Events & Promotions
| Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 11:09 |
It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 11:09 |
|
|
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
07:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
10:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Difficulty:
Question Stats:
72% (02:43) correct
28%
(02:56)
wrong
based on 1108
sessions
History
| The ecologist faults community planners generally for not considering the effect of converting land to industrial or residential use. | |
| The economist would allow road construction to proceed even if it would threaten sensitive ecosystems. | |
| Both the economist and ecologist offer guidance for planners who are considering whether to undertake road construction projects. | |
| Both the economist and the ecologist consider the regional economic impacts of road construction projects. | |
| Neither the economist nor the ecologist provides clear criteria for determining whether a road project should be undertaken. |
Difficulty:
Question Stats:
62% (00:58) correct
38%
(01:08)
wrong
based on 1203
sessions
History
| Yes | No | |
| The economist is more intent on endorsing road construction projects than the ecologist is. | ||
| The economist and the ecologist are both concerned with the criteria on which community planners base decisions. | ||
| The ecologist is concerned with how road projects can affect the quality of life within communities, whereas the economist is not. |
Difficulty:
Question Stats:
61% (01:07) correct
39%
(01:16)
wrong
based on 1158
sessions
History
| Acceptable | Not Acceptable | |
| The road’s planned route could be altered to avoid the sensitive ecosystem at no additional cost. | ||
| The road would provide a significant economic benefit to neighboring communities. | ||
| Mitigating the threat to the sensitive ecosystem would cost an additional $1 million. |
Success stories and strategies from high-scoring candidates.