Question 20·Medium·Rhetorical Synthesis
While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
Linda Brown is a marine biologist.
In 2016, Brown published a study concluding that providing shade to bleached coral did not aid recovery.
In 2020, Brown coauthored a paper with engineer Mateo Ruiz.
Ruiz designed adjustable shade canopies that move with the sun.
Using these canopies, Brown found that bleached coral regained 60 % of their color in shaded nurseries.
The student wants to emphasize how Brown’s findings about shading coral changed between her two studies. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
For rhetorical synthesis questions like this, first underline the task in the question stem (here, “emphasize how Brown’s findings about shading coral changed between her two studies”). Then, quickly pull from the notes the key facts that relate to that task—in this case, the 2016 conclusion about shade and the 2020 result with 60% recovery. Next, scan each option and ask: (1) Does it use the relevant notes (not extra or missing information)? (2) Does it mention both time points or studies if the question is about change? (3) Does it clearly show the relationship the question asks for (such as cause-effect, contrast, or change)? Eliminate any choice that is incomplete, too general, or off-focus, and select the one that most directly and precisely fulfills the stated aim
Hints
Focus on the specific goal
The question is not just asking you to restate the notes; it wants you to emphasize how Brown’s findings changed. Look for an answer that shows a before-and-after or a contrast between the two studies.
Use the notes to identify the contrast
Compare the note about the 2016 study with the note about the 2020 paper. What did Brown say about shade in 2016, and what did she find when using Ruiz’s canopies in 2020?
Check whether both studies and their results are included
Eliminate any choice that talks only about one study or that mentions both years but doesn’t explain how the results or conclusions differed.
Look for contrast words
See if any option uses a word like “although” or clearly sets up a contrast between 2016 and 2020; that can signal a sentence designed to highlight a change in findings.
Step-by-step Explanation
Understand the task
The question asks which sentence emphasizes how Brown’s findings about shading coral changed between her two studies.
So the right choice must:
- Refer to both the 2016 and 2020 work, and
- Make the difference in findings (change in conclusions) clear.
Pull out the key details from the notes
From the notes:
- 2016 study: Brown concluded that providing shade to bleached coral did not aid recovery.
- 2020 paper with Ruiz: Using adjustable shade canopies that move with the sun, Brown found that bleached coral regained 60% of their color in shaded nurseries.
So her view of shade changed from “does not aid recovery” to “coral regained 60% of their color with shade.”
Check which options include both studies and their findings
Now, test each choice against what we need:
- Does it mention both 2016 and 2020?
- Does it state or clearly imply what each study found about shade?
- Does it highlight a contrast or change between those findings?
Keep these three questions in mind as you read each answer choice.
Eliminate choices that do not show the change
Evaluate the options:
- A: Says both studies “investigated” shade but does not describe the different findings or the change.
- C: Only mentions the 2020 work and does not mention the 2016 findings at all.
- D: Is vague (“research spans several years”) and says coral “regained much of their color,” but does not mention the earlier conclusion that shade did not help or clearly tie this to shade.
All three fail to clearly show how Brown’s conclusions changed between 2016 and 2020.
Confirm the best choice
The remaining option:
- Mentions 2016 and clearly states that Brown concluded shade did not help bleached coral.
- Mentions the 2020 collaboration with Ruiz’s moving canopies.
- States that this later work showed a 60% recovery rate, directly contrasting with the earlier “did not help” conclusion.
This directly emphasizes how Brown’s findings changed between the two studies. Therefore, the correct answer is: “Although Brown concluded in 2016 that shade did not help bleached coral, her 2020 collaboration using Ruiz’s moving canopies showed a 60 % recovery rate.”