1. explain your pick and why other options are incorrect
2. can you explain the statement- "Other scholars, however, have portrayed organized labour as defending all along the relatively priviliged position of white workers relative to African American workers"..does thi mean unions instigate racism
3. How does the second passage connect to the first passages- does it give reasons for failiure of war time alliance?
Some historians contend that conditions
in the United States during the
Second World War gave rise to a
dynamic wartime alliance between
trade unions and the African American
community, an alliance that advanced
the cause of civil rights. They conclude
that the postwar demise of this
vital alliance constituted a lost oppor-
tunity for the civil rights movement that
followed the war. Other scholars,
however, have portrayed organized
labor as defending all along the relatively
privileged position of White
workers relative to African American
workers. Clearly, these two perspectives
are not easily reconcilable, but
the historical reality is not reducible
to one or the other.
Unions faced a choice between
either maintaining the prewar status
quo or promoting a more inclusive
approach that sought for all members
the right to participate in the internal
affairs of unions, access to skilled
and high-paying positions within the
occupational hierarchy, and protection
against management's arbitrary
authority in the workplace. While
union representatives often voiced
this inclusive ideal, in practice unions
far more often favored entrenched
interests. The accelerating development
of the civil rights movement
following the Second World War
exacerbated the union's dilemma,
forcing trade unionists to confront
contradictions in their own practices.
The passage is primarily concerned with
a. providing a context within which to evaluate opposing viewpoints about a historic phenomenon
b. identifying a flawed assumption underlying one interpretation of a historical phenomenon
c. assessing the merits and weaknesses of a controversial theory about a historical phenomenon
d. discussing the historical importance of the development of a wartime alliance
e. evaluating evidence used to support a particular interpretation of a historical phenomenon
RC Main idea questions practice -GMATprep
GMAT/MBA Expert
- Stacey Koprince
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2228
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
- Location: Montreal, Canada
- Thanked: 639 times
- Followed by:694 members
- GMAT Score:780
Hi, guys
FYI - if you want experts to respond, then please follow forum guidelines (copy and paste the text into the body of your message; don't just load a screen shot). This rule exists because, when we hit "reply to post," we can only see the text of prior posts down below while we respond - we can't see the text of any images or screen shots. We have a lot of posts to answer in a short period of time, so we're not able to take the time to go back and forth over multiple screens, especially for multiple long screen shots.
Which brings us to another forum guideline to follow: new post for each problem. It's okay to post multiple problems for the same passage in one thread, but it becomes very confusing very quickly if multiple passages are posted - and that's even more true when the problems are of different types. (For example, two of the above questions are main idea questions, but the third is an inference question.)
FYI - if you want experts to respond, then please follow forum guidelines (copy and paste the text into the body of your message; don't just load a screen shot). This rule exists because, when we hit "reply to post," we can only see the text of prior posts down below while we respond - we can't see the text of any images or screen shots. We have a lot of posts to answer in a short period of time, so we're not able to take the time to go back and forth over multiple screens, especially for multiple long screen shots.
Which brings us to another forum guideline to follow: new post for each problem. It's okay to post multiple problems for the same passage in one thread, but it becomes very confusing very quickly if multiple passages are posted - and that's even more true when the problems are of different types. (For example, two of the above questions are main idea questions, but the third is an inference question.)
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 940
- Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:22 am
- Thanked: 55 times
- Followed by:1 members
no clue who PM'ed but we will type the questions.Stacey Koprince wrote:Hi, guys
FYI - if you want experts to respond, then please follow forum guidelines (copy and paste the text into the body of your message; don't just load a screen shot). This rule exists because, when we hit "reply to post," we can only see the text of prior posts down below while we respond - we can't see the text of any images or screen shots. We have a lot of posts to answer in a short period of time, so we're not able to take the time to go back and forth over multiple screens, especially for multiple long screen shots.
Which brings us to another forum guideline to follow: new post for each problem. It's okay to post multiple problems for the same passage in one thread, but it becomes very confusing very quickly if multiple passages are posted - and that's even more true when the problems are of different types. (For example, two of the above questions are main idea questions, but the third is an inference question.)
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2326
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
- Thanked: 173 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:710
IMO Biamcste wrote:Please choose and explain your picks for this GMATprep RC question
AT the end of the passage, an example is given stating there is bias towards middleclass women over working class women.
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2326
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
- Thanked: 173 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:710
My Pick : Aiamcste wrote:1. explain your pick and why other options are incorrect
2. can you explain the statement- "Other scholars, however, have portrayed organized labour as defending all along the relatively priviliged position of white workers relative to African American workers"..does thi mean unions instigate racism
3. How does the second passage connect to the first passages- does it give reasons for failiure of war time alliance?
GMAT/MBA Expert
- Stacey Koprince
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2228
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
- Location: Montreal, Canada
- Thanked: 639 times
- Followed by:694 members
- GMAT Score:780
Ah, I see, you edited the original post of the passage - great, thanks. You're probably in the midst of editing the other one (it's still showing as a screen shot), so I'll just do the Historians passage now.
Summary (done as I read for the first time):
P1
Some ppl say that WW2 --> alliance bet. unions and AfAm --> civil rights
[this language sounds like the author is going to believe something else is true - or, at least, the author is going to talk about someone else who believes something else]
end of war = end of alliance = lost opp. for civil rights
Others [here we go!] say unions helped W not AfAm [so, this contradicts the ppl in the first line of the summary above]
Author [last sentence]: it's not clear that one view is right
P2
Unions had choice: (1) maintain prewar view (which is? W?), or (2) include everyone [okay, so the "prewar view" was probably favoring W]
Union reps said they were inclusive, but really weren't so much.
Post-war civil rights made this dichotomy even more pronounced.
Question. Main Idea.
A. maybe. vague, but nothing obviously wrong. keep reading.
B. no. not *primarily* about identifying a flaw for just one of the sides
C. no. there are two theories, not just one.
D. no. the "wartime alliance" is only ONE of the theories. where's the other?
E. no. no evidence. there are two interpretations, not just one.
For your 2nd question - I wouldn't necessarily interpret that as unions instigating racism, but it does say that they are favoring W over AfAm. Are they doing that for racist reasons? Maybe - and probably, at least partially, from what we know of history. But the passage doesn't say anything about that, so I'm not speculating - I'm not supposed to bring in outside knowledge.
Is your third question supposed to say "paragraph" instead of "passage"? If so, let me know. If not, can you clarify your question - I'm not sure how you're asking to connect the two different passages?
Summary (done as I read for the first time):
P1
Some ppl say that WW2 --> alliance bet. unions and AfAm --> civil rights
[this language sounds like the author is going to believe something else is true - or, at least, the author is going to talk about someone else who believes something else]
end of war = end of alliance = lost opp. for civil rights
Others [here we go!] say unions helped W not AfAm [so, this contradicts the ppl in the first line of the summary above]
Author [last sentence]: it's not clear that one view is right
P2
Unions had choice: (1) maintain prewar view (which is? W?), or (2) include everyone [okay, so the "prewar view" was probably favoring W]
Union reps said they were inclusive, but really weren't so much.
Post-war civil rights made this dichotomy even more pronounced.
Question. Main Idea.
A. maybe. vague, but nothing obviously wrong. keep reading.
B. no. not *primarily* about identifying a flaw for just one of the sides
C. no. there are two theories, not just one.
D. no. the "wartime alliance" is only ONE of the theories. where's the other?
E. no. no evidence. there are two interpretations, not just one.
For your 2nd question - I wouldn't necessarily interpret that as unions instigating racism, but it does say that they are favoring W over AfAm. Are they doing that for racist reasons? Maybe - and probably, at least partially, from what we know of history. But the passage doesn't say anything about that, so I'm not speculating - I'm not supposed to bring in outside knowledge.
Is your third question supposed to say "paragraph" instead of "passage"? If so, let me know. If not, can you clarify your question - I'm not sure how you're asking to connect the two different passages?
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2326
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
- Thanked: 173 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:710
@Stacey,Stacey Koprince wrote:Ah, I see, you edited the original post of the passage - great, thanks. You're probably in the midst of editing the other one (it's still showing as a screen shot), so I'll just do the Historians passage now.
Summary (done as I read for the first time):
P1
Some ppl say that WW2 --> alliance bet. unions and AfAm --> civil rights
[this language sounds like the author is going to believe something else is true - or, at least, the author is going to talk about someone else who believes something else]
end of war = end of alliance = lost opp. for civil rights
Others [here we go!] say unions helped W not AfAm [so, this contradicts the ppl in the first line of the summary above]
Author [last sentence]: it's not clear that one view is right
P2
Unions had choice: (1) maintain prewar view (which is? W?), or (2) include everyone [okay, so the "prewar view" was probably favoring W]
Union reps said they were inclusive, but really weren't so much.
Post-war civil rights made this dichotomy even more pronounced.
Question. Main Idea.
A. maybe. vague, but nothing obviously wrong. keep reading.
B. no. not *primarily* about identifying a flaw for just one of the sides
C. no. there are two theories, not just one.
D. no. the "wartime alliance" is only ONE of the theories. where's the other?
E. no. no evidence. there are two interpretations, not just one.
For your 2nd question - I wouldn't necessarily interpret that as unions instigating racism, but it does say that they are favoring W over AfAm. Are they doing that for racist reasons? Maybe - and probably, at least partially, from what we know of history. But the passage doesn't say anything about that, so I'm not speculating - I'm not supposed to bring in outside knowledge.
Is your third question supposed to say "paragraph" instead of "passage"? If so, let me know. If not, can you clarify your question - I'm not sure how you're asking to connect the two different passages?
whats the answer?? I opted A!!
GMAT/MBA Expert
- Stacey Koprince
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2228
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
- Location: Montreal, Canada
- Thanked: 639 times
- Followed by:694 members
- GMAT Score:780
Ah, I should have specified. When I look back up at my rating of each choice, four are "no" and one is "maybe" so the "maybe" (A) wins.
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2326
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
- Thanked: 173 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:710
Oh..Its good see that My answer is correct! Thx!!Stacey Koprince wrote:Ah, I should have specified. When I look back up at my rating of each choice, four are "no" and one is "maybe" so the "maybe" (A) wins.