|
|
Given the importance of critical thinking to our democracy, our economy, and our lives in a pluralistic, global community, we hope that you get most, if not all, of these right. Click on the link after each item to see an analysis of that item and its various choices.
Instructions: Select the best choice from among those offered.
Sample Reasoning Skills Item #1: Using the phone at her desk, Sylvia in Corporate Sales consistently generates a very steady $1500 per hour in gross revenue for her firm. After all of her firm's costs have been subtracted, Sylvia's sales amount to $100 in bottom line (net) profits every 15 minutes. At 10:00 a.m. one day the desk phone Sylvia uses to make her sales calls breaks. Without the phone Sylvia cannot make any sales. Assume that Sylvia's regular schedule is to begin making sales calls at 8:00 a.m. Assume she works the phone for four hours, takes a one hour lunch exactly at noon, and then returns promptly to her desk for four more hours of afternoon sales. Sylvia loves her work and the broken phone is keeping her from it. If necessary she will try to repair the phone herself. Which of the following options would be in the best interest of Sylvia's firm to remedy the broken phone problem?
A = Use Ed's Phone Repair Shop down the street. Ed can replace Sylvia's phone by
10:30 a.m. Ed will charge the firm $500.
B = Assign Sylvia to a different project until her phone can be replaced with one from
the firm's current inventory. Replacing the phone is handled by the night shift.
C = Authorize Sylvia to buy a new phone during her lunch hour for $75 knowing she
can plug it in and have it working within a few minutes after she gets back to
her desk at 1:00 p.m.
D = Ask Sylvia to try to repair her phone herself. She will probably complete the
repair by 2:00 p.m.; or maybe later.
Sample Reasoning Skills Item #2: "I've heard many reasons why our nation should reduce its reliance on petroleum vehicle fuels. One is that relying on imported oil makes our economy dependent on the political whims of foreign rulers. Another is that other energy sources, like the possibility of hydrogen based fuels, are less harmful to the environment. And a third is that petroleum is not a renewable resource so when we've used it all up, it will be gone! But I don't think we're likely to use it all up for at least another fifty years. And by then we'll have invented new and better fuels and more fuel-efficient vehicles too. So that argument doesn't worry me. And I don't really believe the stuff about how foreign leaders can force our nation to change its policies simply by decreasing their oil production. Oil companies like Exxon have made record profits precisely in those times when the supply of foreign oil was reduced. I don't see the big oil companies being very interested in policy change when the money is rolling in. And for another, our nation has demonstrated that it is willing to wage war rather than to permit foreign leaders to push us around. So this whole thing about how we have to reduce our reliance on petroleum based gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel is bogus." The speaker's reasoning is best evaluated as
A = solid. It shows the arguments for reducing petroleum vehicle fuels are weak
B = solid. The speaker is very clear about what he believes and why he believes it.
C = weak. The speaker probably owns stock in Exxon or some other oil company.
D = weak. The speaker ignored the environmental argument entirely.
Click here for an explanation of Item #2 and its Options
Sample Reasoning Skills Item #3: Three graduate school friends, Anna, Barbara, and Carol, graduated successfully. Being in the same program, the three often worked as a team on group assignments. Anna earned the special recognition of "pass with distinction" when she graduated. Carol and Barbara, although receiving their degrees, did not earn this special honor. A fourth student in the same graduate program, Deirdre, often said that the graduate program was poorly designed and not difficult at all. Deirdre did not graduate, instead she was advised by the faculty to withdraw from the program because her work was below acceptable standards. Given this information only, it follows that
A = Carol and Barbara deserved to receive "pass with distinction" like Anna.
B = Barbara's work in the program was superior to Carol's.
C = Barbara was jealous of the academic success her friend, Anna, enjoyed.
D = Deirdre's work in the program was below the quality of Carol's work.
E = Anna, being successful, will decide to enroll in another advanced graduate program.
Click here for an explanation of Item #3 and its Options
©2008 Measured Reasons LLC, Hermosa Beach, CA & (c) 2007 The California Academic Press LLC, Millbrae CA.
© 2001, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009 Insight Assessment - a division of California Academic Press, 217 La Cruz Ave. Millbrae, CA 94030-2106 USA. Serving over 3000 clients worldwide.