Reading comp PrepTest 155 · Section 3 · Question 10

Passage

 With rapidly expanding populations, growing industrial development, and dwindling water supplies on national and regional levels, water is fast replacing Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary Topic:
Legal

Paragraph 1
  • Paragraph note
    • Problem (potential conflicts over water) and one attempted solution (ILC treaty structure)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Cause-and-effect relationships, according to the author:
      • Increasing populations, development, and water shortages have caused water to become the world's most valuable resource (first sentence)
      • The growing importance of water has caused the potential for conflicts over water resources like rivers (second sentence)
      • Nations' realization that they need to cooperate to protect rivers has caused the UN ILC to develop a treaty structure (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "rapidly" (first sentence); "dwindling" (first sentence); "fast replacing" (first sentence); "growing importance of water" (second sentence); "threats" (third sentence); "acutely aware" (third sentence); "need for international cooperation" (last sentence)
Paragraph 2
  • Paragraph note
    • Details of ILC Draft Articles (guidelines for treaty-formation based on customary principles and accepted law)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • List of principles ILC Draft Articles recommend for treates:
      • Use of river shouldn't harm another nation (last sentence)
      • Every nation's use should be equitable and reasonable (last sentence)
      • Nations should work to protect ecosystems (last sentence)
Paragraph 3
  • Paragraph note
    • Author's criticism of ILC (doesn't address changing water levels)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view
      • The ILC Draft Articles are a step forward but "inadequate" because they don't address future environmental changes, like changing water levels (first through last sentences)
    • Cause-and-effect relationships, according to the author:
      • An increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide causes the greenhouse effect and warmer temperatures, which causes decreased participation and increased runoff from snow (second through last sentences)
    • Author's attitude: "significant step forward" (first sentence); "inadequate because they do not provide satisfactory ways of dealing with possible future environmental changes" (first sentence); "significant environmental threat" (second sentence); "likely to have a number of dramatic effects on water levels" (last sentence); "more importantly" (last sentence)
Paragraph 4
  • Paragraph note
    • More of the author's criticisms (allocating a fixed amount of water will be unfair as water levels change) and possible solution
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view:
      • The Draft Articles recommend allocating fixed amounts of water, which doesn't address changes to water levels and will therefore favor countries with higher usage (first through third sentence)
      • This problem could be avoided if the Draft Articles were more flexible (fourth through last sentence)
    • Examples of ways to make the Draft Articles more flexible, according to the author:
      • Allocating water based on proportional usage or having plans for specific changes (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "will not be flexible enough" (first sentence); "would have no mechanism for coping" (second sentence); "unjustly favor" (third sentence); "circumvent this problem" (fourth sentence)


Main Point:
The UN ILC's proposed treaty structure is a step forward in addressing a current problem, but it's inadequate because it doesn't address what will happen to changes in water levels in the future.

Key Lines?
Paragraph 1, Sentence 4 (P1, S4) - Potential solution to a problem
P3, S1 - Summary of the author's opinion of the solution

Meta-Structure?
Problem/Solution: This passage best fits the Problem/Solution Meta-Structure*. The author describes a problem with the increasing risk of international conflict over water sources and one potential solution — the United Nations' ILC Draft Articles, which recommend guidelines in the formation of treaties regarding rivers and other watercourses that flow through more than one country. The author even layers another problem and solution on this general framework. The author describes a problem with the ILC solution and briefly discusses how to solve one of those problems. Still, it's easiest to understand this passage if we consider the growing risk of conflict as the passage's central problem and the ILC's Draft Articles as the passage's central solution.

In a Problem/Solution passage, the author's opinion of the proposed solution is the passage's main point. The author has a fairly critical opinion of ILC's Draft Articles, an opinion summarized in the first sentence of the third paragraph. We can use that sentence to help us with any question that requires us to consider the passage's main point.

*Some may argue that this is a Criticizing a Viewpoint or Correcting the Record passage — understandably so, since this author is fairly critical of the proposed solution. If you went with either of these, that's OK! You'd wind up with the same main point and big-picture understanding of the passage described above. Let's remember that the Meta-Structures are here to help us think about the overarching structure and ideas in a passage. We don't have to agree on which Meta-Structure a passage has to realize the benefits of the Meta-Structures.

Causality: The most prominent minor Meta-Structure in this passage is causality. The author describes several cause-and-effect relationships in the passage, and at least one of them is likely to factor into a question. To help us locate and review these relationships, we recommend highlighting the causal words, like "increased" (P1, S2), "led to" (P1, S4), "resulting" (P3, S3), "arising from" (P3, S3), and "due to" (P3, S3).

Last Thoughts?
It'll likely be important to note that although the author focuses on problems with the proposed Draft Articles, the author still says they're a "significant step forward" (P3, S1). So, the author is not entirely down on the Draft Articles. This concession might factor into a Tone question or two.

Question prompt

According to the passage, Remaining source text redacted.
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

Legal

Answer choices

  1. A
    criticize existing international practices Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    Does this say the Draft Articles attempt to write out existing water law principles and guide the formation of treaties?

    Nope. In fact, our review of the first half of the second paragraph reminded us that the Articles' recommendations rely on past legal decisions (P2, S1), so they definitely do not criticize those decisions.
  2. B
    provide an explicit formulation Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem
    Question Type:
    Minor Point/Must Be True

    Strategy Overview:
    Refer to notes or what you highlighted/underlined to locate where the passage discusses the purpose of the Draft Articles' development, and refer to the relevant part of the passage as needed to find that answer choice that must be true

    Answer Anticipation:
    For questions that ask us to find a specific detail mentioned in the passage, quickly finding and reviewing that piece of information is paramount. That is why we make brief notes describing the role of each paragraph and highlight or underline definitions and the minor Meta-Structures — doing so helps us find the salient information efficiently and reliably. Once we review that part of the passage, we can look through the answer choices to see which one is best supported by what we reviewed.

    Here, the question asks about the purpose of the Draft Articles' development. Where did that discussion show up in the passage? Our note for the second paragraph is, "Details of ILC Draft Articles (guidelines for treaty-formation based on customary principles and accepted law)." If there's going to be an explanation of the Articles' purpose, it'll probably be in the paragraph that outlines the details of those Articles. Scanning through the second paragraph, we can see that the first half discusses their purpose. We learn that the Draft Articles are "an attempt to codify" existing principles of water law (P2, S2) and were "intended" as a set of guidelines for treaty creation (P2, S2). Let's find an answer reflecting these facts.

    Answer Choice Explanation:
    Does this say the Draft Articles attempt to write out existing water law principles and guide the formation of treaties?

    Yes! According to the second paragraph, the Draft Articles attempted to codify commonly applied — or "customary — principles of international law, as this answer states. We would be justified in selecting (B) and advancing directly to the next question.

    Key Takeaway:
    As we've seen throughout Logical Reasoning, motive is a key concept tested on the exam, and that carries through to Reading Comp, as well. It can be useful to note when it's mentioned in a passage.
  3. C
    establish uniform judicial procedures Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    Does this say the Draft Articles attempt to write out existing water law principles and guide the formation of treaties?

    No. The Draft Articles help nations form treaties — they don't specify what judges should do. In fact, there's no mention of judicial procedures in this paragraph.
  4. D
    protect the pre-existing water Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Does this say the Draft Articles attempt to write out existing water law principles and guide the formation of treaties?

    Not exactly. This answer choice temps some because it references a detail mentioned in the passage that some test-takers may remember. The author criticizes these guidelines for protecting the water rights of those who use the most water (P4, S3). But this question didn't ask for the author's opinion of the Draft Articles. It asked for their purpose. And there's no indication that this is the purpose of the Draft Articles.
  5. E
    help guarantee continued industrial Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Does this say the Draft Articles attempt to write out existing water law principles and guide the formation of treaties?

    Negative. Industrial development is noted as a cause of the increasing scarcity of water (P1, S1), but there's no mention of it as a driving force behind the ILC's proposal.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 3%
  2. B Credited 63%
  3. C 28%
  4. D 4%
  5. E 2%

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