ELC 501 - reading comprehension week 6 PDF

Preview

Summary

Tutorial on how to do the reading comprehension. For example, supporting details, topic, main idea, minor and major....

Description

QUESTION 1 Provide the meaning (synonym) for each of the following words: a)

differentiated (line 7) = modified

b)

scintillating (line 13)

= brilliant

c)

disparage (line 67)

= downgrade

d)

stupendous (line 76) = prodigious

e)

mundane (line 80)

= boring (5 marks)

QUESTION 2 List TWO (2) types of support given by the writer in Paragraph III to indicate that Greenpeace does not support Shell’s odd marketing campaign. a)

Type of support : Fact Example : A research report in the latest edition of The Chemical Engineer (the journal for the Institution of Chemical Engineers) covered Greenpeace’s latest salvo against Shell.

b)

Type of support : Opinion Example : According to Greenpeace expert, Dr Abraham Thomas, one of Greenpeace’s points was that kids should not be exposed to Shell when building houses, roads and cars out of Lego bricks.

(4 marks)

QUESTION 3 Identify the STATED MAIN IDEA of Paragraph VIII and provide ONE MAJOR and ONE MINOR supporting details. a)

Stated main idea:

Ans : Shell’s silence may well have been the smart move and the Greenpeace (1 mark)

campaign will be forgotten.

b)

Major supporting detail:

Ans : Lego will suffer a little bit for having fewer retail outlets than it had before but in the long term, the Greenpeace YouTube clip will see its interest fade. (1 mark)

c)

Minor supporting detail:

Ans : Apart from Lego, all that will remain, for the few who have any interest, is the fact that Greenpeace roped in two innocent bystanders in its attempt to disparage (1 mark)

Shell, namely: a toy company, and kids who play with building blocks.

QUESTION 4 a)

What is the implied main idea of Paragraph IV?

Ans : The big benefit of odd marketing campaigns is that they are unusually costeffective.

(2 marks)

QUESTION 5 Identify the type of support for each of the supporting details based on the following options. Use each option only ONCE.

Personal experience Explanation

Example Statistics

Expert opinion Research Findings

Supporting Details

Types of Supporting Details

a)

One of the favourites from history was General Thomas ‘Stonewall’ Jackson’s tactics in the American Civil War.

Research Findings

In

March 1862, Jackson knew that his side, the Confederates, were vastly outnumbered by Major – General George B McClellan’s much larger Union army in the Shenandoah Valley in Virginia. (lines 44 - 48) b)

The results gained for that outlay were fairly dramatic. According to UK daily The Guardian (Oct9,2014), the video got six million hits on YouTube although, when it was viewed in December, it showed up as a much smaller 4,352 – ironically the first version got pulled over an ethical snag because of copyright issues with the song. The fact that it got an article in The Guardian is a measure of publicity itself, it was also in The Financial Times and The Economist.

(lines 34 – 39)

Explanation

c)

On top of that, the buzz marketing campaign is stupendous. It

Expert opinion

is a thrill that is considerably enhanced by the fact that odd campaigns have a heightened sense of risk – if you fail it is painful, but winning is a big trill. (lines 74 – 76) d)

According to Dr Jose Reagal, the Lego brand, and everyone

Example

who enjoys creative play, should never have become part of this dispute between Greenpeace and Shell. Dragging in kids and a toy company would be a bad idea, unless one is keen on the idea that ‘any publicity is good publicity’. (lines 85 - 88)

( 4 marks) QUESTION 6 Write T for a statement that is TRUE and F for a statement that is FALSE.

a)

Statements

TRUE/FALSE

The main purpose of branding is to trick customers into buying

False

the products in the market. b)

Shell’s petrol stations are considered by Greenpeace as odd

True

retail outlets for Lego products and building block sets. c)

Greenpeace campaign against Shell is successful as Shell

True

continues not to respond. d)

Greenpeace is dragging creative kids who want to build things

False

into its fight with Shell.

(4 marks) QUESTION 7 Explain what does the writer mean by saying, “There is no doubt about it – odd battles require more creativity than many other areas of marketing”. (lines 71-73) Ans : It means to be more creative, its need more idea from others area of marketing to generate creative idea.

(2 marks)

QUESTION 8

Indicate the topic that is most suitable for the content of Paragraph X. Provide two evidence from the paragraph to support your answer. The topic must be in the

form of phrase or key words, while the evidence can be in a form of a sentence or phrases.

Topic: Childish Argument Evidence 1: Dragging in kids and a toy company would be a bad idea, unless one is keen on the idea that ‘any publicity is good publicity’.

Evidence 2: Lego could have responded with ‘Sorry Greenpeace, this is a very unfair campaign on a toy company, and you’re dragging creative kids who want to build things into your fight with Shell

(3 marks)

QUESTION 9 Shell’s silence may well have been the smart move and the Greenpeace campaign will be forgotten. Lego will suffer a little bit for having fewer retail outlets than it had before but in the long term, the Greenpeace YouTube clip will see its interest fade. What can you infer regarding Shell’s response towards Greenpeace’s campaign? Ans : Greenpeace’s will be forgotten.

(2 marks)

QUESTION 10 In this article, the writer cites one of the favourites from American history i.e. General Thomas ‘Stonewall’ Jackson’s tactics in the American Civil War whereby a head to – head fight with General George B McClellan’s and his much larger Union army in the Shenandoah Valley in Virginia in March 1862, was the right decision.’ Do you agree that General Thomas ‘Stonewall’ Jackson’s decision was right? Explain your answer. Ans : Yes. It is because he decide to not go for the big battle because he knew that the number of McClellan’s men more than double his available forces. (3 marks) QUESTION 11 Study the statements below. Write I for inductive reasoning and D for Deductive reasoning in the boxes provided.

a) A research report in the latest edition of The Chemical Engineer (the journal for the Institution of Chemical Engineers) covered Greenpeace’s latest salvo

against Shell. The deal involved Shell’s petrol stations as retail outlets for Lego products, as well as the use of toy versions of the petrol stations as part of a building block set. According to Greenpeace expert, Dr Abraham Thomas, one of Greenpeace’s points was that kids should not be exposed to Shell when building houses, roads and cars out of Lego bricks. Who would have ever imagined that picking on something as small and everyday as petrol stations as a retail outlet, or Shell petrol stations being in Lego sets, was even worth talking about, let alone campaigning about? But in many ways, that is exactly the whole point of why it was effective – it was all about oddness. (Paragraph III) i.

Types of reasoning: D

ii.

Explanation to type of reasoning: Start from general to specific

b) According to Sun Tzu’s maxim in The Art of War, fighting is a waste if it does not result in victory. Such belief must have also been the cause for Jackson’s firm decision

to stay away from a standard head – on- fight because of his

smaller army as compared to McClellan’s army. Moreover, Jackson’s wise strategy of sending small groups of his men on raiding missions and into smaller fights with the enemy led to his eventual victory. ( Paragraph VII) i.

Types of reasoning : I

ii. Explanation to type of reasoning: Start from specific to general

c) The unfairness of picking on Lego is what got Greenpeace the headline ‘Childish Arguments’ for the report in The Economist. A press release by Lego CEO Jorgen Vig Knudstorp stated: ‘The Greenpeace campaign used the Lego brand to target Shell. As it is stated before, it is firmly believed that Greenpeace ought to have a direct conversation with Shell. According to Dr Jose Reagal, the Lego brand, and everyone who enjoys creative play, should never have become part of this dispute between Greenpeace and Shell. Dragging in kids and a toy company would be a bad idea, unless one is keen on the idea that ‘any publicity is good publicity’. Lego could have responded with ‘Sorry Greenpeace, this is a very unfair campaign on a toy company, and you’re dragging creative kids who want to build things into your fight with Shell. We won’t play your game’. That might have worked as the Lego management probably knows its buying better and anyone else. (Paragraph X) i)

Types of reasoning: I

ii)

Explanation to type of reasoning: Start from specific to general (6 marks)

QUESTION 12 Formulate ONE underlying assumptions that can be made in Paragraph XI. Provide TWO evidence from the paragraph to support your answer. Your anser for the evidence can be in form of a sentence or phrases.

Underlying assumptions: Greenpeace take a chance on Lego

Evidence 1: The Greenpeace campaign used the Lego brand to target Shell

Evidence 2: As it is stated before, it is firmly believed that Greenpeace ought to have a direct conversation with Shell....