What the exam asks
| Family | Typical stem | What the passage gives you |
|---|---|---|
| Illustrate a claim | Which quotation from the poem (novel, play, essay, speech) most effectively illustrates the claim? | A sentence or two about a literary work that ends in a specific claim, for example that a character hides kindness behind gruffness |
| Support a hypothesis | Which finding, if true, would most directly support the researchers’ hypothesis? | A short research summary that states a hypothesis, often with the reasoning behind it |
| Weaken a claim | Which finding, if true, would most directly weaken the historian’s argument? | An argument or hypothesis and, usually, the evidence it rests on |
Quotation items draw on poetry, novels, plays and speeches, including older works. Finding items come from the natural sciences, social sciences and history.
Core ideas
Step 1: split the claim into parts
Nearly every claim has two or three parts, and the correct evidence matches all of them. For “the speaker contrasts the oak’s steady endurance with the speaker’s own frailty”:
- the oak endures;
- the speaker is frail;
- the two are contrasted.
A quotation praising the oak’s endurance, however vivid, fails parts 2 and 3. That half-match is the most common wrong answer in this skill.
Quotation items: match the claim, not the topic
All four quotations come from the same work, so all four share its topic. Only one matches the claim. Match what the claim requires:
| If the claim says… | …the quotation must show |
|---|---|
| X seems A but is really B | both A and B, with A covering or hiding B |
| X comes to realize / changes | the after: the realization or the new state (not just the before) |
| X contrasts A with B | both A and B, set against each other |
| X values A over B | a choice or trade-off in which A wins |
| the setting or mood has quality Q | an image that clearly carries Q (not its opposite) |
Finding items: know exactly what the hypothesis predicts
Break the hypothesis into four pieces:
- Variables: what is said to affect what (leg length → running performance).
- Direction: more or less, faster or slower, earlier or later.
- Mechanism or level: why, and at what level (individual birds adjusting, or populations evolving).
- Specificity: a response to caterpillar feeding specifically, or to any damage?
Then state the prediction: “If this hypothesis is true, we should see ___.” Support is a finding that fills that blank, ideally one that rival explanations would not predict. Weaken is a finding in which the prediction fails, the effect appears without the proposed cause, or a different factor explains the result.
| Hypothesis type | Strongest support | Strongest weakener |
|---|---|---|
| Causal (A causes B) | B changes when A changes and other factors are held equal | the effect vanishes once a confound (such as sleep) is held equal |
| Comparative (group 1 differs because of C) | groups that differ only in C differ in the outcome | groups that differ in C show no difference |
| Specific trigger (response to X, not Y) | response after X but not after a similar Y | the same response after Y |
| “X rather than Y” | evidence only X predicts | evidence only Y predicts |
| Argument resting on evidence E | — | a finding showing E doesn’t lead to the conclusion |
“If true” means accept it, and relevant isn’t enough
Treat every finding as fact and judge only its logical effect. Distractors mention the same animals, towns or people, so ask whether the finding involves the hypothesis’s specific variables and prediction. If the hypothesis and its rival both predict a finding, it supports neither over the other.
Worked examples
Exam technique
- Read the claim first. In quotation items it is usually the passage’s last sentence. Note its key words: hides, comes to realize, contrasts, more than.
- Split, then scan. Check each option against each part and cross out any option missing one, however beautiful its language.
- For findings, write the prediction (“If true, we’d see ___”) before reading the choices.
- Check the stem’s verb. Many misses come from spotting the right relationship and then choosing its opposite (support instead of weaken).
- Grid multi-part hypotheses. When researchers must show “both A and B”, check A and B for each choice. Each distractor usually satisfies only one.
- Timing: 60–80 seconds. Scan long quotations for the required elements instead of reading them as poetry.
Common mistakes
Quick recap
- Two families: quotations that illustrate a literary claim, and findings that support or weaken a hypothesis.
- Split every claim into parts, and the correct evidence matches all of them.
- For change claims, the quotation must show the after. For contrast claims, it must show both sides.
- Turn each hypothesis into a prediction (“we should see ___”) and look for that result.
- The best support favors the hypothesis over its rival. The best weakener breaks its prediction or reveals a confound.
- “If true” means accept the finding and judge only its logic.
- Check the stem’s verb (support or weaken) before you commit.