GED — All Questions

Read: 'Either we cut the arts program or we lay off teachers.' The weakness in this statement is that it—

• a.repeats a point that the other side already conceded
• b.presents only two options when others exist✓
• c.uses figures that cannot be verified anywhere
• d.quotes an opponent out of context

Framing a budget problem as a choice between exactly two painful outcomes shuts out every other possibility, from new revenue to smaller cuts spread across departments. No figures appear in the sentence. Nothing is repeated. And no opponent is quoted.

Read: 'This policy is the best one available because no better policy exists.' This reasoning is weak because it—

• a.assumes what it is supposed to prove✓
• b.cites a source with an interest in the outcome
• c.generalizes from a single unusual case
• d.confuses the order of two events

The reason given restates the conclusion in other words, so the argument goes in a circle and never reaches outside itself for support. No source is named. No case, unusual or otherwise, is offered. And no sequence of events is described.

Which of these is a statement of fact rather than opinion?

• a.The library should open earlier on Tuesdays
• b.The library closed at six on Tuesday✓
• c.The library is the best building in town
• d.The library's hours are far too short

A fact can be checked against a record, and the closing time either was six or it was not. Calling the hours too short is a judgment about what is enough. Naming a building the best is a matter of taste. And saying the library should open earlier recommends an action rather than reporting one.

Read: 'The new brand of paint dried faster in our test than the leading brand.' A reader should ask first—

• a.how heavy each can was
• b.where the paint was purchased
• c.who conducted the test✓
• d.what color the paint was

If the manufacturer ran its own test, the result may still be true but it deserves more scrutiny, so the source is the first question a careful reader asks. Color, weight and place of purchase have no bearing on drying time or on the credibility of the comparison.

Read: 'A survey of twelve neighbors found that most oppose the new parking rule. The city should repeal it.' The clearest weakness is that—

• a.the neighbors were not named
• b.parking rules of this kind are rarely repealed
• c.twelve neighbors cannot speak for the city✓
• d.surveys can never measure public opinion reliably

A dozen people on one street is far too small and too narrow a group to stand for a city's residents, so the evidence does not reach the conclusion. How often rules get repealed says nothing about whether this one should be. Surveys can measure opinion well when the sample is adequate. And naming the respondents would not fix the size of the sample.

Read: 'Some argue that the fee is a burden on small shops. In fact the fee is waived for any business under twenty employees.' The second sentence functions as—

• a.a rebuttal of the stated objection✓
• b.a concession that the objection is right
• c.a restatement of the objection
• d.an example supporting the objection

The writer names an opposing point and then answers it with a fact that removes its force, which is what a rebuttal does. It does not restate the objection, since it introduces new information. It works against the objection rather than illustrating it. And a concession would agree rather than reply.

Read: 'Night classes should be expanded. Enrollment in the two existing sections has been full for six straight terms, and ninety students were turned away last fall.' The evidence supports the claim mainly by showing—

• a.that students prefer evenings to mornings
• b.that demand exceeds the current supply✓
• c.that night classes are taught well
• d.that the college can afford more sections

Full sections and ninety rejected students are measures of unmet demand, which is precisely what an argument for expansion needs. Nothing in the figures speaks to teaching quality. Affordability is a separate question the passage never addresses. And a preference for evenings is not established, since the students turned away may have had no other option.

Read: 'Since the speed limit dropped, crashes on Route 9 have fallen by a fifth.' Which additional fact would most weaken this argument that the lower limit worked?

• a.Most drivers say they support the change
• b.The road was closed for repairs half that year✓
• c.The speed limit fell by ten miles per hour
• d.Crashes rose on a different road nearby

If the road was shut for months, there was less traffic to crash, which supplies an alternative explanation for the drop and undercuts the causal claim. The size of the speed reduction describes the policy rather than testing it. A change on another road does not explain this one. And driver approval is opinion, not evidence about crashes.

Read: 'The program must be working. My neighbor enrolled and found a job within a month.' This argument depends on—

• a.a single story standing in for a pattern✓
• b.a definition that shifts halfway through
• c.a threat about what will happen next
• d.an appeal to an unnamed authority

One person's experience may be encouraging, but it cannot show what a program does in general, and nothing else is offered. No definition is used, let alone changed. No authority is invoked. And nothing is threatened.

Read: 'The measure will save money, improve safety, and, according to the engineers who studied it, cut travel times by nine minutes.' The strongest evidence in this sentence is—

• a.the promise that it will save money
• b.the engineers' estimate of nine minutes✓
• c.the fact that the measure exists
• d.the assurance that safety will improve

A specific figure attributed to people who studied the problem can be examined and challenged, which is what makes it evidence rather than assertion. Saving money and improving safety are stated without any support. And that the measure exists is not evidence for anything.

Read: 'Studies suggest that walking thirty minutes a day may reduce the risk of heart disease.' Compared with a claim that walking prevents heart disease, this statement is—

• a.identical in meaning to the stronger claim
• b.an opinion rather than a report
• c.more cautious and easier to defend✓
• d.stronger and harder to support

The words 'suggest,' 'may' and 'reduce the risk' all limit what is being asserted, which makes the claim easier to back with real findings. A stronger claim would be harder to defend, not this one. The two are not identical: prevention and risk reduction are different claims. And reporting what studies indicate is not a statement of preference.

Read: 'Anyone who cares about children will support this bond measure.' The persuasive technique at work is—

• a.tying the position to the reader's identity✓
• b.defining an unfamiliar technical term
• c.conceding the strongest opposing point
• d.citing the results of a controlled study

The sentence makes disagreement look like not caring about children, so the reader is pressed by self-image rather than by reasons about the bond. No study is cited. No opposing point is granted. And no term is defined.

Read: 'Two writers disagree about the bridge. One cites the repair estimate; the other cites the number of daily crossings.' The disagreement is best described as—

• a.a dispute about what the words in question mean
• b.a difference in which evidence matters most✓
• c.a disagreement about a past event
• d.a case of one of the writers inventing facts

Both writers use real figures; they differ over which consideration should govern the decision, cost or use. Nothing suggests a quarrel over definitions. Nothing indicates either figure is fabricated. And neither is describing an event that already happened.

Read: 'The council's so-called reform hands a windfall to developers.' The phrase 'so-called' mainly—

• a.identifies the reform's official title
• b.signals the writer's disapproval✓
• c.shows the writer is quoting a source
• d.marks a term the reader may not know

Placing 'so-called' before 'reform' tells the reader the writer does not accept the label, which is loaded language doing argumentative work. It does not supply an official name. It is not a quotation. And it is not glossing an unfamiliar word.

Read: 'The clinic treats more patients than any other in the county, and its waiting times are the longest.' A reader who concludes the clinic is poorly run has—

• a.misread what the word county is being used to mean
• b.overlooked that volume can explain the wait✓
• c.assumed that the figures given had been invented
• d.confused the clinic with another one

The same sentence that reports long waits also reports the highest patient volume, which is an obvious alternative explanation the hasty conclusion ignores. The meaning of 'county' is not in question. The figures are taken at face value by both readings. And no confusion of identity is involved.

Read: 'If we allow food trucks downtown, the next thing will be carnival rides on Main Street.' This argument is weak because it—

• a.presents an opinion as a statistic
• b.relies on a source that cannot be checked
• c.uses a word in two different senses
• d.assumes one small step leads to an extreme one✓

Nothing connects permitting food trucks to permitting carnival rides, so the chain is asserted rather than shown, which is the slippery-slope move. No source is mentioned. No word shifts its meaning. And no statistic appears.

Read: 'The company says the layoffs were unavoidable. The union says the company spent forty million on stock buybacks in the same quarter.' The union's response works by—

• a.agreeing with the company's reasoning
• b.predicting what the company will do next
• c.offering a fact that tests the company's claim✓
• d.questioning the meaning of the word layoff

If the money was there for buybacks, the claim that layoffs could not be avoided becomes much harder to sustain, so the figure is a direct challenge. The union is not agreeing. No definition is disputed. And nothing is predicted.

A writer claims that a new bus route would be well used. Which evidence would support that claim most strongly?

• a.A council member's promise to fund the route
• b.Ridership counts from a similar route in the same city✓
• c.A statement that buses are good for the environment
• d.The number of buses the city currently owns

Counts from a comparable route measure the very thing in question, how many people actually ride, and come from the same city. Environmental benefit is a separate argument for the route, not evidence of use. The size of the bus fleet is a capacity fact. And a promise of funding says nothing about ridership.

Read: 'Because the tax was cut in January and hiring rose in June, the tax cut created the jobs.' The argument assumes—

• a.that hiring figures are measured every month
• b.that the tax cut in question was a small one
• c.that nothing else could explain the hiring✓
• d.that January precedes June

The reasoning treats sequence as proof of cause, which only works if every other explanation, from seasonal hiring to a general recovery, has been ruled out. The size of the cut is not at issue. How often hiring is measured is a detail of the data. And that January comes before June is true but is exactly the weak point rather than a hidden assumption.

Read: 'Sixty percent of respondents favored the change.' Which question would most help a reader judge this claim?

• a.What format was the report published in
• b.Who paid to print the final document
• c.Who was asked and how were they chosen✓
• d.How long did the survey take to complete

A percentage means little until you know whose opinions it summarizes and whether they represent the group in question, which is a matter of sampling. The time the survey took does not affect whom it reached. The publication format is irrelevant. And printing costs say nothing about the sample.

Read: 'Critics of the plan say it costs too much. They are wrong, because the plan is affordable.' The reply fails because it—

• a.misquotes what the critics actually said about cost
• b.concedes the critics' main point
• c.restates the disagreement without evidence✓
• d.introduces a new topic that is irrelevant here

Asserting affordability is simply denying the objection in different words, and no figure or reason is offered to settle which side is right. The reply stays on the topic the critics raised. It represents their position accurately. And it concedes nothing.

Read: 'The author concludes that the program should be expanded, and admits that the evaluation covered only one site.' The admission mainly—

• a.shows that the author is being dishonest with readers
• b.makes the evidence irrelevant
• c.proves that the conclusion the author reached is false
• d.limits how far the conclusion can be pushed✓

Stating the limits of the evidence tells the reader how much weight the conclusion can bear, which is a mark of careful argument rather than a defect. A single site does not prove the conclusion wrong. Disclosing a limitation is the opposite of dishonesty. And evidence from one site is still evidence, just narrower.

Read: 'Four schools tried the later start time. Test scores rose in three of them and fell slightly in the fourth.' A fair summary is that the results were—

• a.entirely positive across the board
• b.too mixed to show any pattern
• c.mostly positive but not uniform✓
• d.negative in the majority of schools

Three improvements and one small decline is a favorable pattern with an exception, and saying so reports what happened without overstating it. Claiming it was positive across the board erases the fourth school. Calling it patternless ignores the three. And describing a majority as negative reverses the count.

Read: 'The report is dated 2004 and describes the internet habits of teenagers.' Using it to describe teenagers today is a problem mainly because—

• a.reports are never reliable sources
• b.the author had an obvious bias
• c.the sample was certainly too small
• d.the evidence may be out of date✓

Behavior in this area has changed enormously since 2004, so the age of the study is the immediate objection, whatever its quality was at the time. Reports are perfectly capable of being reliable. Nothing is said about the sample size. And no evidence of bias is given.

Read: 'Opponents claim the fee will drive shops away. Yet every shop that closed last year cited rent, not fees.' The writer answers the objection by—

• a.questioning the motives of opponents
• b.offering evidence that points elsewhere✓
• c.conceding that shops did close
• d.changing the subject to rents in general

The reason shops actually gave is used to challenge the proposed cause, which is a reply on the merits. The writer does note that shops closed, but that is the setting for the evidence rather than a concession of the point. Rent is raised because the shops raised it, not as a new subject. And nobody's motives are questioned.

Which word correctly completes the sentence: 'The box of rusted nails ______ on the top shelf'?

• a.sit
• b.sits✓
• c.were sitting
• d.have sat

The subject is 'box,' which is singular, so the verb must be singular no matter how many nails the phrase after it mentions. 'Sit' agrees with 'nails' instead of with the real subject, which is the trap the phrase is there to set. 'Were sitting' is plural as well. And 'have sat' is likewise a plural form of the present perfect.

Which word correctly completes the sentence: 'The supervisor ______ we met on Tuesday approved the order'?

• a.whom✓
• b.whose
• c.which
• d.who

The pronoun is the object of 'met' — we met him — and the objective form is 'whom.' 'Who' is the subject form and would be right only if the pronoun did the meeting. 'Which' is used for things rather than people. And 'whose' shows possession, which nothing here requires.

Which word correctly completes the sentence: 'Of the three routes, the coastal one is the ______'?

• a.more longer
• b.most long
• c.longer
• d.longest✓

With three or more items the superlative is required, and for a short adjective that means the -est ending. 'Longer' is the comparative and is used when exactly two things are compared. 'Most long' forms the superlative the wrong way for a one-syllable adjective. And 'more longer' doubles the comparative, which is never correct.

Which sentence uses a colon correctly?

• a.The kit contains: a wrench, pliers, and a driver.
• b.The kit contains three tools, a wrench: pliers and a driver.
• c.The kit: contains three tools, a wrench, pliers, and a driver.
• d.The kit contains three tools: a wrench, pliers, and a driver.✓

A colon introducing a list must follow a complete sentence, and 'The kit contains three tools' can stand alone. Putting the colon straight after 'contains' breaks the sentence in the middle of a verb and its object. Dropping a colon inside the list itself separates nothing meaningful. And a colon after the subject cuts the sentence off from its own verb.

Which word correctly completes the sentence: 'The new safety rule will ______ every department in the plant'?

• a.affect✓
• b.effect
• c.effected
• d.affects

The verb meaning to have an influence on something is 'affect'; 'effect' as a noun is the result. 'Affects' is the wrong form after 'will,' which needs the bare infinitive. And 'effected' would mean brought about, which a rule cannot do to a department, besides being the wrong tense here.

Which word correctly completes the sentence: 'The second applicant had more experience ______ the first'?

• a.as
• b.from
• c.then
• d.than✓

'Than' is the word used in comparisons, and 'more experience' demands it. 'Then' refers to time or sequence and is a different word entirely, however similar it sounds. 'From' is used with 'different,' not with 'more.' And 'as' would need the form 'as much experience as.'

Which sentence shows the correct plural possessive?

• a.The employees lounge was repainted last week.
• b.The employees' lounge was repainted last week.✓
• c.The employees's lounge was repainted last week.
• d.The employee's lounge was repainted last week.

A lounge belonging to more than one employee takes the plural 'employees' with the apostrophe after the s. Placing the apostrophe before the s makes the lounge belong to one employee. Leaving the apostrophe out removes the possession altogether. And adding a second s after the apostrophe is not the form used for a regular plural.

Which word keeps the verb tenses consistent: 'He walked to the counter and ______ for a receipt'?

• a.will ask
• b.asked✓
• c.asks
• d.is asking

'Walked' sets the sentence in the past, so the second verb in the pair must be past as well. 'Asks' shifts to the present in the middle of one action. 'Is asking' shifts to the present progressive. And 'will ask' jumps to the future, which leaves the two halves describing different times.

Which sentence punctuates the quotation correctly?

• a.'We close at nine' the clerk said.
• b.'We close at nine.' the clerk said.
• c.'We close at nine', the clerk said.
• d.'We close at nine,' the clerk said.✓

When a quotation is followed by words such as 'the clerk said,' the comma goes inside the closing quotation mark. Placing the comma outside is the British convention and is marked wrong on American tests. A period ends the sentence and cannot be followed by 'the clerk said.' And omitting the punctuation entirely runs the quotation into the attribution.

Which revision corrects the dangling modifier in 'After finishing the inspection, the report was filed'?

• a.The report, after finishing the inspection, was filed.
• b.After the inspection was finishing, the report was filed.
• c.After finishing the inspection, the report was filed promptly.
• d.After finishing the inspection, the engineer filed the report.✓

The opening phrase needs a subject that could have done the finishing, and naming the engineer supplies one. Adding 'promptly' leaves the report as the thing that finished the inspection. Moving the phrase into the middle of the sentence changes nothing about who finished. And 'was finishing' creates a new error without fixing the old one.

Which sentence hyphenates the compound modifier correctly?

• a.She interviewed a well-known author last spring.✓
• b.The author she interviewed is well-known.
• c.She interviewed a well known author last spring.
• d.She interviewed a well-known-author last spring.

A two-word modifier placed before the noun it describes takes a hyphen, so 'well-known author' is correct. Leaving the hyphen out before the noun loses the link between the two words. Hyphenating the noun into the modifier joins words that are not a unit. And after the verb, as in 'is well known,' the hyphen is normally dropped.

Which sentence uses the correct pronoun form?

• a.The dispute was settled between yourself and I.
• b.The dispute was settled between you and myself.
• c.The dispute was settled between you and me.✓
• d.The dispute was settled between you and I.

'Between' is a preposition, so the pronouns after it take the objective form, which is 'me.' 'I' is the subject form and sounds formal here without being correct. 'Yourself' and 'myself' are reflexive forms, used when the subject and object are the same person, which is not the case in this sentence.

Which word correctly completes the sentence: 'If I ______ more time, I would rewrite the whole section'?

• a.will have
• b.would have
• c.have
• d.had✓

A condition contrary to present fact pairs the past form in the if-clause with 'would' in the main clause, so 'had' is the form required. 'Have' states a real present condition and does not match 'would rewrite.' 'Will have' puts a future in a clause that cannot take one. And 'would have' repeats the modal that already appears in the second half.

What is 3/8 + 1/4?

• a.4/12
• b.3/4
• c.5/8✓
• d.1/2

Rewrite 1/4 as 2/8 so the denominators match, then add the numerators: 3/8 + 2/8 = 5/8. Adding numerators and denominators straight across gives 4/12, which is what makes fractions look harder than they are. One half is 4/8 and falls just short. And 3/4 is 6/8, one eighth too much.

What is 2/3 × 3/5?

• a.5/8
• b.2/5✓
• c.6/5
• d.1/5

Multiply straight across to get 6/15, then divide both parts by 3 for 2/5. Adding across instead of multiplying produces 5/8. Inverting the second fraction gives 6/5, which is what division would call for. And 1/5 drops a factor somewhere in the reduction.

What is 5/6 ÷ 1/3?

• a.2 1/2✓
• b.5/18
• c.2/9
• d.1 1/2

Dividing by a fraction means multiplying by its reciprocal: 5/6 × 3/1 = 15/6, which reduces to 5/2, or 2 1/2. Multiplying by 1/3 instead of dividing gives 5/18. The answer 1 1/2 would come from a different dividend altogether. And 2/9 does not arise from any correct step here.

Write 0.45 as a fraction in lowest terms.

• a.45/10
• b.4/5
• c.1/45
• d.9/20✓

The digits end in the hundredths place, so 0.45 is 45/100, and dividing both parts by 5 gives 9/20. Writing 45/10 misplaces the decimal by a factor of ten. Four fifths is 0.8, nearly twice as large. And 1/45 inverts the number entirely.

Which list puts 5/8, 0.6 and 58% in order from least to greatest?

• a.58%, 5/8, 0.6
• b.5/8, 0.6, 58%
• c.0.6, 58%, 5/8
• d.58%, 0.6, 5/8✓

Convert everything to decimals: 58% is 0.58, 0.6 stays as it is, and 5/8 is 0.625, so the order runs 0.58, 0.60, 0.625. Reversing that order puts the largest first. Placing 0.6 below 58% mistakes 0.6 for 0.06. And putting 5/8 before 0.6 treats eight parts as smaller than they are.

What is −7 − (−3)?

• a.4
• b.−10
• c.−4✓
• d.10

Subtracting a negative is the same as adding its opposite, so −7 − (−3) becomes −7 + 3, which is −4. Treating the two minus signs as one gives −10. Changing the sign of the first number as well gives 10. And 4 has the right size but the wrong sign, since the result stays below zero.

What is the product of −3 and −5?

• a.8
• b.15✓
• c.−15
• d.−8

Two negative factors give a positive product, so (−3)(−5) = 15. Keeping the answer negative ignores that rule. The value −8 comes from adding rather than multiplying. And 8 is that same sum with the sign dropped.

Evaluate |−9| − |4|.

• a.13
• b.5✓
• c.−13
• d.−5

Absolute value strips the sign, so this is 9 − 4, which equals 5. Adding the two values after stripping the signs gives 13. Keeping the first number negative and then subtracting gives −13. And −5 reverses the order of the subtraction.

A 12-ounce bottle of juice costs $3.60. What is the price per ounce?

• a.$0.30✓
• b.$3.33
• c.$0.33
• d.$4.32

A unit rate divides cost by quantity: $3.60 ÷ 12 = $0.30 per ounce. Dividing the ounces by the dollars gives 3.33 and answers a question nobody asked. The figure $0.33 comes from dividing by 11 or from a slip in the decimal. And multiplying rather than dividing gives $4.32.

A price rises from $40 to $50. What is the percent increase?

• a.25%✓
• b.20%
• c.125%
• d.10%

Percent change divides the increase by the original amount: 10 ÷ 40 = 0.25, or 25%. Dividing by the new price instead gives 20%, which is the classic trap in these problems. The raw increase of 10 dollars is not itself 10 percent. And 125% is the new price as a share of the old, not the increase.

8 is what percent of 32?

• a.4%
• b.40%
• c.400%
• d.25%✓

Divide the part by the whole and convert: 8 ÷ 32 = 0.25, which is 25%. The value 4 is the result of dividing 32 by 8, the reverse comparison. Forty percent of 32 would be 12.8. And 400% would make 8 four times the whole rather than a quarter of it.

An item costs $24 and sales tax is 7%. What is the total?

• a.$24.07
• b.$25.68✓
• c.$1.68
• d.$31.00

The tax is 0.07 × $24 = $1.68, and adding it to the price gives $25.68; multiplying $24 by 1.07 does both steps at once. Adding seven cents treats the percent as a flat amount. Adding seven dollars treats it as dollars rather than percent. And $1.68 is the tax alone, not the total.