Identify and Summarize a Viewpoint
Sample Question:
Which of the following statements is most consistent with Scientist 1’s viewpoint?
What’s Being Tested: Your ability to accurately understand what one perspective claims.
Knowledge & Skills Required:
- Reading comprehension
- Paraphrasing scientific reasoning
- Distinguishing core claims from supporting details
What’s Needed to Answer Correctly:
- Know which scientist said what
- Separate fact from opinion/interpretation
- Don’t mix viewpoints or generalize
Correct Approach:
- Skim the passage and label each viewpoint (e.g., S1 = “light is a wave”)
- Read the question stem and target only the correct scientist
- Rephrase the viewpoint mentally and match it to the correct choice
Identify a Key Disagreement Between Perspectives
Sample Question:
On which of the following points do Scientist 1 and Scientist 2 disagree?
What’s Being Tested: Can you pinpoint how the perspectives conflict?
Knowledge & Skills Required:
- Comparison of claims
- Recognizing opposing views
- Understanding scientific nuance (e.g., not just "yes/no", but how and why)
What’s Needed to Answer Correctly:
- Identify core statements from each person
- Look for direct contradictions, not small differences in wording
Correct Approach:
- Underline or summarize each person’s main claims
- Look at each answer option and ask: “Does one agree and the other disagree?”
- Eliminate answer choices where both support or oppose the idea similarly
Identify a Point of Agreement
Sample Question:
On which of the following points would both researchers most likely agree?
What’s Being Tested: Do you understand the common ground, if any?
Knowledge & Skills Required:
- Careful comparison
- Recognizing neutral or overlapping statements
- Avoiding assumption of total disagreement
What’s Needed to Answer Correctly:
- Know when the scientists are not actually in conflict on a given point
- Eliminate options that show clear contradiction
Correct Approach:
- Identify the non-controversial points mentioned by both
- Test each answer: “Does this conflict with either view?”
- Choose the one neither scientist would object to
Infer a Likely Response to New Information
Sample Question:
If new evidence showed that particle mass affects wave interference, which scientist would most likely revise their viewpoint?
What’s Being Tested: Can you apply each viewpoint to a new or hypothetical scenario?
Knowledge & Skills Required:
- Understanding the logic behind each view
- Applying reasoning, not memorized content
- Evaluating flexibility or rigidity of the claims
What’s Needed to Answer Correctly:
- Interpret how strongly or loosely each theory is stated
- Determine which view is more open to modification or already includes the new detail
Correct Approach:
- Understand the logic each scientist uses (e.g., “mass doesn’t matter” vs. “mass determines outcome”)
- Ask: whose theory already includes or excludes the new info?
- Choose the one most likely to accept or reject the new evidence based on their core argument
Identify Supporting Reasoning or Evidence
Sample Question:
Which of the following provides support for Scientist 2’s claim about gravitational lensing?
What’s Being Tested: Can you connect a claim to its reasoning or evidence?
Knowledge & Skills Required:
- Understanding cause-effect or evidence-conclusion logic
- Matching supporting examples or analogies to arguments
What’s Needed to Answer Correctly:
- Track the scientist’s justification, not just their claim
- Distinguish supporting logic from side commentary
Correct Approach:
- Read Scientist 2’s argument carefully
- Identify what evidence or logic they use (e.g., analogy, prior experiment, principle)
- Match that to the correct answer choice
Compare Reasoning Structures or Logical Approaches
Sample Question:
Which best describes the difference in how the two scientists explain the observed phenomenon?
What’s Being Tested: Can you understand not just what each person thinks, but how they reason?
Knowledge & Skills Required:
- Identifying scientific models (e.g., theoretical vs. observational)
- Recognizing whether reasoning is deductive, empirical, or analogical
What’s Needed to Answer Correctly:
- Go beyond surface-level disagreement — look at reasoning paths
- Spot differences like: “uses equations” vs. “uses observed patterns”
Correct Approach:
- Identify how each scientist builds their argument
- Categorize: Is it based on data? Theory? Past models?
- Match those reasoning styles to answer options