Question 48·Hard·Transitions
Prescribed burns can protect forests by removing excess underbrush that fuels severe wildfires. Critics argue that intentionally setting fires risks harming wildlife in the short term. ______ proponents point out that carefully managed burns ultimately foster healthier ecosystems and reduce the likelihood of catastrophic blazes.
Which choice completes the text with the most logical transition?
For transition questions, always read at least the full sentence before and after the blank, then label the relationship between them in simple terms: same idea, contrast, example/detail, or cause-and-effect. Once you know the relationship, quickly group the answer choices by type (similarity, contrast, example, result) and cross out any that don’t match your label, then plug the remaining option into the sentence to confirm it preserves the logical flow.
Hints
Compare the viewpoints
Look at who is speaking in each part: the second sentence mentions critics, and the next sentence mentions proponents. Are these groups agreeing with each other or taking different sides?
Identify the logical relationship
Ask yourself: Is the sentence after the blank giving an example of the critics’ concern, agreeing with it, explaining a result of it, or arguing against it?
Classify the transition types
Think about what each type of transition usually does: one shows similarity, one gives a more specific detail, one shows a consequence, and one introduces a contrasting point. Match the needed relationship to one of these types.
Step-by-step Explanation
Understand what each sentence is saying
Break down the three parts:
- First sentence: Prescribed burns have a benefit (they remove underbrush and can prevent severe wildfires).
- Second sentence: Critics focus on a downside (fires risk harming wildlife in the short term).
- Third sentence (after the blank): Proponents focus on a different idea (carefully managed burns help ecosystems and prevent catastrophic blazes in the long term).
The second and third ideas are from two different sides: critics vs. proponents.
Determine the relationship between critics and proponents
Ask: How does the proponents’ point relate to the critics’ point?
- The critics say: there is short-term harm.
- The proponents say: there is long-term benefit.
These two ideas are opposing views about the same practice. The sentence after the blank does not give an example of the critics’ concern and does not show a result caused by it. Instead, it presents a counterpoint or contrast.
Match the relationship to the type of transition
Now connect the relationship you found (a contrast between critics and proponents) to the transition types:
- A word that means “in the same way” would show agreement or similarity.
- A word that introduces a more specific example would show detail.
- A word that introduces a result would show cause-and-effect.
- A word that introduces an opposing point would show contrast.
Since we need a contrast or “counterpoint” transition, eliminate any choices that show similarity, extra detail, or cause-and-effect.
Evaluate each choice and select the one that fits
Check each option against the needed contrast:
- “Similarly,” would say proponents are agreeing with critics, which is wrong.
- “Specifically,” would say the proponents’ point is just a detailed example of the critics’ point, which is not true.
- “Consequently,” would say the proponents’ view is a result of the critics’ concern, which does not match the logic.
- “Nonetheless,” signals that, despite what critics argue, proponents still point out long-term benefits. This fits the contrast between the second and third sentences.
Therefore, the correct answer is “Nonetheless,”.