Library Numbers: Separating Fact from the Writer's Claim
An unseen passage in a practice test reads:
Last year the town library lent 12,400 books, up from 9,800 the year before. It added 600 new members and extended its evening hours by one hour on weekdays. The librarian says, 'This proves that people read more when they have a comfortable place to sit.' The town council has proposed cutting the library's furniture budget by 40 per cent, arguing that 'books matter more than chairs.' A citizens' group has collected 1,200 signatures against the cut.
The question paper asks: 'Which detail best supports the librarian's conclusion?' The four options are: (i) 12,400 books lent; (ii) 600 new members; (iii) extended evening hours; (iv) 1,200 signatures. A student chooses (iii) because it is the only change the library made. Another chooses (i) because it is the largest number.
1. The question asks which detail best supports the librarian's conclusion. Is the question well formed? Answer by identifying what the conclusion actually claims and which option, if any, supports it. 80–110 words.
Read the worked answer
The question is not well formed. The librarian's conclusion is causal: comfortable seating caused people to read more. The passage shows borrowing rose from 9,800 to 12,400 and membership rose by 600, but it does not show why. Extended evening hours (iii) is a rival explanation, not support. New members (ii) and signatures (iv) say nothing about reading or seating. Option (i) supports only the outcome - that borrowing increased - and even that assumes borrowing equals reading. So the best answer is that no option supports the full causal claim; (i) is the closest if the question is read as asking about increased borrowing, but the causal gap must be stated.
2. Rewrite the librarian's sentence so that it states only what the data can support. Then name one additional piece of data that would make the original causal claim testable.
Read the worked answer
Revised sentence: 'Borrowing rose from 9,800 to 12,400 books while membership grew by 600 and weekday evening hours were extended by one hour.' Data to test the causal claim: a short survey of visitors asking whether they came more often because of seating, or seat-occupancy counts before and after any furniture change, compared with a similar library that did not change its seating.
3. The council says 'books matter more than chairs.' Is this a fact, an opinion, or a recommendation? Explain how you would classify it for an unseen-passage question.
Read the worked answer
It is an opinion. 'Matter more' is a value judgment, not a measurement; the passage gives no data comparing the value of books and chairs. It also functions as a recommendation because it is used to justify a 40 per cent cut. For an unseen-passage question, classify it as opinion and point to the evaluative comparative 'more than' as the signal.