Reading comp PrepTest 145 · Section 3 · Question 2
Passage
Passage walkthrough
Topic: Legal
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- History of UDHR (first treaty on human rights, some wanted to create an obligation to act)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Comparisons, according to the author:
- Unlike other international treaties, the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was expressly affirmed and created a standard for human rights (first and second sentences)
- Some small countries and NGOs wanted the language of UDHR to go further and create an obligation to promote human rights, but the version of UDHR that passed didn't feature such an obligation (third through last sentences)
- Author's attitude: "lobbied vigorously" (fourth sentence)
- Comparisons, according to the author:
Paragraph 2
- Paragraph note
- Process and content of UDHR (long drafting/debate process, expressed principles of freedom/equality and fundamental rights)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Examples of fundamental rights asserted in UDHR, according to the author:
- The right to work, the right to rest and leisure, and the right to education (last sentence)
- Author's attitude: "elaborate" (second sentence)
- Examples of fundamental rights asserted in UDHR, according to the author:
Paragraph 3
- Paragraph note
- Author on what UDHR gets wrong (nonbinding) and right (led to binding conventions and set standards/aspirations)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Author's view:
- The biggest weakness of the UDHR is that it's a nonbinding legal document (first and second sentences)
- But the UDHR is a progressive document that has created (belatedly) legally binding human rights and sent a good message (last sentence)
- Cause-and-effect relationship, according to the author:
- The UDHR has caused the creation of legally binding human rights agreements (last sentence)
- Author's attitude: "in many ways a progressive document" (first sentence); "weaknesses" (first sentence); "most regrettable" (first sentence); "purely programmatic nature" (second sentence); "has led, even if belatedly" (last sentence); "clearly deserves recognition" (last sentence)
- Author's view:
Main Point: Despite its nonbinding legal status and late adoption, the UDHR is a good first step in promoting and starting to set a legal framework for international human rights laws.
Meta-Structure?Importance of [Subject]: This passage best fits the Importance of [Subject] Meta-Structure. In such a passage, the author describes why a particular person, artistic work, law or legal accomplishment, or scientific breakthrough was historically significant or meaningful. The word "[Subject]" is just a placeholder for whatever specific topic the passage is about. In this case, the passage is about an international treaty, so we can think of this as an Importance of Treaty passage.
In an Importance of [Subject] passage, the main point is generally the author's opinions on why the subject was important. The author summarizes their opinions on the UDHR treaty in the last paragraph, so we'll use that to construct our anticipated main point.
Last Thoughts?Note how the last paragraph presents the strengths and weaknesses of the UDHR, yet our anticipated main point makes it seem as if the author has a positive view of it. That's because of how the last paragraph is phrased, with the author pointing out a flaw but then pivoting ("Nevertheless") to the positive. In pivoting away from the negative to the positive, we should view the author's opinion as leaning more towards the latter while still believing the former.
Question prompt
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: B
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Strategy Overview
Answer Anticipation
Answer choices
-
Ato contrast the different Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
(A) Does this say the author quotes from Article I and the proposal to contrast how strongly the UDHR actually protects human rights with how strongly some UN members wanted the UDHR to protect human rights?
Nope. Besides, there's no indication that the definition of human rights is different between the two documents. In fact, the proposal doesn't have enough specifics on what it means by human rights for us to possibly draw such a comparison!
-
Bto compare the strength Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B matches the stem
(B) Does this say the author quotes from Article I and the proposal to contrast how strongly the UDHR actually protects human rights with how strongly some UN members wanted the UDHR to protect human rights?
Yes! This lines up with our anticipation perfectly. The author quotes from the UN Charter's Article I before pivoting into a discussion of the UN members who wanted stronger language in the UDHR (P1, S3). These members' proposal "would have implied an obligation for member states to act on human rights issues" (P1, S4-S5), so the author must bring up the specific language of these two things to highlight the stronger language in the proposal, making this the correct answer. We can justifiably select (B) and advance straight to the following question.
-
Cto identify a bureaucratic Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
(C) Does this say the author quotes from Article I and the proposal to contrast how strongly the UDHR actually protects human rights with how strongly some UN members wanted the UDHR to protect human rights?
No. Besides, the only shared language here is "human rights," and that's hardly bureaucratic vocabulary. The author also focuses on the ideas here and their strength, not the vocabulary.
-
Dto highlight what the Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
(D) Does this say the author quotes from Article I and the proposal to contrast how strongly the UDHR actually protects human rights with how strongly some UN members wanted the UDHR to protect human rights?
Nope. The author doesn't use any superlative language in discussing these specific sections, so we can't say she brought up these quotes to show the "most important" points made in each.
-
Eto call attention to Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
(E) Does this say the author quotes from Article I and the proposal to contrast how strongly the UDHR actually protects human rights with how strongly some UN members wanted the UDHR to protect human rights?
No. The author doesn't discuss the prose style, nor are the prose styles in the two highlighted quotes particularly different!
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
No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.