Office Email Privacy

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct83% picked this

   A problem is introduced, followed by specific examples illustrating the problem; a possible solution is suggested, followed by

   Why this is right

   This definitely does not adhere to the "one ingredient per paragraph" formula. A problem is introduced 1st paragraph (how private should email be?) specific examples illustrating the problem 2nd and 3rd paragraphs (here are some of the questions about email privacy within government / here are some questions about email privacy in the private sector) a possible solution is suggested This skips right to the last sentence, before the semicolon (the only solution may be to encrypt messages with codes) acknowledgement of its shortcomings The backend of the final sentence (but that undermines the convenience of email) Why is this correct answer psychotically taking the final sentence, dividing it in half, and presenting each half as a big picture ingredient? Good question, me. It's partly to be obnoxious, but it's also somewhat respectable because what we care about predominantly relates to the overall purpose and framework of the passage. Since this was a Problem / Solution style passage, the fact that there is a Solution offered but rejected is the big payoff moment of the entire passage.

   Skill tested: Organization · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

   83%
2. B

   Out of Scope: preferred solution0% picked this

   A problem is introduced, followed by explications of two possible solutions to the problem; the first solution is preferred to the second, and reasons

   The author never endorses any solution, so we can't match anything up with "two solutions, the first is preferred to the second".

   0%
3. C

   Trap7% picked this

   A problem is introduced, followed by analysis of the historical circumstances that helped bring the problem about; a possible solution is offered and rejected

   Weak Last Ingredient Out of Scope: historical circumstances The quickest way to eliminate would be to check the final ingredient and think, "The solution wasn't rejected because it's a partial remedy (it doesn't solve the whole problem). It was rejected because it undermines the principal virtue of email, which is convenience." If we read the whole thing, we'd also struggle to match up "the historical circumstances that helped bring the problem about". We never discuss any history behind how we got to this current problem of trying to figure out how private email should be.

   7%
4. D

   Bad Last Ingredient: solution argued for7% picked this

   A problem is introduced, followed by enumeration of various questions that need to be answered before a solution can be found; one possible

   If we check the last ingredient, we can ditch this since the author never "argues for" any solution. She considers a possible solution and then says, "Unfortunately, that would undermine the #1 thing we like about email".

   7%
5. E

   Out of Scope: preferred approach2% picked this

   A problem is introduced, followed by descriptions of two contrasting approaches to thinking about the problem; the second approach is preferred to the first,

   The first two ingredients make enough sense to keep reading, as we could maybe match up "government vs. private sector" with "two contrasting approaches". But this goes off the rails once it's saying "the second approach is preferred to the first". The author never says she prefers to think about email privacy in relation to the private sector, as opposed to thinking about in relation to the government. And the final paragraph certainly doesn't try to defend a preference for thinking about this privacy issue in relation to business more so than in relation to government.

   2%