Question 1
A student writes a news report about the AI grading trial and includes the sentence: 'Sadly, the school ignored obvious concerns from parents.' Which revision best keeps the news report neutral while preserving the information?No clue? Show me the answer
Correct answerCorrect!
IncorrectStep-by-step walkthrough
Choose a solution method
Method #1Direct reasoningStep 1: Spot the problem
The words 'sadly' and 'obvious' reveal the writer's personal judgement, which violates the neutral, third-person convention of a news report.
Step 2: Recall the fix taught
The content states that evaluative words should be cut or attributed to a named source rather than presented as the writer's own view.
Step 3: Check the information is kept
Deleting the sentence loses useful information, so the better fix keeps the content but reassigns the opinion to someone who actually holds it.
Step 4: Compare with other options
Moving the sentence to the end doesn't remove the bias, and adding more emotive language moves the text further from a news report.
Step 5: Confirm the answer
Attributing the criticism to a named source, as in the choice “Attribute the judgement to a named source: 'Parent Maria Lopez said the school ignored her concerns'”, preserves neutrality and information, matching the taught convention.
Method #2Process of eliminationStep 1: Deleting entirely
This removes the bias but also removes potentially newsworthy information about parental reaction, which a good report would want to keep.
Step 2: Moving to the end
Repositioning the sentence does nothing to remove the writer's judgemental language, so the neutrality problem remains unsolved.
Step 3: Stronger emotive words
This makes the bias worse, not better, moving the text further toward opinion-column style rather than fixing it.
Step 4: Confirm attribution
Attributing the opinion to a named source lets the fact of the criticism stand while keeping the journalist's own voice neutral.
Question 2
Which opening line is most characteristic of an opinion column's 'hook', as distinct from a news report's lead paragraph?No clue? Show me the answer
Correct answerCorrect!IncorrectStep-by-step walkthrough
Choose a solution method
Method #1Direct reasoningStep 1: Define the hook
An opinion column hook grabs attention and signals the writer's voice through a question, bold claim, or vivid scene.
Step 2: Test each option
Only one option uses a direct rhetorical question aimed at the reader and an explicit first-person stance ('I certainly wouldn't').
Step 3: Check for 5W lead style
The other three options answer factual 5W questions in neutral third person, which is lead-paragraph style, not a hook.
Step 4: Contrast voice
The correct option has personal voice and evaluative stance; the others avoid the writer's opinion entirely.
Step 5: Confirm the answer
The rhetorical question plus 'I' pronoun marks this clearly as an opinion column hook.
Method #2Process of eliminationStep 1: Principal confirms rollout
This answers who, what, when in neutral tone with a named source, which is a lead paragraph, not a hook.
Step 2: Trial length from documents
This is a factual detail with no personal voice, fitting inverted pyramid body content rather than an opinion hook.
Step 3: Reaction described neutrally
This describes reactions without stating the writer's own opinion, so it reads as balanced reporting, not persuasion.
Step 4: Confirm the hook
The rhetorical question aimed at the reader combined with 'I' is the clear opinion column hook.
13 more questions in this topic
Pick this up in your Library: it holds the whole topic, notes, cheatsheet and questions. Your answers here are kept on this device.