s. Let's find an answer that lines up with this information.
Answer Explanation:
(Lines 7-10) When discussing the activists of the Ô30s and Ô40s, Garcia argues that they anticipated the reforms proposed by the activists of the Ô60s and Ô70s. This answer is therefore correct.
Key Takeaway:
Finding information in the passage quickly is key to answering detail-based questions efficiently. While using your notes is one way to do so, you can also use easily-identifiable elements (e.g., numbers and italicized words) to find the relevant sections. -
BThey were more politically Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 1-5) This answer is tempting because it seems to line up with Garcia's main point. However, his point was that the activists from the Ô30s to the Ô60s were more politically diverse than previously thought. He doesn't compare their political diversity to the activists of the Ô70s. -
CThey were as militant Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 7-10) It's noted that Garcia believed the activists of the Ô30s/'40s anticipated some of the reforms proposed by a group the Author characterizes as "more militant," but that doesn't mean that Garcia agrees that the latter group was militant, or how comparatively militant the former group was. After all, you can propose the same reforms as another group and do so in a less militant manner. -
DMost of them advocated Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 24-26) This answer describes the agenda of the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, but we don't know that this group was around in the Ô30s and Ô40s (they may have arose in the latter half of the 1930-1960 time period outlined), or that they made up the majority of political activists. -
EMost of them were Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 26-30) Garcia argues that the differences between activist groups is insignificant because they focused on "liberal reform, not revolution," so, if anything, this answer is contradicted (while still having the problem of not necessarily applying to the activists just through the Ô40s).
What this tests
Question analytics
Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.
Answer choice distribution
Accounts
Save your place across PrepTests
Bookmark questions, build weak-spot lists, and pick up exactly where you left off—built for serious repeat practice.
No payment yet. We will only email when accounts open.
Already have an account? Log in
Deeper help
Ask follow-ups on any step
Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.
Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.
Discussion
-
Why is A correct? 1 reply
Started by mb159701