The Bilingual Storytime Survey
The Fukushima City Library began a bilingual storytime in April. Sessions run on Saturdays from 10:00 to 10:40. In May, 38 children attended; in June, 52. A survey of 60 parents found that 41 wanted more Japanese in the sessions, 12 wanted more English, and 7 had no preference. One volunteer, Ms. Sato, reads in English and then translates into Japanese. The library director says attendance rose because of word of mouth. The volunteer coordinator notes that June had three rainy Saturdays, which may have pushed families indoors. Each session costs 3,000 yen for materials, and the library can fund only two sessions per month. The library must decide whether to add a second volunteer or change the language balance.
1. Which conclusion about the attendance increase is best supported by the passage?
Read the worked answer
Best conclusion: Attendance increased from May to June, but the passage does not establish whether word of mouth or rainy weather caused the increase.
Reasoning: The director's word-of-mouth explanation is an opinion; the passage gives no referral data. The coordinator's rain explanation is plausible but also untested, because there is no comparison with non-rainy Saturdays. The survey is about language preference among parents who already attend, not about why new families came. A tempting wrong answer is “More parents wanted Japanese, so the program should switch to Japanese.” That does not follow: 41 of 60 parents preferring more Japanese describes current attendees, not the cause of attendance growth. The only defensible reading is cautious: two months of attendance numbers and one preference survey cannot separate the competing explanations.
2. What additional information would most help the library evaluate the director's claim?
Read the worked answer
Most useful information: A short referral question asked of new families over several months, plus attendance records matched to weather.
Reasoning: To test “word of mouth,” the library needs to know how new families heard about the program-friend, flyer, school, social media. To test the rain explanation, it needs attendance on rainy versus non-rainy Saturdays, not just one rainy June. A second language-preference survey would not help, because preference is not the same as attendance cause. The key judgement is distinguishing evidence that could confirm a cause from data that merely describes the audience.
3. The coordinator says rainy Saturdays “may have pushed families indoors.” What does this suggest about the evidence?
Read the worked answer
What it suggests: The passage contains an alternative explanation, and the word “may” signals uncertainty rather than proof.
Reasoning: A good reader notices that the coordinator is not asserting a fact; she is proposing a rival cause. That matters because the director's claim is also unproven. The passage gives no controlled comparison, so neither explanation should be accepted as established. The correct exam move is to treat both as hypotheses and to ask what data would separate them.