prismlearning.academy Logo
NEUR
N

While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:Muckrakers were journalists who sought to expose corruption in US...

GMAT Expression of Ideas : (Expression) Questions

Source: Official
Expression of Ideas
Rhetorical Synthesis
MEDIUM
...
...
Notes
Post a Query

While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:

  • Muckrakers were journalists who sought to expose corruption in US institutions during the Progressive Era (1897–1920).
  • Ida Tarbell was a muckraker who investigated the Standard Oil Company.
  • She interviewed Standard Oil Company executives, oil industry workers, and public officials.
  • She examined thousands of pages of the company's internal communications, including letters and financial records.
  • Her book The History of the Standard Oil Company (1904) exposed the company's unfair business practices.

The student wants to emphasize the thoroughness of Ida Tarbell's investigation of the Standard Oil Company. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?

A

Ida Tarbell not only interviewed Standard Oil executives, oil industry workers, and public officials but also examined thousands of pages of the company's internal communications.

B

Ida Tarbell, who investigated the Standard Oil Company, was a muckraker (a journalist who sought to expose corruption in US institutions during the Progressive Era, 1897–1920).

C

As part of her investigation of the Standard Oil Company, muckraker Ida Tarbell conducted interviews.

D

Published in 1904, muckraker Ida Tarbell's book The History of the Standard Oil Company exposed the company's unfair business practices.

Solution

Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage

Part A: Create Passage Analysis Table

Text from PassageAnalysis
Muckrakers were journalists who sought to expose corruption in US institutions during the Progressive Era (1897–1920).
  • What it says: Muckrakers = journalists exposing corruption, Progressive Era 1897-1920
  • What it does: Defines what muckrakers were and when they operated
  • What it is: Background/context
Ida Tarbell was a muckraker who investigated the Standard Oil Company.
  • What it says: Tarbell = muckraker, investigated Standard Oil
  • What it does: Introduces the specific person and her target
  • What it is: Subject introduction
She interviewed Standard Oil Company executives, oil industry workers, and public officials.
  • What it says: Interviewed execs, workers, officials
  • What it does: Describes one method of her investigation
  • What it is: Evidence of research method
She examined thousands of pages of the company's internal communications, including letters and financial records.
  • What it says: Examined 1000s pages internal docs (letters, financial records)
  • What it does: Describes another method of her investigation
  • What it is: Evidence of research method
Her book The History of the Standard Oil Company (1904) exposed the company's unfair business practices.
  • What it says: Book (1904) = exposed unfair practices
  • What it does: Presents the outcome/result of her investigation
  • What it is: Result/conclusion

Part B: Provide Passage Architecture & Core Elements

Main Point: Ida Tarbell conducted a thorough investigation of Standard Oil using multiple research methods, ultimately exposing the company's unfair practices in her 1904 book.

Argument Flow: The notes begin by defining muckrakers and their historical context, then introduce Tarbell as a specific example who investigated Standard Oil. They detail her comprehensive research methods—both interviews and document examination—before concluding with the successful outcome of her investigation.

Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely

What's being asked? Which choice most effectively emphasizes thoroughness

What type of answer do we need? A sentence that highlights the comprehensive nature of Tarbell's investigation

Any limiting keywords? "thoroughness" is the key concept—we need to show the investigation was comprehensive/complete

Step 3: Prethink the Answer

  • To emphasize thoroughness, the answer should show that Tarbell's investigation was comprehensive and detailed
  • From our notes, thoroughness is demonstrated by:
    • The variety of people she interviewed (executives, workers, officials)
    • The extensive document review (thousands of pages of internal communications)
    • The depth of materials examined (letters and financial records)
  • The most thorough investigation would combine multiple research methods and show both breadth and depth
  • The right answer should highlight that Tarbell didn't just do one type of research—she did multiple types extensively
Answer Choices Explained
A

Ida Tarbell not only interviewed Standard Oil executives, oil industry workers, and public officials but also examined thousands of pages of the company's internal communications.

✓ Correct
  • Combines both major research methods from the notes
  • "not only...but also" structure emphasizes she did multiple things
  • Shows breadth (variety of interview subjects) and depth (thousands of pages)
  • Directly demonstrates thoroughness through comprehensive approach
B

Ida Tarbell, who investigated the Standard Oil Company, was a muckraker (a journalist who sought to expose corruption in US institutions during the Progressive Era, 1897–1920).

✗ Incorrect
  • Focuses on background information about muckrakers and time period
  • Mentions she investigated Standard Oil but gives no details about methods
  • Doesn't show what made her investigation thorough
C

As part of her investigation of the Standard Oil Company, muckraker Ida Tarbell conducted interviews.

✗ Incorrect
  • Only mentions one research method (interviews)
  • Doesn't specify the variety of people interviewed
  • Ignores the document examination entirely
  • Shows incomplete picture of her investigative approach
D

Published in 1904, muckraker Ida Tarbell's book The History of the Standard Oil Company exposed the company's unfair business practices.

✗ Incorrect
  • Focuses on the outcome (book publication and results)
  • Doesn't describe the investigative methods that made it thorough
  • Publication year and results don't demonstrate thoroughness of research process
Rate this Solution
Tell us what you think about this solution
...
...
Forum Discussions
Start a new discussion
Post
Load More
Similar Questions
Finding similar questions...
Previous Attempts
Loading attempts...
Similar Questions
Finding similar questions...
Parallel Question Generator
Create AI-generated questions with similar patterns to master this question type.