SAT ELA Exam 6 (Full Module 2)

Question 1
Answer: B. qualify

Explanation:
The sentence says the report endorses the zoning policy, so the report is generally favorable. However, it also says that the evidence for some projected benefits is still preliminary. That means the endorsement is not absolute or unconditional. Instead, the report is adding a limitation or condition to its support. The word qualify means to limit, modify, or make a statement less absolute, so it fits perfectly.

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• attenuate means weaken or reduce in force, but the sentence is not mainly about weakening the recommendation overall; it is about adding a condition to it.
• exaggerate means overstate, which is the opposite of what the sentence is doing.
• obscure means make unclear, but the sentence is actually clarifying the limits of the recommendation, not hiding them.

Question 2
Answer: C. The passage suggests that the reform’s significance lies less in its stated goals than in the varied ways local officials interpreted and enforced it.

Explanation:
The passage first explains what the reform was supposed to do: it was written broadly in order to standardize local procedures. But then the passage shifts to what actually happened in practice: officials in different regions interpreted it differently, and those different interpretations produced sharply uneven outcomes. That contrast is the key to the main idea. The passage is not saying the reform mattered because of cost, national adoption, or deliberate regional variation. Instead, it is saying the reform’s importance comes from the fact that its real-world impact depended heavily on local interpretation and enforcement.

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• The passage never mentions maintenance cost.
• It never says the reform was important because it was the first adopted nationally.
• It does not claim the reform was intentionally designed to produce different results in different regions.

Question 3
Answer: A. It introduces evidence that complicates the explanation proposed in the first sentence.

Explanation:
The first sentence gives a causal explanation: researchers originally thought the marsh grass declined mainly because soil salinity increased. The second sentence introduces new evidence about timing: the decline had already begun before salinity rose most sharply. That matters because it weakens the neat cause-and-effect relationship proposed in the first sentence. The second sentence does not completely disprove the first explanation, but it does make it less certain and suggests that another factor may also have contributed. That is why “complicates” is the best description.

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• The second sentence is not just restating the first in more technical terms.
• It does not shift to public policy.
• It certainly does not fully confirm the first sentence’s claim.

Question 4
Answer: B. Text 1 presents a broad trend, whereas Text 2 identifies a condition under which that trend appears weaker.

Explanation:
Text 1 presents a general scientific pattern: many alpine wildflowers bloom earlier in years when spring temperatures rise earlier. It also gives a possible reason: warmer temperatures speed up development. Text 2 does not deny that trend, but it adds an important qualification. In certain high-elevation valleys, flowering dates changed only slightly even when springs were unusually warm. The reason given is persistent snowpack, which delayed exposure to the conditions plants actually need for growth. So Text 2 is not merely repeating Text 1, and it is not disproving it altogether. Instead, it is identifying a specific condition in which the broad pattern is weaker.

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• Text 2 does more than restate Text 1.
• Text 2 does not claim warming has no effect at all.
• Both texts are clearly about flowering timing, so they are not unrelated.

Question 5
Answer: A. Text 2 provides a concrete case that extends the claim in Text 1 by showing how the same principle can affect a different kind of decision.

Explanation:
Text 1 is theoretical. It explains a broad idea: rules designed for fairness can create inefficiencies when they are applied uniformly to groups with different starting conditions. Text 2 then gives a specific example from transportation planning. A bus policy that looked fair on paper ended up producing long wait times in certain neighborhoods because it ignored local differences. That means Text 2 takes the abstract principle in Text 1 and shows how it plays out in practice. This is exactly the relationship described in choice A.

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• Text 2 does not reject the idea that fairness and efficiency can be balanced; it just shows that doing so is difficult.
• The texts are not mainly about whether rules should be explicit.
• Text 2 does not narrow the principle to economics; it illustrates it in transportation.

Question 6
Answer: A. The final sentence limits how broadly the earlier findings should be generalized.

Explanation:
The passage begins with a strong positive result: the literacy interventions led to substantial gains in several large suburban districts. But the second sentence immediately adds an important caution. All of the districts shared unusual advantages: low student-teacher ratios and extensive after-school staffing. That means the study’s results may depend partly on those favorable conditions. In other words, the second sentence warns readers not to assume the same results would necessarily appear in districts without those advantages. Its function is to limit generalization.

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• It is not simply restating the main claim.
• It does not introduce a contradictory second study.
• It does not shift into policy recommendations.

Question 7
Answer: B. ; however,

Explanation:
This sentence contains two complete independent clauses:

1. “The earliest copies of the manuscript are incomplete”
2. “later versions preserve enough of the argument to allow scholars to reconstruct its main claims with confidence”

The word however is a transitional adverb linking these two full clauses. Standard punctuation requires a semicolon before however and a comma after however. That is why ; however, is correct.

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• , however, creates a comma splice because a comma alone cannot join two independent clauses.
• : however, is incorrect because a colon is not the right mark before a transitional adverb in this structure.
• however with no punctuation creates a run-on sentence.

Question 8
Answer: A. its

Explanation:
The sentence needs a possessive pronoun showing that the guidance software belongs to the aerospace firm’s system. The correct singular possessive pronoun is its.

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• it’s means “it is,” so it does not show possession.
• their and theirs are plural and do not agree with the singular noun firm.

Question 9
Answer: A. showing

Explanation:
The sentence says the revised chart compared several variables, and then it needs a word that smoothly shows the result of that comparison. The participle showing works correctly because it introduces a modifying phrase explaining what the comparison revealed: “showing how the watershed had changed over time.”

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• showed would incorrectly create another main verb.
• shows also creates faulty sentence structure.
• to show does not fit the intended grammatical relationship here.

Question 10
Answer: C. qualify

Explanation:
The review board supports the restoration plan overall, but it adds an important limitation: some projected benefits depend on climate models whose long-term accuracy is uncertain. That means the endorsement is being made less absolute. The board is not withdrawing support, but it is attaching a condition to it. The word that best captures that move is qualify.

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• equivocate means speak ambiguously or evasively, which is not what the board is doing.
• temper can mean soften, but qualify is more exact because the sentence is specifically about limiting the force of a claim.
• corroborate means confirm with evidence, which is the opposite of what the sentence suggests.

Question 11
Answer: B. The passage suggests that the reform’s long-term significance lies less in its stated objectives than in the different ways local officials interpreted and enforced it.

Explanation:
The passage emphasizes that the reform was intended to standardize local practice, but what actually mattered was how different administrators interpreted several provisions differently. Some used it narrowly, while others used it broadly, and those differences produced sharply different outcomes. So the central point is not cost, deliberate design for different regions, or historical unimportance. It is that the reform’s long-term significance came from variation in interpretation and enforcement.

Question 12
Answer: A. It introduces evidence that complicates the causal explanation proposed in the first sentence.

Explanation:
The first sentence offers a straightforward explanation: rising water temperatures caused the crab population to decline. The second sentence complicates that explanation by saying oxygen levels had already fallen sharply before the most significant warming occurred. That timing matters because it suggests another environmental factor may have been involved earlier than the proposed cause. The explanation is therefore made less certain and more complex.

Question 13
Answer: B. Text 1 presents a broad relationship, whereas Text 2 identifies a condition under which that relationship becomes less consistent.

Explanation:
Text 1 says many amphibian species breed earlier when spring warming happens earlier. Text 2 introduces a case in which that relationship weakens: wetlands at higher elevations where snowmelt remained delayed. In those places, breeding dates changed only slightly because access to breeding pools and water temperatures remained limited. So Text 2 qualifies the general pattern, rather than simply repeating or rejecting it.

Question 14
Answer: A. Text 2 provides a practical example that applies the abstract principle outlined in Text 1.

Explanation:
Text 1 presents a broad theoretical claim about fairness and inefficiency. Text 2 takes that abstract principle and shows it in action through a bus-allocation policy. The transportation example demonstrates how a rule that looks fair in theory can create inefficient results in practice when local differences are ignored. So Text 2 functions as an applied example of Text 1’s principle.

Question 15
Answer: A. The final sentence limits how broadly the earlier findings should be generalized.

Explanation:
The first sentence reports strong gains from summer mathematics programs. The second sentence immediately qualifies that result by noting that all participating districts had unusual advantages, including low student-teacher ratios, tutoring support, and longer summer sessions. Those features mean the results may not carry over to districts lacking similar conditions. So the function of the second sentence is to narrow generalizability.

Question 16
Answer: B. ; however,

Explanation:
Again, the sentence contains two complete clauses joined by the transition however. That construction requires a semicolon before however and a comma after it. So ; however, is the correct punctuation.

Question 17
Answer: C. its

Explanation:
The noun contractor is singular, so the sentence needs the singular possessive pronoun its to show that the navigation software belongs to the contractor’s system.

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• theirs and their are plural.
• it’s means “it is.”

Question 18
Answer: D. complicate

Explanation:
The report at first seemed to provide a simple explanation for the drop in voter turnout. But later archival evidence suggested that regional enforcement practices differed much more than people had thought. That introduces new factors and makes the original explanation less simple. The best word is complicate.

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• underscore means emphasize.
• invalidate would mean prove completely wrong, which is too strong.
• exaggerate means overstate, which does not fit.

Question 19
Answer: B. The passage suggests that the policy’s importance lies less in its original language than in the sharply different ways local officials interpreted and enforced it.

Explanation:
The passage’s key contrast is between the policy’s broad, standardizing language and the very different ways local officials used it. Those differences in application are what gave the policy its historical significance. So the main idea is about uneven interpretation and enforcement, not cost or deliberate regional variation.

Question 20
Answer: A. It introduces timing evidence that makes the explanation in the first sentence less certain.

Explanation:
The original explanation is that bird populations fell because insect availability declined for a long period. But the second sentence says nesting success had already started to fall before insect counts reached their lowest levels. That timing evidence weakens confidence in the original explanation because it suggests the decline may have begun before the supposed main cause reached its worst point.

Question 21
Answer: B. Text 1 presents a general trend, whereas Text 2 identifies conditions under which that trend may weaken.

Explanation:
Text 1 gives a general pattern: earlier spring warming tends to produce earlier migration. Text 2 adds a limiting condition: in certain northern habitats, snow cover and delayed insect emergence reduce the usual effect of early warming. So Text 2 is qualifying the trend, not denying it.

Question 22
Answer: A. Text 2 offers a concrete case that applies the abstract principle described in Text 1.

Explanation:
Text 1 gives a general idea about how fairness rules can create inefficiencies when applied uniformly across very different circumstances. Text 2 shows that principle operating in a real transit policy. Therefore, Text 2 is a concrete case illustrating the abstract claim in Text 1.

Question 23
Answer: A. The second sentence limits how broadly the earlier finding should be generalized.

Explanation:
The study reports strong gains from reading-support programs, but the second sentence notes that all studied districts had unusual advantages. That means the results may not apply just as strongly in places without those resources. The second sentence therefore functions as a qualification on the broader applicability of the findings.

Question 24
Answer: B. ; however,

Explanation:
This is the same punctuation rule as the earlier semicolon question. Two independent clauses are joined by the transitional adverb however, so the correct form is ; however,.

Question 25
Answer: B. that

Explanation:
The clause “_____ appears to date from a later phase of construction…” is a restrictive clause identifying which carved panel is being discussed. For restrictive clauses modifying things, that is the standard choice.

• which is less standard here without commas.
• who and whom apply to people, not objects.

Question 26
Answer: D. tentative

Explanation:
The commission is still waiting for measurements from several field teams, and the map is “likely to be revised.” That means the map is not final. The best word is tentative, which means uncertain, not settled, or subject to change.

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• provisional is close in meaning, but here tentative is the sharper fit for something still awaiting final review.
• equitable means fair.
• cumulative means growing by addition.

Question 27
Answer: D. corroborate

Explanation:
The field notes match the official survey in dates, locations, and sequence. That means they support or confirm the accepted account rather than challenge it. The best word is corroborate, which means confirm with additional evidence.

Why the other answers are incorrect:

• attenuate means weaken.
• qualify means limit or modify.
• exaggerate means overstate.

Next Step:
Log My Score
Return to English Hub