Reading comp PrepTest 143 · Section 2 · Question 1

Incorrect. (Lines 13-15) This answer represents the view of Weiner and his cohort, but that's only one of the viewpoints and not even the one that the Author sides with.

Incorrect. (Lines 1-6) The passage starts by introducing the elimination of the colonial gaze as an old problem that has been supplanted by "an even more profound" one, so this answer misses . . . well, the entire passage!

Correct. Question Type:
Main Point

Strategy Overview:
Reiterate the main point as we summarized it after reading through the passage

Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
The Author spent the first paragraph introducing a phenomenon (Lines 6-10) before introducing a debate over that phenomenon (Lines 11-12). She then presented one viewpoint (Lines 13-15) followed by another that disagreed with the first (Lines 29-31). Finally, she brought up an example that supported the second view over the first (Lines 44-47).

From this, we said the main point of the passage is:

While there is a sharp debate between anthropologists on whether it's good for indigenous cultures to adopt Western technology/cameras, a real-world example suggests that this technology does more harm than good, at least as far as preserving their culture is concerned.

Answer Explanation:
(Lines 6-10; Lines 11-12; Lines 44-47) Paragraph 1 introduces the topic—the impact of video equipment on indigenous peoples. It also notes that there is a "sharp" division between anthropologists before spending Paragraph 2 and 3 exploring the two sides of the divide. Finally, the last paragraph brings up a single example that lends credence to one of the two sides of the divide—the one that thought video technology did more good than harm in helping indigenous peoples "strengthen" and preserve their languages and traditions. This answer hits all of those major points (even if it glosses over the "loser" side of the divide), so it's the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Always pay attention to the certainty of the main point answers! The correct one should match the certainty put forward by the Author in the passage.

Incorrect. (Lines 44-47) This answer doesn't mention the other side of the debate at all, and it pivots away from the side that the Author argues has some evidence supporting it. The Author does use only one example to back up that viewpoint, but she never expresses hesitancy because of a lack of long-term studies on the topic.

Incorrect. (Line 47) The Author notes that the example of the Kayapo "lends credence" to one side of the debate, which is a much weaker statement than saying that it "validates" that side. A giant crater from around 65 million years ago lends credence to the theory that a meteorite wiped out the dinosaurs, but it doesn't make that theory valid.