Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Aug 2710:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
We’ve worked incredibly hard to build TTP into the best test prep experience possible, and it would mean a lot to us to win Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep. If TTP has helped you, we’d be incredibly grateful for your vote.
Sep 0410:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
What does test anxiety really look like on the GMAT? For many test takers, it does not look like a panic attack. Instead, it shows up as brain fog, rereading, negative comparisons, mental noise....
Sep 0609:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EST
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful EA course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Perfect class schedule and easy course access for working professionals. Class starts Sept. 6, 9:30am-12:30pm EST- Sep 09
07:00 AM PDT
-10:00 AM PDT
Meet AdComs and explore top Master’s programs - MiM, MiF, MSc, MSBA and more. - Application Fee Waivers - Free 1-Week of GMAT Club Tests: - Master's Application Toolkit - Grand Prize Giveaway 
Sep 1507:00 PM EDT
-09:00 PM EST
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Sept. 15, 2026 - Nov. 15, 2027, 7:00pm-9:00pm EST
Sep 2108:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Oct. 13, 2026 - Jan. 7, 2027, 8:00pm-10:00pm EST
29 Sep 2024, 13:54
Kudos
Bookmarks
In 1946, US President Harry Truman signed into law the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, which established what is now called the National School Lunch Program (NSLP). The NSLP reimburses states for providing free and low-cost meals to qualifying students. In its first year, about 7 million children participated, rising to over 30 million by 2016. Schools may only serve free or reduced-price lunches to children who qualify, based on household income and family size. Currently, children from families with incomes at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level qualify for free lunch, while those from families with incomes between 130 and 185 percent qualify for reduced-price lunch.
Unfortunately, the eligibility guidelines leave many children in a difficult situation: their parents earn more than 130 percent of the federal poverty level but not enough to consistently afford full or reduced-price meals. This gap often results in school lunch debt, which can have acute psychological impacts on children, including stigma and bullying from peers. For many children, these school meals are often their only reliable source of daily nutrition.
Eight states have established universal school meal programs for schools participating in the NSLP. Other states have eliminated the reduced-price lunch category, making meals free for any student from a family with an income below 185 percent of the federal poverty level. However, most states have not adopted such expanded programs, leaving millions of children without consistent access to school meals.
The author's attitude toward the National School Lunch Program can best be described as:
A. Neutral, presenting the program and its issues without expressing a clear stance.
B. Critical, condemning the National School Lunch Program for failing to adequately address children’s needs and demanding reform.
C. Concerned, pointing out the gaps in the program and their potential negative effects on children.
D. Optimistic, suggesting that state-level reforms can fully solve the program’s shortcomings.
E. Defensive, defending the program's current structure against potential criticism.
Unfortunately, the eligibility guidelines leave many children in a difficult situation: their parents earn more than 130 percent of the federal poverty level but not enough to consistently afford full or reduced-price meals. This gap often results in school lunch debt, which can have acute psychological impacts on children, including stigma and bullying from peers. For many children, these school meals are often their only reliable source of daily nutrition.
Eight states have established universal school meal programs for schools participating in the NSLP. Other states have eliminated the reduced-price lunch category, making meals free for any student from a family with an income below 185 percent of the federal poverty level. However, most states have not adopted such expanded programs, leaving millions of children without consistent access to school meals.
The author's attitude toward the National School Lunch Program can best be described as:
A. Neutral, presenting the program and its issues without expressing a clear stance.
B. Critical, condemning the National School Lunch Program for failing to adequately address children’s needs and demanding reform.
C. Concerned, pointing out the gaps in the program and their potential negative effects on children.
D. Optimistic, suggesting that state-level reforms can fully solve the program’s shortcomings.
E. Defensive, defending the program's current structure against potential criticism.
29 Sep 2024, 13:54
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
In 1946, US President Harry Truman signed into law the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, which established what is now called the National School Lunch Program (NSLP). The NSLP reimburses states for providing free and low-cost meals to qualifying students. In its first year, about 7 million children participated, rising to over 30 million by 2016. Schools may only serve free or reduced-price lunches to children who qualify, based on household income and family size. Currently, children from families with incomes at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level qualify for free lunch, while those from families with incomes between 130 and 185 percent qualify for reduced-price lunch.
Unfortunately, the eligibility guidelines leave many children in a difficult situation: their parents earn more than 130 percent of the federal poverty level but not enough to consistently afford full or reduced-price meals. This gap often results in school lunch debt, which can have acute psychological impacts on children, including stigma and bullying from peers. For many children, these school meals are often their only reliable source of daily nutrition.
Eight states have established universal school meal programs for schools participating in the NSLP. Other states have eliminated the reduced-price lunch category, making meals free for any student from a family with an income below 185 percent of the federal poverty level. However, most states have not adopted such expanded programs, leaving millions of children without consistent access to school meals.
The author's attitude toward the National School Lunch Program can best be described as:
A. Neutral, presenting the program and its issues without expressing a clear stance.
B. Critical, condemning the National School Lunch Program for failing to adequately address children’s needs and demanding reform.
C. Concerned, pointing out the gaps in the program and their potential negative effects on children.
D. Optimistic, suggesting that state-level reforms can fully solve the program’s shortcomings.
E. Defensive, defending the program's current structure against potential criticism.
A. Incorrect. The author is not purely neutral. While the passage presents factual information, it emphasizes the issues with the program, particularly the gaps in eligibility, and shows concern for the children affected by these gaps.
B. Incorrect. The tone is not critical in the sense of condemning the program or demanding reform. While the author points out shortcomings in the program, there is no strong condemnation or direct call for reform. The tone is more focused on concern for the children impacted by the gaps.
[color=#339966;]C. Correct Answer.[/color] The author's tone is concerned. The passage highlights the limitations of the National School Lunch Program and the negative effects of these gaps on children, particularly with regard to lunch debt and psychological impacts. This indicates a tone of concern for the children rather than criticism of the program itself.
D. Incorrect. The author is not optimistic about the state-level reforms completely solving the program’s shortcomings. While some solutions are mentioned, the focus is on the current gaps and the harm they cause, rather than an optimistic view of reforms.
E. Incorrect. The author is not defensive of the program’s current structure. In fact, the passage suggests that the current eligibility criteria leave many children without consistent access to meals, indicating concern rather than defense of the existing system.
Answer: C
In 1946, US President Harry Truman signed into law the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, which established what is now called the National School Lunch Program (NSLP). The NSLP reimburses states for providing free and low-cost meals to qualifying students. In its first year, about 7 million children participated, rising to over 30 million by 2016. Schools may only serve free or reduced-price lunches to children who qualify, based on household income and family size. Currently, children from families with incomes at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level qualify for free lunch, while those from families with incomes between 130 and 185 percent qualify for reduced-price lunch.
Unfortunately, the eligibility guidelines leave many children in a difficult situation: their parents earn more than 130 percent of the federal poverty level but not enough to consistently afford full or reduced-price meals. This gap often results in school lunch debt, which can have acute psychological impacts on children, including stigma and bullying from peers. For many children, these school meals are often their only reliable source of daily nutrition.
Eight states have established universal school meal programs for schools participating in the NSLP. Other states have eliminated the reduced-price lunch category, making meals free for any student from a family with an income below 185 percent of the federal poverty level. However, most states have not adopted such expanded programs, leaving millions of children without consistent access to school meals.
The author's attitude toward the National School Lunch Program can best be described as:
A. Neutral, presenting the program and its issues without expressing a clear stance.
B. Critical, condemning the National School Lunch Program for failing to adequately address children’s needs and demanding reform.
C. Concerned, pointing out the gaps in the program and their potential negative effects on children.
D. Optimistic, suggesting that state-level reforms can fully solve the program’s shortcomings.
E. Defensive, defending the program's current structure against potential criticism.
A. Incorrect. The author is not purely neutral. While the passage presents factual information, it emphasizes the issues with the program, particularly the gaps in eligibility, and shows concern for the children affected by these gaps.
B. Incorrect. The tone is not critical in the sense of condemning the program or demanding reform. While the author points out shortcomings in the program, there is no strong condemnation or direct call for reform. The tone is more focused on concern for the children impacted by the gaps.
[color=#339966;]C. Correct Answer.[/color] The author's tone is concerned. The passage highlights the limitations of the National School Lunch Program and the negative effects of these gaps on children, particularly with regard to lunch debt and psychological impacts. This indicates a tone of concern for the children rather than criticism of the program itself.
D. Incorrect. The author is not optimistic about the state-level reforms completely solving the program’s shortcomings. While some solutions are mentioned, the focus is on the current gaps and the harm they cause, rather than an optimistic view of reforms.
E. Incorrect. The author is not defensive of the program’s current structure. In fact, the passage suggests that the current eligibility criteria leave many children without consistent access to meals, indicating concern rather than defense of the existing system.
Answer: C
