Reading comp PrepTest 155 · Section 3 · Question 11

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

In the passage, the Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: D

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Legal

Answer choices

  1. A
    focus on the management Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    Does this say the author thinks the Draft Articles are flawed because they do not address what will happen to changes in water levels in the future or that they recommend allocating a fixed amount of water?

    Nope. So, we can cross off this choice immediately. The author's criticism seems to take environmental changes as an inevitability. The author never suggests that the Articles should attempt to protect rivers from such changes. Plus, the author's solutions address managing water flows (P4, S1), so we don't have any reason to believe the author has an issue with that focus.
  2. B
    fail to incorporate certain Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    Does this say the author thinks the Draft Articles are flawed because they do not address what will happen to changes in water levels in the future or that they recommend allocating a fixed amount of water?

    Nope. We should therefore eliminate this answer choice without giving it much consideration.

    If we had to debate (B)'s merits, we would still eliminate it. Although the author says that the proposal is an "attempt" to codify principles of customary international water-use practices, that doesn't necessarily mean this attempt was successful. Still, the author never criticize the Articles' failure to incorporate principles, so we have no basis for selecting (B).
  3. C
    do not address pertinent Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    Does this say the author thinks the Draft Articles are flawed because they do not address what will happen to changes in water levels in the future or that they recommend allocating a fixed amount of water?

    Negative. As a result, we can cross off this choice. Indeed, the Draft Articles are explicitly for "Non-Navigational Uses" (P2, S1), and the author doesn't claim that they fail to live up to that title.
  4. D
    suggest that treaties stipulate Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D matches the stem
    Question Type:
    Tone/Author Agree

    Strategy Overview:
    Consult your notes or passage to recall the author's attitude about the topic in question, and find the answer that best reflects your understanding of the author's opinion on that topic

    Answer Anticipation:
    This question asks us to find the answer choice that accurately characterizes why the author thinks the Draft Articles are flawed. This relates directly to the author's main point, so we can anticipate what the correct answer will say by reviewing the main point.

    The author's central complaint is that the Articles don't address what will happen to changes in water levels in the future (P3, S1). The author lists a few more reasons why the Articles are flawed in the fourth paragraph, which we summarized in our notes: "allocating a fixed amount of water will be unfair as water levels change." The correct answer will almost certainly relate back to the main point or the author's complaint about allocating a fixed amount of water.

    Answer Choice Explanation:
    Does this say the author thinks the Draft Articles are flawed because they do not address what will happen to changes in water levels in the future or that they recommend allocating a fixed amount of water? Yes! This answer restates the author's specific issue with water allocation, found at the beginning of the fourth paragraph. We can select (D) and move on to the next question.

    Key Takeaway:
    Even though this question may appear to ask about a specific detail in the passage, we answered it by referencing the main point and our notes. We didn't have to look back at the passage once. Even test-takers with below-average reading speeds can reliably complete the Reading Comp questions if they understand the passage's main point and structure and limit the number of times they consult the passage.
  5. E
    provide little assistance to Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Does this say the author thinks the Draft Articles are flawed because they do not address what will happen to changes in water levels in the future or that they recommend allocating a fixed amount of water?

    Not quite. The author states that adhering to fixed quantities "unjustly" favors countries with the most extensive water usage. However, the author doesn't say that industrialized countries are the ones with the most extensive usage (maybe it's the ones with the largest populations). And the author never criticizes the proposal for failing to address "expanding" water uses.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 23%
  2. B 1%
  3. C 2%
  4. D Credited 70%
  5. E 3%

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 not A? 1 reply

    Started by efield16