Rhetorical Synthesis
Select and connect accurate notes to fulfill the writer's complete purpose.
By the end, you should be able to:
- Translate a rhetorical goal into specific requirements for content, audience, emphasis, and scope.
- Select the notes needed for that goal and distinguish accurate but irrelevant details from unsupported claims.
- Combine information without changing its meaning, including comparisons, sequences, study findings, and numerical relationships.
- Evaluate every choice against both the evidence and the complete task, then explain why the closest competitor falls short.
Reading position saved on this browser; this is not a completion record.
2.1 Turn the goal into selection criteria
A synthesis question asks you to do a particular writing job with a small set of notes. It does not ask for the most complete inventory of the research. Begin with the goal: identify its action, its subject, and any limits. "Explain why a material was chosen for outdoor signs" requires a reason for that choice; the material's inventor and color might be accurate details that do nothing to explain it.
Turn those requirements into a short private checklist before evaluating the choices. Then mark the notes that can satisfy each requirement. A useful checklist might be "name the selected material + connect its property to outdoor use." This step prevents an appealing fact from redefining the task. Read the selected notes together: a design requirement in one note and a tested property in another may form the needed explanation.
Finally, test both accuracy and purpose. A choice can pass the accuracy check while failing the purpose check. Extra information is not automatically disqualifying, and the shortest sentence is not automatically strongest. The decisive question is whether the sentence performs the complete requested job clearly, without unsupported connections. Use your checklist as a filter, not as a demand that the answer repeat the prompt's exact words.
Goal language | Information to seek |
|---|---|
Explain why X was selected | A requirement and a property that meets it |
Emphasize X's contribution | What X did and why that action matters to the stated topic |
Describe a limitation | The condition that restricts a result or use |
W2.1: Select the reason, not the whole project
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. A design team created reusable identification tags for plants in a coastal garden.
2. The tags needed to remain readable after repeated exposure to salt spray.
3. The team tested printed paper tags and engraved ceramic tags under the same spray conditions.
4. After testing, the paper tags were illegible, but the engraved ceramic tags remained readable.
5. The team selected ceramic tags, which took longer to produce than paper tags and came in two colors.
The student wants to explain why the team selected ceramic tags for the coastal garden. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
A. The team selected ceramic tags for a coastal garden after testing two tag materials, and the ceramic tags came in two colors.
B. The team selected ceramic tags because their engravings remained readable after salt-spray testing, meeting the coastal garden's need for durable identification.
C. The ceramic tags selected for the coastal garden came in two colors and required more production time than the paper tags.
D. The team tested paper and ceramic tags under identical conditions to investigate how salt spray affected the readability of plant identifiers.
Practice this lesson: 2.07, 2.08, 2.09.
Show worked solutionHide worked solution for W2.1
Answer: B
Chosen sentence: The team selected ceramic tags because their engravings remained readable after salt-spray testing, meeting the coastal garden's need for durable identification.
- Reduce the goal to "explain the selection of ceramic tags." A list of project details will not supply the reason.
- Connect the readability requirement in note 2 with the test result in note 4; note 5 identifies the chosen material.
- Choice B states that the tested property met the requirement, making the reason for the choice explicit.
- Check the tempting procedural answer D: it explains what the test investigated, but leaves the selection and its reason unstated.
Evidence from the notes: Coastal need for readable identifiers: notes 1-2. Ceramic engravings remained readable in the test: note 4. Ceramic was the selected material: note 5.
Goal check: B names the chosen material and connects its successful test result to the garden's stated requirement.
Why A fails: Accurate, but the testing and color facts do not tell the reader why ceramic was selected.
Why C fails: Accurate, but production time and colors do not establish the benefit that satisfied the garden's need.
Why D fails: Accurate, but this describes the test's purpose without reporting the decisive result or explaining the selection.
Key takeaway: Use the goal to identify the connection the sentence must make, not just the facts it must mention.
2.2 Introduce a subject to the specified audience
An introduction gives readers the context they need for the writer's purpose. For an unfamiliar person, that often means an identity or role plus the contribution relevant to the topic. For an unfamiliar work, it may mean the creator, the kind of work, and its distinguishing feature. The prompt determines which of these details matter; there is no fixed biographical formula.
First, underline the audience condition. A reader unfamiliar with a composer may need to know that the person composes music. A reader already familiar with the composer may instead need an explanation of a particular project. Next, locate the minimum useful orientation in the notes. Combine it with the detail the goal asks you to highlight. Check pronouns and titles: a sentence can be grammatically complete yet give a new reader too little context to understand its subject.
Do not assume that familiar audiences know every related fact, or that unfamiliar audiences need every date and award. Familiarity is limited to what the prompt states. Likewise, a title alone does not establish that something is a novel, installation, or research project. When choices differ in background detail, decide which background helps this audience accomplish the specified purpose rather than rewarding either maximum explanation or maximum brevity.
Audience condition | Useful introduction |
|---|---|
Unfamiliar with the person | Identity or role plus the requested contribution |
Knows the person, not the work | Type of work plus its relevant feature |
Knows the work, not the technique | Technique's meaning plus its role in that work |
W2.2: Orient readers to an unfamiliar artist
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. Mira Solen is a textile artist who works with discarded climbing rope.
2. Solen created the installation Tide Ladder in 2024.
3. Tide Ladder consists of panels made from discarded climbing rope and arranged to resemble a rising waterline.
4. The installation invites viewers to consider how coastal spaces change over time.
5. Solen learned knotting techniques from a sailing instructor before beginning her textile practice.
The student wants to introduce Solen to an audience unfamiliar with her, emphasizing the subject explored in Tide Ladder. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
A. Created in 2024, Tide Ladder arranges discarded climbing rope into panels resembling a rising waterline and explores changes in coastal spaces over time.
B. Mira Solen learned knotting from a sailing instructor before becoming a textile artist, and she created the rope installation Tide Ladder in 2024.
C. Textile artist Mira Solen used discarded climbing rope for the panels of Tide Ladder, an installation that she created in 2024.
D. Textile artist Mira Solen explores changes in coastal spaces through Tide Ladder, an installation of discarded rope panels resembling a rising waterline.
Practice this lesson: 2.10, 2.11, 2.12.
Show worked solutionHide worked solution for W2.2
Answer: D
Chosen sentence: Textile artist Mira Solen explores changes in coastal spaces through Tide Ladder, an installation of discarded rope panels resembling a rising waterline.
- The goal has three requirements: introduce Solen, orient unfamiliar readers, and emphasize the installation's subject.
- Note 1 provides Solen's identity; notes 3-4 connect the work's form to its subject.
- D combines that orientation and focus without requiring prior knowledge of either the person or the title.
- A explains the work well, but never identifies Solen; C introduces her but leaves the requested subject unexplained.
Evidence from the notes: Solen's identity as a textile artist: note 1. Installation and panels made from discarded climbing rope to resemble a rising waterline: notes 2-3. Exploration of changing coastal spaces: note 4.
Goal check: D identifies Solen and explicitly states the subject explored by the named work.
Why A fails: Accurate about the installation, but does not introduce or even name Solen, the person specified in the goal.
Why B fails: Accurate biographical context, but the training and date do not explain the subject explored in Tide Ladder.
Why C fails: Accurate introduction to the artist and material, but omits the requested focus on changes in coastal spaces.
Key takeaway: Match the amount and kind of background to the audience and to the particular feature the goal emphasizes.
2.3 Explain a concept or process
An explanation makes an idea understandable by showing what it means or how its parts work together. A definition identifies a concept's essential feature; a process explanation connects an input, action, or condition to an outcome. A sentence that merely names an application or announces that a process is useful may be accurate without explaining the requested idea.
Build a small chain from the relevant notes: "when this happens, this component changes, producing that result." Include only links the notes support. For a definition, ask what distinguishes the concept from neighboring ideas. For a process, ask which change produces the stated outcome. Pay attention to direction: heat leaving a sample is not heat entering it, and a sensor detecting pressure is not the sensor creating pressure.
Explanations may compress steps, but compression must preserve the mechanism and any required starting or ending point. Not every question demands a complete technical account. If the goal asks how a valve closes, details about manufacturing or eventual disposal may be irrelevant. Avoid adding an intuitive scientific explanation that the notes never establish. Even a plausible connection needs evidence here; your job is to explain the supplied account, including its stated limits, rather than complete it from outside knowledge.
Sentence does this | What to check |
|---|---|
Defines a concept | Does it state the distinguishing feature? |
Explains a process | Does it connect the necessary actions in the correct direction? |
Names a use or benefit | Does that actually answer the requested how or what? |
W2.3: Preserve the mechanism
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. A prototype seedling pot uses a two-layer strip to control a small watering valve.
2. The lower layer absorbs moisture and expands; the upper layer neither absorbs moisture nor expands.
3. Unequal expansion makes the strip bend upward when the surrounding soil is wet.
4. The upward bend pushes the valve closed, stopping the flow of water into the pot.
5. The prototype was tested with bean seedlings, and its valve can also be closed by hand.
The student wants to explain how wet soil causes the prototype pot to stop receiving water. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
A. The prototype pot can stop receiving water when its valve is closed by hand, and the design was tested using bean seedlings.
B. The prototype pot uses a two-layer strip connected to a small watering valve, with one moisture-absorbing layer and one nonabsorbing layer.
C. In wet soil, the strip's lower layer expands while its upper layer does not, bending the strip upward to close the watering valve.
D. Wet soil makes both layers of the strip expand equally, causing the strip to bend upward and close the valve supplying the pot.
Practice this lesson: 2.13, 2.14, 2.15.
Show worked solutionHide worked solution for W2.3
Answer: C
Chosen sentence: In wet soil, the strip's lower layer expands while its upper layer does not, bending the strip upward to close the watering valve.
- The goal requires a causal chain from wet soil to stopped water flow, not a description of the device's parts alone.
- Use notes 2-4 in order: unequal absorption produces unequal expansion, which bends the strip and closes the valve.
- C preserves the difference between the layers and the direction of the bend, then links the bend to closure.
- Check B carefully: its components are accurate, but it leaves their movement and its consequence unexplained.
Evidence from the notes: Moisture absorption and unequal layer expansion: note 2. Upward bending under wet conditions: note 3. Bending closes the valve and stops flow: note 4.
Goal check: C explains the response to wet soil and connects that response to the valve shutting off water.
Why A fails: Accurate, but explains manual closure and names the test plants instead of explaining the response to wet soil.
Why B fails: Accurate component description, but does not connect moisture to bending or bending to the valve's closure.
Why D fails: Contradicts note 2: the layers do not expand equally, and unequal expansion is the stated reason for the bend.
Key takeaway: When the goal asks how something happens, preserve the links that turn a list of parts into an explanation.
2.4 Use a specific example of a stated idea
An example is a particular case that exhibits the defining feature of a broader idea. To choose one, first translate the idea into a test. If the idea is that an object was repurposed, the example must show an earlier use and a different later use. Describing an old object, an unusual object, or a repaired object does not necessarily pass that test.
Then find a note or combination of notes that demonstrates the required feature. A strong answer often names a concrete case and includes the detail that makes it an instance of the idea. It need not repeat the general statement word for word, but the connection should be clear from the supplied information. Distinguish a specific example from a definition, a claim that examples exist, or a neighboring concept.
Watch the full wording of the goal. "An example from the theater project" limits which case may be selected. "An example of cooperation between species" requires both the relevant participants and the cooperative relationship; merely placing species together is insufficient. Do not reject another genuine example because it is less vivid. If several notes qualify, another stated condition must distinguish the best choice. The safest reasoning identifies the feature and the evidence that the selected case displays it.
Broader idea | An example needs |
|---|---|
Repurposing | An old use and a distinct new use |
Shared responsibility | At least two participants carrying out parts of the responsibility |
A material change | A concrete before-and-after property, not merely a new location |
W2.4: Demonstrate what makes the case qualify
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. For this project, repurposing means using an object for a function different from its original one.
2. A neighborhood theater obtained several wooden shipping crates that had carried lighting equipment.
3. The theater converted the crates into seats for its outdoor audience.
4. The theater also repaired a damaged spotlight and returned it to lighting performances.
5. Volunteers painted the stage backdrop and moved unused curtains into a storage room.
The student wants to give a specific example of repurposing in the theater project. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
A. The theater repurposed wooden crates that had carried lighting equipment by converting them into seats for the audience at its outdoor performances.
B. The theater repaired a damaged spotlight and returned it to use in performances, extending the working life of an existing piece of equipment.
C. The theater's volunteers painted the stage backdrop and moved unused curtains to storage while preparing the space for its outdoor audience during the project.
D. Repurposing involves giving an existing object a function different from its original one, a practice relevant to projects such as the neighborhood theater's.
Practice this lesson: 2.16, 2.17, 2.18.
Show worked solutionHide worked solution for W2.4
Answer: A
Chosen sentence: The theater repurposed wooden crates that had carried lighting equipment by converting them into seats for the audience at its outdoor performances.
- Define the membership test from note 1: the same object must receive a different function.
- Combine notes 2-3: the crates first carried equipment and later served as seats.
- A states both functions, so the reader can see why this particular case fits the idea.
- B is the nearest conceptual distractor: repairing a spotlight extends its use but does not change its lighting function.
Evidence from the notes: Definition of repurposing: note 1. Crates' original shipping function: note 2. Crates' new seating function: note 3.
Goal check: A provides a specific theater object and the change of function that makes it repurposing.
Why B fails: Accurate, but repairing the spotlight restores its original function; note 4 does not describe a different use.
Why C fails: Accurate, but painting a backdrop and storing curtains do not demonstrate a change from an object's original function.
Why D fails: Accurate as a definition and general connection, but gives no specific object or action that exemplifies the idea.
Key takeaway: Show the feature that makes the case an example; naming a related activity does not establish the connection.
2.5 Emphasize a meaningful similarity
A similarity compares two or more subjects on a shared feature. Start by identifying the subjects and the dimension named in the goal: purpose, method, material, structure, or result. The sentence should make that common feature visible. Two facts placed in the same sentence do not automatically establish a similarity, even when both are relevant to the general topic.
Build a parallel statement from the notes: "Both X and Y use method M," or "X and Y share purpose P, although their methods differ." These are reasoning patterns, not required answer wording. Check that each half of the comparison has evidence. If one project reduces water use and another measures water use, you cannot group them as projects that reduced use merely because both concern water.
Keep the similarity at the supported level. The same goal does not imply the same process, and the same type of result does not imply equal numerical results. A difference may appear in a correct answer if it helps frame the requested similarity, but it should not replace that emphasis. When a goal names a comparison dimension, an accurate similarity on another dimension is off-goal. When the goal is broad, do not invent an unstated preference for one true similarity over another.
Notes establish | Safe common claim |
|---|---|
Same purpose, different procedures | Both pursue that purpose |
Different amounts of improvement | Both improved, if both results show improvement |
Related topics, only one shared method stated | Do not infer an identical method |
W2.5: Match the requested dimension
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. The Brookline and Mesa projects both collected observations about neighborhood bird activity.
2. The Brookline project invited residents to identify birds by matching photographs to a supplied guide.
3. The Mesa project invited residents to identify bird calls by matching recordings to a supplied audio guide.
4. Both projects accepted observations from residents with no previous bird-identification training.
5. Brookline recorded sightings at sunrise, while Mesa collected recordings throughout the afternoon.
The student wants to emphasize a similarity in who could participate in the two projects. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
A. Brookline residents identified birds using photographs, whereas Mesa residents matched recorded bird calls to an audio guide when submitting their neighborhood observations.
B. Both the Brookline and Mesa projects welcomed neighborhood residents who lacked prior bird-identification training to contribute observations about local bird activity.
C. The Brookline and Mesa projects both gathered information about neighborhood bird activity, although one collected sunrise sightings and the other collected afternoon recordings.
D. Brookline gathered sightings at sunrise, and Mesa gathered recordings in the afternoon, giving each project a different daily period for observing birds.
Practice this lesson: 2.19, 2.20, 2.21.
Show worked solutionHide worked solution for W2.5
Answer: B
Chosen sentence: Both the Brookline and Mesa projects welcomed neighborhood residents who lacked prior bird-identification training to contribute observations about local bird activity.
- The requested dimension is participant eligibility, not the projects' topic, identification methods, or observation schedules.
- Note 4 explicitly supports the same eligibility condition for both projects.
- B states that shared condition and identifies both subjects without claiming they used the same observation method.
- C contains a real similarity, but it concerns the research topic rather than who could participate.
Evidence from the notes: The two projects and their bird observations: note 1. Residents without previous identification training were eligible in both: note 4.
Goal check: B compares participant eligibility and makes the shared openness to untrained residents explicit.
Why A fails: Accurate comparison of methods, but contrasts how residents identified birds rather than comparing who could participate.
Why C fails: Accurate topic similarity and schedule difference, but does not state the requested similarity in eligible participants.
Why D fails: Accurate schedule contrast, but supplies neither the participant condition nor an emphasis on similarity.
Key takeaway: A true similarity can still miss the goal when it compares the wrong feature.
2.6 Emphasize a difference on a shared dimension
A useful contrast compares the same kind of information about each subject. If the goal asks how two translations handle a recurring word, compare each translator's treatment of that word. Contrasting one translator's publication date with the other's vocabulary does not explain that difference. Establish the shared comparison dimension before deciding which unequal facts matter.
Create a two-column mental table: subject X and subject Y, with the requested feature as the row label. Fill both cells from the notes. The answer should state or clearly imply the difference between those entries. Useful contrasts can concern categories, methods, timing, degrees, or outcomes. They need not declare one subject superior. Preserve any conditions attached to each entry; results under different test conditions cannot automatically establish an overall ranking.
Check comparative language carefully. "More," "less," "earlier," and "only" make specific claims that require evidence. A feature documented for X is not necessarily absent from Y unless the notes establish that absence. Also separate the comparison from its explanation: notes may show that two choices differ without explaining why. A correct sentence can include shared context, but that context should help readers understand the requested difference, not substitute a general similarity for the contrast.
Proposed contrast | Required support |
|---|---|
X used one method; Y used another | Evidence for each method |
X had more than Y | Comparable quantities with compatible units and scope |
Only X had a feature | Evidence for X's presence and Y's absence |
W2.6: Keep the comparison on one row
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. Two teams restored different sections of a painted wooden screen.
2. Team Alder removed surface dust from its section with a soft brush.
3. Team Birch removed surface dust from its section with a low-suction vacuum.
4. Both teams then filled small cracks with the same type of reversible filler.
5. Team Alder worked in March, and Team Birch worked in April; neither report compared the methods' effectiveness.
The student wants to emphasize the difference between the teams' methods of removing surface dust. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
A. Team Alder worked on the painted screen in March, whereas Team Birch restored its section in April and also removed surface dust.
B. Both restoration teams removed surface dust and then filled small cracks in their sections of the painted wooden screen using the same reversible filler.
C. Team Alder's soft brush removed surface dust more effectively than Team Birch's low-suction vacuum, although both teams used the same filler afterward.
D. To remove surface dust from the painted screen, Team Alder used a soft brush, whereas Team Birch used a low-suction vacuum.
Practice this lesson: 2.22, 2.23, 2.24.
Show worked solutionHide worked solution for W2.6
Answer: D
Chosen sentence: To remove surface dust from the painted screen, Team Alder used a soft brush, whereas Team Birch used a low-suction vacuum.
- The shared row is "method of removing surface dust." Fill Alder's cell with brush and Birch's cell with low-suction vacuum.
- D compares those two entries directly, using the common restoration task to orient the reader.
- C includes the right methods but adds an effectiveness ranking that note 5 explicitly says the reports did not make.
- A offers a real difference in dates; it fails because the goal specifies dust-removal methods.
Evidence from the notes: Common object and restoration task: note 1. Alder used a soft brush: note 2. Birch used a low-suction vacuum: note 3.
Goal check: D contrasts each team's method for the same task and makes no unsupported judgment about effectiveness.
Why A fails: Accurate timing contrast, but does not identify either method of dust removal, the requested comparison dimension.
Why B fails: Accurate shared sequence and filler choice, but emphasizes similarities rather than the difference in dust-removal methods.
Why C fails: The methods are accurately identified, but the claimed effectiveness ranking is unsupported and conflicts with the reporting limit in note 5.
Key takeaway: Compare like with like, and keep an observed difference separate from an unsupported reason or ranking.
2.7 Summarize without widening the evidence
A summary compresses the notes around a central pattern. It does not earn its strength by making the broadest possible claim. First identify the group actually described: four stations, the novels in one collection, or participants in one study. Then identify the pattern within that group. Finally, check whether an exception or limitation changes the pattern enough to belong in the summary. A statement about most of a sample cannot automatically become a statement about all members of a larger population.
Quantifiers do substantial work. Some establishes at least one without, by itself, establishing that not all qualify; most requires a majority; all permits no exceptions within the stated group. If six of eight sites changed, a summary that says the sites generally changed may be supportable, but one that says every site changed is not. Prefer wording whose scope is visibly supported by the notes, especially when the goal asks you to preserve differences or exceptions.
Compression also has limits. A sentence that accurately describes one case may be too narrow to summarize several cases. A sentence that names every case may still miss their shared pattern. Ask: What can I say about this whole set, and what must I retain so that the compression does not mislead?
Notes establish | Supported summary | Unjustified expansion |
|---|---|---|
Three of four sampled groups used grants. | Most sampled groups used grants. | Groups generally depend on grants. |
Two techniques appear in all three works studied. | The three works share those techniques. | Every work by the author uses those techniques. |
W2.7: Summarizing a pattern and an exception
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. A researcher examined replacement-equipment purchases by four Bellwater community radio stations in 2023.
2. Alder, Beacon, and Cove each combined city grants with listener donations.
3. Drift funded its purchase entirely through a local business sponsorship.
4. All four replaced recording equipment at least ten years old.
5. No other stations or earlier equipment purchases were examined.
The student wants to summarize the funding pattern among the four stations while acknowledging the exception. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
A. In 2023, Alder, Beacon, and Cove used city grants and listener donations to replace recording equipment that was at least ten years old.
B. Community radio stations typically replace old equipment using a combination of city grants and listener donations, although business sponsorships are also possible.
C. For their 2023 equipment purchases, three of the four stations combined city grants with listener donations, while Drift relied entirely on a business sponsorship.
D. The four Bellwater stations all replaced recording equipment in 2023, and the researcher did not examine their earlier equipment purchases.
Practice this lesson: 2.25, 2.26, 2.27.
Show worked solutionHide worked solution for W2.7
Answer: C
Chosen sentence: For their 2023 equipment purchases, three of the four stations combined city grants with listener donations, while Drift relied entirely on a business sponsorship.
- Convert the goal into two requirements: summarize funding across the four stations and retain the station that followed a different pattern.
- Group Alder, Beacon, and Cove because note 2 gives them the same combination of funding sources; keep Drift separate because note 3 gives it a different source.
- Restrict the sentence to these stations and their 2023 purchases; note 5 provides no basis for a general claim about community radio funding.
- Choose C because it compresses the three similar cases and states the exception in the same comparison.
Evidence from the notes: The set consists of four stations and the purchases occurred in 2023: note 1. Three stations combined grants and listener donations: note 2. Drift relied entirely on a business sponsorship: note 3.
Goal check: C summarizes the majority pattern and the exception while limiting the claim to the four stations and the specified purchases.
Why A fails: The information is accurate under notes 2 and 4, but it excludes Drift, so the required exception disappears from the summary.
Why B fails: The named funding sources appear in the notes, but typically extends a four-station finding to community radio stations generally, beyond the researcher's evidence.
Why D fails: The shared replacement activity and the study boundary are accurate under notes 1, 4, and 5, but the sentence does not summarize how the purchases were funded.
Key takeaway: A useful summary preserves both the pattern and the boundaries of the evidence that supports it.
2.8 Select evidence that supports the specified claim
When the goal supplies a claim, treat that claim as the proposition your sentence must support. Translate it into a question: What observation would give a reader a reason to accept this particular statement? A date, location, or biography may be relevant to the topic without providing evidence for the claim. Look for the note that bears on the claim's actual relationship, such as coexistence, adaptability, influence, or a change in measured performance.
Build a short evidence chain: claim, relevant observation, connection. If the claim is that a designer incorporated damage into the finished appearance, visible repairs support it more directly than the designer's training or the age of the object. The answer need not mechanically repeat the claim, but the evidence should make its relevance apparent.
Do not strengthen the claim beyond what the evidence permits. One successful trial can support a statement about that trial; it cannot establish that a device always succeeds. When a causal claim attributes an effect to a particular variable, check whether the comparison controls other relevant conditions; a descriptive association does not require that same causal evidence. Finally, distinguish an answer that merely announces the claim from an answer that supplies a concrete reason for it. Repetition is not additional evidence.
W2.8: Evidence rather than background
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. Textile artist Irena Pell completed the wall hanging Mended Field in 2019 using damaged linen cloth.
2. Pell trained as a furniture restorer before making textile art.
3. She repaired tears with thick red thread, leaving every repair visible in the finished hanging.
4. Undamaged areas retained their original pale gray color.
5. The 140-centimeter-wide work was first displayed in a community arts center.
The student wants to support the claim that Pell made the cloth's earlier damage part of the finished work's visual design. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
A. In Mended Field, Pell left repairs made with thick red thread visible against the cloth's original pale gray areas, incorporating the repaired tears into its appearance.
B. Before completing the wall hanging Mended Field in 2019, Irena Pell had trained as a furniture restorer and then begun making textile art.
C. Pell's Mended Field was made from a damaged linen cloth, measures 140 centimeters wide, and was first displayed in a community arts center.
D. Pell made the cloth's earlier damage part of Mended Field's visual design by concealing every repaired tear beneath a new layer of pale gray fabric.
Practice this lesson: 2.28, 2.29, 2.30.
Show worked solutionHide worked solution for W2.8
Answer: A
Chosen sentence: In Mended Field, Pell left repairs made with thick red thread visible against the cloth's original pale gray areas, incorporating the repaired tears into its appearance.
- The claim concerns the visible role of damage in the completed object, so search for information about how the tears were treated and what viewers could see.
- Note 3 supplies the direct evidence: every red-thread repair remained visible; note 4 supplies the contrast with the original gray cloth.
- Select A because the repairs' visibility connects the earlier tears to the finished visual design without claiming why Pell chose that approach.
Evidence from the notes: The work is Pell's Mended Field: note 1. Thick red repairs remained visible: note 3. The undamaged cloth remained pale gray: note 4.
Goal check: A provides concrete visual evidence for the supplied claim, rather than substituting the artist's background or the object's dimensions.
Why B fails: The career information is accurate under note 2, but training as a restorer does not show how damage functioned in this work's appearance.
Why C fails: These facts are supported by notes 1 and 5, but using damaged cloth alone does not establish that the damage remained part of the visible design.
Why D fails: The sentence repeats the claim, but its supposed supporting detail contradicts note 3: the repairs were visible, not concealed beneath new fabric.
Key takeaway: Choose the observation that gives the reader a reason to accept the exact claim, and keep that observation accurate.
2.9 Show sequence and change over time
A goal about development or change requires more than collecting dates. Identify the entity being tracked and the dimension that changes: an author's revision, a machine's function, a population's recorded size, or the order of a process. Arrange the relevant observations in time before you choose a sentence. Then decide whether the goal asks for the complete sequence, an initial-to-final contrast, or one turning point.
Keep the time scale visible enough to support the comparison. An annual total and a single month's total do not show a decline on the same basis. Likewise, a beginning and ending value may conceal a temporary rise in between. If the goal asks how something changed throughout an observation, an accurate endpoint comparison can still be incomplete.
Chronology establishes order, not necessarily cause or intention. A bridge can be strengthened after a flood without the notes establishing that the flood prompted the work. Words such as because, led to, and in order to add relationships that dates alone do not supply. Also preserve what stayed the same when it matters to the goal: a revised design may change its material while retaining its shape. A sequence sentence should organize the evidence, not invent the story connecting it.
W2.9: Tracking a design through three versions
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. Engineer Mara Iven developed three collapsible field stool prototypes between 2016 and 2020.
2. The 2016 version had an aluminum frame and flat wooden seat.
3. The 2018 version retained the aluminum frame but replaced wood with flexible fabric.
4. The 2020 version retained the fabric seat but replaced aluminum with carbon fiber.
5. All used the same central folding hinge; reasons for changing materials were not stated.
The student wants to describe the sequence of material changes across Iven's three stool prototypes. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
A. Iven's three collapsible field stool prototypes, developed between 2016 and 2020, all folded along the same central hinge despite changes in their materials.
B. Iven first replaced the aluminum frame with carbon fiber in 2018 and then replaced the wooden seat with flexible fabric in 2020.
C. Iven's 2016 stool used an aluminum frame and wooden seat, while the 2020 version used a carbon-fiber frame and fabric seat.
D. After using aluminum and wood in 2016, Iven replaced the wooden seat with fabric in 2018 and then replaced the aluminum frame with carbon fiber in 2020.
Practice this lesson: 2.31, 2.32, 2.33.
Show worked solutionHide worked solution for W2.9
Answer: D
Chosen sentence: After using aluminum and wood in 2016, Iven replaced the wooden seat with fabric in 2018 and then replaced the aluminum frame with carbon fiber in 2020.
- List the two changing components separately: the seat changed from wood to fabric, and the frame changed from aluminum to carbon fiber.
- Use notes 2-4 to order those changes: original materials in 2016, seat change in 2018, frame change in 2020.
- Choose D because it follows both changes through all three versions; no explanation of the engineer's motives is needed or supplied.
Evidence from the notes: Aluminum frame and wooden seat in 2016: note 2. Fabric replaced wood in 2018 while the frame stayed aluminum: note 3. Carbon fiber replaced aluminum in 2020 while the fabric seat remained: note 4.
Goal check: D describes the ordered material changes across all three prototypes, including the intermediate version.
Why A fails: The shared hinge is accurate under note 5, but it emphasizes continuity rather than describing the requested material-change sequence.
Why B fails: It reverses the changes and their dates: the seat changed in 2018, and the frame changed in 2020.
Why C fails: Both endpoint descriptions are accurate, but omitting the 2018 prototype leaves out the order in which the two materials changed.
Key takeaway: Track what changes, when it changes, and whether the goal requires intermediate stages as well as endpoints.
2.10 Separate a study's purpose, method, and findings
Research notes often contain three different kinds of information. The purpose is the question the researchers intended to investigate. The method is what they did to investigate it. The finding is what their measurements or analysis showed. Mark these roles before reading the choices, because each can sound informative while serving a different goal.
Watch the verbs. Researchers may seek to determine whether a sound affects recall, ask participants to hear a sound, and find a difference in recall. The first states a purpose, the second a method, and the third a finding. A study's purpose does not imply that the expected result occurred. Conversely, a procedural detail does not report an outcome simply because it includes a number, such as the number of participants.
Findings also carry limits. A reported association should remain an association unless the notes justify a causal conclusion. Failure to establish a difference does not prove the treatments identical for every person. If the goal asks for both a purpose and a finding, include both and preserve any qualification needed to characterize the result accurately. Do not let an appealing result replace the original research question, or let a detailed procedure crowd out the requested conclusion.
Role | Question it answers | Typical signal |
|---|---|---|
Purpose | What did researchers want to learn? | To investigate whether... |
Method | What did researchers do? | Participants completed... |
Finding | What did the evidence show? | The recorded scores were... |
W2.10: Reporting the research question
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. Niko Saren's team investigated whether background rhythm affected adults' memory for symbol sequences.
2. Forty adults each viewed sequences under two conditions: repeating drum rhythm and silence.
3. Condition order varied across participants, who later selected symbols they had seen.
4. The team recorded the percentage selected correctly in each condition.
5. Average accuracy was 76% with rhythm and 75% in silence; analysis did not establish a reliable difference.
The student wants to state the purpose of Saren's study. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
A. In Saren's study, forty adults viewed symbol sequences with a repeating drum rhythm and in silence before selecting symbols they remembered seeing.
B. Saren's team sought to determine whether hearing a background rhythm affected adults' ability to remember a sequence of symbols they had seen.
C. Saren's team recorded average accuracy of 76% with a drum rhythm and 75% in silence, without establishing a reliable difference between conditions.
D. Saren's study was designed to demonstrate that hearing a background rhythm reliably improves adults' memory for symbol sequences compared with silence.
Practice this lesson: 2.34, 2.35, 2.36.
Show worked solutionHide worked solution for W2.10
Answer: B
Chosen sentence: Saren's team sought to determine whether hearing a background rhythm affected adults' ability to remember a sequence of symbols they had seen.
- The requested role is purpose: the research question, rather than the procedure or the result.
- Note 1 directly identifies what the team wanted to investigate: whether rhythm affected memory for symbols.
- Choose B, which preserves the open question; the notes do not say the researchers intended to prove an improvement.
Evidence from the notes: The team was led by Saren and investigated rhythm's possible effect on adults' symbol memory: note 1.
Goal check: B states what the study sought to learn without replacing its purpose with its procedure or outcome.
Why A fails: The participant count and activity are accurate under notes 2 and 3, but these describe the method rather than explicitly stating the study's purpose.
Why C fails: The percentages and limitation accurately report note 5, but they are findings, not the question the researchers set out to investigate.
Why D fails: This changes an investigation of whether an effect existed into an intention to demonstrate a beneficial effect; note 1 does not support that predetermined aim.
Key takeaway: Classify each relevant note by its role before deciding whether it accomplishes the requested research-writing goal.
2.11 Compare quantities on the right basis
A numerical answer must preserve what was counted or measured, the unit, the group or denominator, and the time period. Before calculating, write the comparison in words: total electricity, electricity per square meter, the share of surveyed homes, or an estimated townwide count. A correct number can answer the wrong quantitative question.
For a proportion, divide the relevant part by its own total. A rise from 18 of 60 to 36 of 90 is a rise from 30% to 40%, even though the raw count doubled. Subtracting the percentages gives a 10-percentage-point increase. Dividing that 10-point change by the original 30% gives a relative increase of about 33.3%. Those descriptions are different, and neither licenses calling the share's increase 100%.
Keep comparisons like for like: equal units, compatible periods, and the requested denominator. A larger total can coexist with a smaller rate. Preserve qualifiers such as estimated, approximately, and in the sample; arithmetic cannot turn an estimate into an observation. If the goal does not require a calculation, do not assume that the answer with the most numbers is strongest. Check each quantity's meaning first, then verify any calculation the chosen sentence actually needs.
W2.11: Counts and shares tell different stories
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. Lark Workshop surveyed employees' travel modes on a particular day in each of two years.
2. In 2018, 18 of 60 surveyed employees arrived by bicycle.
3. In 2024, 36 of 90 surveyed employees arrived by bicycle.
4. Each participant selected one mode; figures describe only participants on those survey days.
5. The survey did not ask why participants chose their modes.
The student wants to compare the percentage of surveyed employees who arrived by bicycle in 2018 and 2024. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
A. The number of surveyed Lark Workshop employees who arrived by bicycle doubled between the 2018 and 2024 survey days, increasing from 18 to 36.
B. Bicycle arrivals represented 30% of surveyed employees in 2018 and 40% in 2024, an increase of 10 percentage points between the two surveys.
C. Bicycle arrivals represented 30% of surveyed employees in 2018 and 40% in 2024, meaning the percentage arriving by bicycle doubled.
D. Lark Workshop's 2018 travel survey included 60 employees, while its 2024 survey included 90 employees, each of whom selected one travel mode.
Practice this lesson: 2.37, 2.38, 2.39.
Show worked solutionHide worked solution for W2.11
Answer: B
Chosen sentence: Bicycle arrivals represented 30% of surveyed employees in 2018 and 40% in 2024, an increase of 10 percentage points between the two surveys.
- The goal asks for percentages within each surveyed group, so use 60 as the 2018 denominator and 90 as the 2024 denominator.
- Compute 18 / 60 = 0.30 = 30% and 36 / 90 = 0.40 = 40%.
- Subtract 40% - 30% to obtain 10 percentage points; the raw count's doubling does not mean the share doubled.
- Choose B because it compares the requested proportions and retains the survey scope.
Evidence from the notes: The 2018 proportion is 18 of 60, or 30%: note 2. The 2024 proportion is 36 of 90, or 40%: note 3. The scope is the employees surveyed on the specified days: notes 1 and 4.
Goal check: B compares the two sample percentages with the correct denominators and correctly states their difference in percentage points.
Why A fails: The count did double under notes 2 and 3, but the goal asks about the percentage of surveyed employees, whose total also changed.
Why C fails: The two percentages are correct, but 40% is not double 30%; doubling the original share would produce 60%.
Why D fails: The sample sizes and single-mode rule are accurate under notes 2-4, but the sentence does not compare bicycle use as a share of either sample.
Key takeaway: Name the denominator before comparing percentages, and distinguish percentage-point differences from relative percentage changes.
2.12 Satisfy the complete goal and preserve qualifications
Some goals combine requirements: introduce a concept to unfamiliar readers, attribute an interpretation to its source, and preserve its tentative status. Turn the goal into a short checklist before evaluating choices. Each requirement matters. A sentence that fulfills two of three can be accurate and well written while still being incomplete.
Check attribution closely. A critic's reading is not automatically an artist's stated intention, and a team's prediction is not an observed outcome. Phrases such as according to, proposed, estimated, and may can carry the exact distinction the goal requires. Removing them may change the evidential status of a claim rather than merely shorten the sentence. At the same time, do not add uncertainty where the notes give a definite observation; attach the qualification to the claim that needs it.
Audience information helps determine what context the sentence must supply. Readers unfamiliar with a technical term may need a brief definition. Readers who already know a work may instead need a direct comparison of interpretations. Familiarity does not permit missing evidence or inaccurate attribution. After checking the facts, read the goal again and test the whole sentence against every requirement. This final pass often distinguishes the best answer from a plausible choice that accomplishes only part of the assignment.
W2.12: Definition, attribution, and an untested explanation
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. Night ventilation draws cooler outdoor air through a building at night to reduce stored indoor heat.
2. Engineer Leda Orin monitored six unoccupied rooms using night ventilation for one summer week.
3. Morning room temperatures were lower than temperatures at each night's start.
4. Orin proposed that heat released by interior walls contributed to cooling.
5. Wall heat transfer was unmeasured, so the explanation was not directly tested.
The student wants to introduce night ventilation to unfamiliar readers and present Orin's proposed explanation for its cooling effect as an untested explanation. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
A. Orin monitored six unoccupied rooms using night ventilation during a summer week and found that their morning temperatures were lower than their temperatures at the start of each night.
B. Night ventilation draws cooler outdoor air through buildings at night, and Orin's measurements proved that heat released by interior walls caused the rooms' overnight cooling.
C. Orin proposed that heat released by interior walls contributed to cooling in the rooms she monitored, but her monitoring did not directly test that explanation.
D. Night ventilation draws cooler outdoor air through a building at night; Orin proposed, without directly testing the explanation, that heat released by interior walls contributes to its cooling effect.
Practice this lesson: 2.40, 2.41, 2.42.
Show worked solutionHide worked solution for W2.12
Answer: D
Chosen sentence: Night ventilation draws cooler outdoor air through a building at night; Orin proposed, without directly testing the explanation, that heat released by interior walls contributes to its cooling effect.
- List the requirements: explain the unfamiliar practice, identify Orin's proposed mechanism, and retain the fact that the mechanism was not directly tested.
- Use note 1 for the definition, note 4 for the proposal, and note 5 for its evidential limit.
- Choose D because it combines those three requirements without presenting the proposed wall mechanism as a measured finding.
Evidence from the notes: Night ventilation moves cooler outdoor air through a building at night: note 1. Orin proposed a contribution from heat released by interior walls: note 4. The explanation was not directly tested because wall heat transfer was not measured: note 5.
Goal check: D supplies the needed definition, attributes the explanation to Orin, and explicitly preserves its untested status.
Why A fails: The sample and temperature observation are accurate under notes 2 and 3, but the sentence neither defines night ventilation nor presents the proposed explanation.
Why B fails: The definition is accurate, but proved contradicts note 5, and caused overstates note 4's proposal that wall heat contributed to cooling.
Why C fails: The proposal and its limitation are accurate under notes 4 and 5, but unfamiliar readers receive no explanation of what night ventilation is.
Key takeaway: The strongest synthesis meets every stated requirement while preserving who claims what and how firmly the notes support it.
Independent practice
Keep these checks in mind
• Name the requested job before selecting facts: introduction, explanation, example, comparison, support, summary, sequence, or another stated aim.
• Identify any required audience, entities, comparison dimension, date range, quantity, qualification, and attribution.
• Map each claim in the leading choice to a note; preserve units, denominators, uncertainty, and the limits of the evidence.
• Check what the sentence emphasizes and connects, since several choices can be accurate while doing different jobs.
• Reject each remaining choice for a specific reason: missing a goal requirement, selecting off-goal evidence, or distorting the notes.
Begin with six short reasoning drills, then complete thirty-six multiple-choice questions. Each lesson has three questions. Identify the decisive relationship or goal requirement, and explain the closest competing answer. The model responses to the drills are examples; other well-supported responses may also work.
These six written drills are ungraded. Write your reasoning before opening each model answer.
Drill 2.01
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. A library tested two shelving labels for a collection used by beginning readers.
2. The labels needed to help children locate books without asking an adult.
3. One design paired a picture with a word; the other used a word alone.
4. In the trial, more children located the requested section independently with the picture-and-word labels.
5. The library selected the picture-and-word labels, which required more ink to print.
A student wants to explain why the library selected the picture-and-word labels. State the two main requirements of this goal, identify the most useful notes, and name one accurate detail that could be omitted.
Write a brief answer and identify the words that justify it.
Show model answerHide model answer for drill 2.01
Convert a goal into evidence requirements | Review lesson 2.1
Answer: One possible response: identify the selected design and connect its trial performance to the need for independent book finding; use notes 2, 4, and 5, while omitting the extra ink requirement.
The goal asks for a reason, so selection alone is insufficient. Note 2 states the desired outcome, note 4 supplies evidence that the design helped achieve it, and note 5 confirms the selection. Note 3 can clarify the alternatives but is not essential in every valid response. The ink detail is accurate yet does not explain the stated benefit. Other wording or an additional relevant note is acceptable.
If you missed it: If you selected every note, label each one "requirement," "evidence," "decision," or "background" and rebuild the reason from the first three roles.
Drill 2.02
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. A demonstration device uses a float to regulate water entering a tank.
2. As the water level rises, the float rises with it.
3. A rising float pulls a lever that gradually narrows the inlet opening.
4. When the water reaches the marked level, the float closes the inlet completely.
5. The demonstration tank is transparent so observers can see the float and lever move.
The goal is to explain how the device stops water entering a full tank. Repair this sentence using the notes: "As rising water pushes the float down, the float widens the inlet until the tank reaches its marked level."
Write a brief answer and identify the words that justify it.
Show model answerHide model answer for drill 2.02
Repair a reversed process explanation | Review lesson 2.3
Answer: One possible revision: "As the water level rises, the float rises and pulls a lever that narrows the inlet, closing it completely at the marked level."
Notes 2-4 establish three linked movements: rising water raises the float, the rising float narrows the opening through a lever, and reaching the marked level closes the inlet. The original sentence reverses both the float's direction and the opening's change. Note 5 explains visibility during the demonstration, not regulation. A valid revision may compress the gradual narrowing if it still explains how rising water leads to complete closure.
If you missed it: Write the supported direction above each action: water up, float up, inlet smaller, inlet closed; revise any verb that breaks that chain.
Drill 2.03
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. Two teams tested insulating sleeves on identical cups containing water at the same starting temperature.
2. Team Elm tested felt sleeves; Team Cove tested cork sleeves.
3. After twenty minutes, the water in felt-covered cups had cooled by 7 degrees Celsius.
4. After twenty minutes, the water in cork-covered cups had cooled by 4 degrees Celsius.
5. Each team also recorded the sleeves' colors, but the test did not investigate color effects.
Write one sentence contrasting the sleeves' performance in this test, including the common measurement period; then explain why a claim about the effect of sleeve color would be unsupported.
Write a brief answer and identify the words that justify it.
Show model answerHide model answer for drill 2.03
Choose a comparison dimension and preserve scope | Review lesson 2.6
Answer: One possible response: "Over twenty minutes in this test, water in felt-covered cups cooled by 7 degrees Celsius, compared with 4 degrees in cork-covered cups." Color was recorded but its effects were not investigated.
Notes 1, 3, and 4 provide comparable conditions, a shared period, and temperature decreases. The comparison concerns change in water temperature, not final temperatures, which are not given numerically. Note 5 permits reporting colors were recorded but cannot establish that a color caused either outcome. Other accurate sentences may say that the cork-covered cups showed a smaller temperature decrease over the tested period.
If you missed it: Use one row label for both subjects: "temperature decrease after twenty minutes"; keep a recorded detail separate from a tested explanation.
Review lesson: 2.6 Emphasize a difference on a shared dimension
Drill 2.04
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. A researcher examined eight volunteer-run seed exchanges in the Marsh County network in 2025.
2. Six recorded distributed seed varieties in shared online catalogs.
3. Two used paper notebooks instead of online catalogs, also recording varieties distributed.
4. The researcher did not examine exchanges outside the network or recordkeeping in other years.
Repair this summary in one sentence: 'Volunteer-run seed exchanges always use online catalogs to record the varieties they distribute.' Summarize the shared recordkeeping practice and preserve the difference in recording formats.
Write a brief answer and identify the words that justify it.
Show model answerHide model answer for drill 2.04
Repairing an overgeneralized summary | Review lesson 2.7
Answer: All eight Marsh County exchanges examined in 2025 recorded the seed varieties they distributed, with six using shared online catalogs and two using paper notebooks.
Notes 2 and 3 establish the shared practice: all eight recorded varieties distributed. They also establish the format difference: six online catalogs and two paper notebooks. Notes 1 and 4 restrict the evidence to these eight network members in 2025, so always and the unrestricted category volunteer-run seed exchanges are too broad. Multiple phrasings are valid if they preserve the study's scope, the common practice, and both formats; the model answer is not the only acceptable sentence.
If you missed it: Underline your subject and any quantity or frequency words. Replace a broad subject with the studied group, delete unsupported frequency claims, and check that your sentence includes both the shared practice and the paper-notebook exception.
Drill 2.05
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. Toma Venn investigated whether label color affected how quickly volunteers located a target container.
2. Twenty-four volunteers searched shelves with blue and orange labels; condition order varied among volunteers.
3. Venn timed searches and calculated each condition's mean.
4. Mean times were 11.2 seconds for blue and 11.4 for orange; analysis did not establish a reliable difference.
Write three short statements labeled Purpose, Method, and Finding, using the notes to supply the correct information for each role.
Write a brief answer and identify the words that justify it.
Show model answerHide model answer for drill 2.05
Distinguishing purpose, method, and finding | Review lesson 2.10
Answer: Purpose: Venn investigated whether label color affected target-container search speed. Method: Twenty-four volunteers searched shelves with blue and orange labels while Venn timed their searches. Finding: Mean search times were 11.2 and 11.4 seconds, respectively, without a reliable difference established by the analysis.
Note 1 states the question and therefore the purpose. Notes 2 and 3 describe the participants' activity and the measurement procedure, which constitute the method. Note 4 gives the results and their limitation. Other concise phrasings are valid, but a finding that simply says blue labels work better overstates the recorded result, and a purpose that says Venn intended to prove orange labels slower invents a predetermined conclusion.
If you missed it: If two labels contain nearly the same statement, ask three separate questions: What did Venn want to learn? What did the study do? What did its evidence establish? Keep the numerical outcome and its limitation together in the finding.
Review lesson: 2.10 Separate a study's purpose, method, and findings
Drill 2.06
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
1. Two surveys asked participating residents whether they had used the Fenwick tool-lending program during the previous month.
2. In the first, 30 of 150 participants reported using it.
3. In the second, 60 of 200 participants reported using it.
4. These figures describe participating samples; the notes do not establish townwide participation rates.
Calculate the sample percentage in each survey, the change in percentage points, and the relative percentage increase in that share; then write one sentence comparing the sample shares accurately.
Write a brief answer and identify the words that justify it.
Show model answerHide model answer for drill 2.06
Distinguishing share, percentage points, and relative change | Review lesson 2.11
Answer: First survey: 30 / 150
Notes 2 and 3 require different denominators. Subtracting the percentages yields 10 percentage points, while dividing the increase by the original 20% yields 50%. The reported-user count doubled, but the share did not, because the sample total also increased. Note 4 requires keeping the comparison within the surveyed samples. Multiple sentence phrasings are valid; each must label the percentages and retain that sample scope.
If you missed it: Write part / whole before using a percentage. Label subtraction as percentage points and relative change as change / original. If your sentence says townwide or says the share doubled, replace that wording with what the sample calculations establish.