16Hit1600
Craft and StructureEasy–MediumResponding to an argument's premise

Craft and Structure practice question

Text 1 Cursive handwriting should return to every primary school. Children who learn it can read older documents, and forming joined letters trains the fine motor skills that young children need to develop. Text 2 Fine motor skills are certainly worth developing, but there are many ways to do it — drawing, building models, playing an instrument. The case for cursive in particular rests on reading old documents, a need most adults meet only a handful of times in their lives.

Based on the texts, how would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to the argument in Text 1?

  1. A. By agreeing that motor skills matter while questioning whether cursive is a necessary way to build them.Correct
  2. B. By denying that forming joined letters trains motor skills at all.
  3. C. By arguing that children should be given more old documents to read.
  4. D. By claiming that drawing is more important than reading.

Answer: A. By agreeing that motor skills matter while questioning whether cursive is a necessary way to build them.

Text 2 grants the motor-skills point ('certainly worth developing') and then says other activities serve the same end, leaving cursive with only the weak old-documents argument.

Why the other answers are wrong

B. By denying that forming joined letters trains motor skills at all.
Text 2 doesn't deny that cursive trains motor skills; it says other activities do too.
C. By arguing that children should be given more old documents to read.
Text 2 treats reading old documents as a rare need, not something to promote.
D. By claiming that drawing is more important than reading.
Drawing is listed as one of several motor-skill activities; Text 2 never ranks it against reading.

More Craft and Structure questions

Not affiliated with the College Board. SAT is a trademark of the College Board.