PrepTest 147

[lcid:3686] Prep Test 147 LSAT — Reading Comp — S3 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 1-6  .       In the last half-century, firefighters in  . North America have developed a powerful system for  . fighting Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Science

Paragraph 1
  • Paragraph note
    • Two different approaches are outlined
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Goal - Properly deal with forest fires
    • Firefighters - Fight them all with modern technology
    • Scientists - Doing too much firefighting can be worse than not doing any since occasional fires stop them from getting out of control
    • Example - Ancient ponderosa forests
    • General rule - Fires naturally happen every 5-25 years
Paragraph 2
  • Paragraph note
    • A problem is explored; a recommendation is made
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Problem - Too much firefighting has left forests (even ponderosa) open to total devastation, killing wildlife and trees, and eroding topsoil
    • Requirement/recommendation - Switch to managing fires instead of eliminating them
Paragraph 3
  • Paragraph note
    • How to implement recommendation
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Fire factors - topography (fixed); weather (unpredictable); fuel
    • Should focus on fuel - most promising is selective harvesting (small trees) and prescribed fires (light fires and also let some natural ones burn under control)
Main Point:
Despite the current fire management technique of stopping all fires, a new technique of harvesting small trees and allowing certain fires to burn (or lighting them) will be better at keeping forest fires under control.

Key Lines:
Lines 1-3 - The firefighter approach is listed
Lines 3-6 - The other approach is suggested
Lines 20-23 - The problem with the first approach is described
Lines 31-35 - The alternative approach is stated
Lines 41-45 - The "most promising" approach is stated

Meta-Structure:
Problem/Solution or Goal/Approach - These two structures are strongly related, as most goals are meant to address a problem (or potential problem). Here, the problem is out of control forest fires, and the goal is to manage forests in a way that prevents them. The firefighter/current approach is to aggressively fight all fires. However, the "most promising" approach is to selectively harvest timber to cut off fuel while allowing for controlled burns.

Last Thoughts:
There are a lot of little details in this passage that should have been noted. For example, the first paragraph has a list of benefits of allowing for regular fires, while the last paragraph has a list of factors in fire behavior. Knowing where to look for these details will probably be key for a few questions, so we should at least have tagged what the lists were of!

Question prompt

The author cites the 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

Science

Answer choices

  1. A
    the support provided for Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem
    Correct. Question Type:
    Argument Structure

    Strategy Overview:
    Review the statement in question and define its role in the context of the last paragraph and the passage as a whole

    Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
    Let's remember the purpose of the passage—to advocate for a new type of fire management. Any statement that isn't explicitly a part of an opposing point should, in some way, support that overall purpose.

    With that in mind, let's head to the last paragraph. These three factors were cited as determinants of fire behavior. The paragraph then goes on to say that two of them—topography and weather—can't be altered or predicted, and so fire managers "should therefore focus their efforts on fuel" (Lines 40-41). Should is a big word on the LSAT—here, it introduces the Author's recommendation.

    So the list of three factors is established to rule two out and thus lead to a recommendation to focus on the third. Let's find an answer reflecting that.

    Answer Explanation:
    (Lines 40-41) The Author brings up three factors in fire behavior, shows that two can't be controlled, and thus ends up recommending a focus on the third—fuel. This ties back to the mention of "devastating crown fires" (Line 31), which the Author is concerned with preventing. Since this answer reflects the purpose and structure of the argument, and the section in question in particular, it's the correct answer.

    Key Takeaway:
    The section where these factors were discussed fell into a common method of reasoning—the elimination of alternatives. The Author brought up three factors, and then showed that two were outside of human control, so the focus should be on the one that could be controlled. The correct answer reflected this method of reasoning. Always be on the lookout for these subsections of an RC passage that fall into a common pattern of reasoning—they'll likely be asked about and have answers that reflect that pattern.
  2. B
    an argument that, given Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    Incorrect. (Line 56-57) While the passage does note that wildfires will "inevitably occur" but will be "more easily" managed, it's not the interaction between the three factors that means it won't be possible to completely control fires. This discussion specifically leads to the recommendation that forest managers focus on fuel, so this answer connects parts of the passage that aren't directly connected.
  3. C
    an attempt to provide Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    Incorrect. (Lines 36-40) These factors have presumably been the determinants of fire behavior since before humans ever existed, and so they can't explain why fires have become unnaturally devastating. That discussion happened in Lines 20-23.
  4. D
    an argument that specific Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Incorrect. This doesn't describe anything close to what's stated in the passage. Don't infer connections where none are suggested!
  5. E
    the suggestion that fires Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Incorrect. (Line 38) The Author brings up weather (which includes lightning) but then rules it out ("unpredictable") as something that can be controlled or relied on to do work. Even when it's mentioned as part of the new approach (Lines 50-54), the focus is on controlled burns since lightning fires would also need other conditions in place to keep them under control.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion