- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Oct 19, 2022
- Wed Aug 16, 2023 3:51 pm
#102842
Hi Brooke,
Please see Robert's previous answer above on the problem with Answer D.
I'll only add that it's important to always focus on the "big picture" ideas/main point of the passage even when answering detail questions like this one.
In the first paragraph, it mentions that most earthquakes are found in "hot zones," regions with high levels of subduction but and this is the critical point of the passage, there are regions of high levels of subduction that don't have earthquakes. So the reason that the passage is written is to try to explain what else is going on. In other words, to explain why only some of the areas with high levels of subduction have earthquakes while some do not.
The final sentence of paragraph one poses a question that the rest of the passage goes on to answer. As a general rule of thumb, when you come across the author raising a question, take note of it because the answer to it will often be a central idea in the passage. Here the question raised was "how can often intense subduction take place at certain locations with little or no seismic effect?" (lines 19-21).
The following paragraph explaining the differences between shallow and deep descents provides the answer to this question. In this context, shallow descents result in more and larger earthquakes and deep descents result in little or no earthquakes. The deep descents explain why there are regions with intense subduction that have little or no seismic effect (i.e. earthquakes).
Here's one final observation that may be helpful with science passages in general. Most of these passages follow a pattern where a new theory helps explain a puzzling fact (which happens here) or a new study sheds light on a previous theory, etc.. Usually, but not always, the passage agrees with the new theory, so it's important to understand the author's take on the different theories/viewpoints.
In this passage, the traditional theory fails to explain this odd fact while the new theory does offer a plausible explanation, and the author agrees with this new theory. If you check the correct answer to the Main Point question in question 22, it can be helpful in answering some of the other questions.
Please see Robert's previous answer above on the problem with Answer D.
I'll only add that it's important to always focus on the "big picture" ideas/main point of the passage even when answering detail questions like this one.
In the first paragraph, it mentions that most earthquakes are found in "hot zones," regions with high levels of subduction but and this is the critical point of the passage, there are regions of high levels of subduction that don't have earthquakes. So the reason that the passage is written is to try to explain what else is going on. In other words, to explain why only some of the areas with high levels of subduction have earthquakes while some do not.
The final sentence of paragraph one poses a question that the rest of the passage goes on to answer. As a general rule of thumb, when you come across the author raising a question, take note of it because the answer to it will often be a central idea in the passage. Here the question raised was "how can often intense subduction take place at certain locations with little or no seismic effect?" (lines 19-21).
The following paragraph explaining the differences between shallow and deep descents provides the answer to this question. In this context, shallow descents result in more and larger earthquakes and deep descents result in little or no earthquakes. The deep descents explain why there are regions with intense subduction that have little or no seismic effect (i.e. earthquakes).
Here's one final observation that may be helpful with science passages in general. Most of these passages follow a pattern where a new theory helps explain a puzzling fact (which happens here) or a new study sheds light on a previous theory, etc.. Usually, but not always, the passage agrees with the new theory, so it's important to understand the author's take on the different theories/viewpoints.
In this passage, the traditional theory fails to explain this odd fact while the new theory does offer a plausible explanation, and the author agrees with this new theory. If you check the correct answer to the Main Point question in question 22, it can be helpful in answering some of the other questions.