Events & Promotions
| Last visit was: 10 Sep 2026, 07:29 |
It is currently 10 Sep 2026, 07:29 |
|
|
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
07:00 PM EDT
-09:00 PM EST
07:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Difficulty:
Question Stats:
71% (02:44) correct
29%
(02:55)
wrong
based on 1546
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:
64% (00:58) correct
36%
(01:07)
wrong
based on 1615
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:
62% (01:07) correct
38%
(01:16)
wrong
based on 1559
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.