How an article links and separates people, ideas and events
Grade 8 Reading Worksheet - Challenge Me
Circle the best answer.
Read this first
Voting in Athens (article)
[1] When people call Athens the birthplace of democracy, they point to real likenesses with modern governments. [2] Athenian citizens met in an assembly on a hillside to talk over laws, vote on them and decide questions of war and money. [3] Citizens of democratic countries today also help to make the laws, although they do so in different ways. [4] Both systems rest on the idea that a government should answer to the people it rules.
[5] The chief difference lies in how citizens take part. [6] In Athens, citizens voted on laws themselves, which historians call direct democracy, and many officials were picked by lottery, not by election. [7] In most countries today, citizens elect leaders to vote on laws for them, which is called representative democracy.
[8] A second difference concerns who counted as a citizen. [9] In Athens only adult men born to Athenian parents could vote, and women, enslaved people and foreign residents were left out. [10] Together those groups made up most of the people who lived in the city. [11] Today, in nearly all democracies, almost every adult citizen has the right to vote.
[12] These differences lead some historians to call Athens an early experiment rather than a model. [13] Its assembly showed that ordinary people could govern themselves, but its limits on citizenship show how narrow that self-government could be. [14] That is why the story of Athens is told with both pride and caution.
Ari links paragraph 1 and paragraph 3. Which choice gives the right label and the right reason?
- Unlike: in paragraph 1 the article says Athens was a democracy, but in paragraph 3 it says Athens was no democracy at all.
- Unlike: in paragraph 2 the article says Athenian citizens voted on laws themselves, but in the same paragraph it says most countries today elect leaders.
- Like: in paragraph 1 the article says Athens and modern democracies both let citizens help make the laws, and in paragraph 3 it says almost every adult could vote in both, so the two systems match.
- Unlike: in paragraph 1 the article says Athens and modern democracies both let citizens help make the laws, but in paragraph 3 it says Athens counted only a small group as citizens.
Bo asks about paragraph 3. According to it, where does the comparison between Athens and today's democracies stop working?
- Athens had no public debate, so nothing about it can be compared with a modern democracy in any way.
- Both let citizens take part in making the laws, and both rest on the idea that a government answers to the people it rules, as paragraph 1 explains.
- Who counted as a citizen: in Athens only adult men born to Athenian parents could vote, but today almost every adult citizen can.
- Citizens in Athens voted on laws themselves, while citizens in most countries today elect leaders to vote on their behalf.
Esme asks which distinction best supports the author's idea that Athens was an early experiment rather than a model. Which choice states it?
- Athens showed that ordinary people could govern themselves, but it limited who counted as a citizen far more than democracies do now.
- Athens chose many officials by lottery, while democracies today choose their officials by election, as the second paragraph explains.
- Athens was a worse government than any democracy today, because its citizens voted on laws directly instead of choosing leaders.
- Athens and today's democracies both rest on the idea that a government should answer to the people it rules, as the first paragraph says.
The Telegraph and the Internet (article)
[1] Writers often call the telegraph an early internet, and the nickname points to a real likeness. [2] Before the 1840s a message could travel no faster than the horse, ship or train that carried it. [3] Then wires began to carry signals between distant cities in moments. [4] The internet carries messages across the world in a similar way, as electrical or light signals instead of letters on paper.
[5] Both systems also depend on a code that turns words into signals. [6] Telegraph operators tapped out Morse code, in which dots and dashes stand for letters. [7] Computers today turn text, pictures and sound into patterns of ones and zeros, and the receiving end reverses the process to recover the message.
[8] A telegram passed through the hands of operators, who tapped it in, copied it down and often passed it on from station to station. [9] Messengers then carried the paper to the door of the person it was meant for. [10] On the internet, machines break a message into small packets, send each one along whatever route is open, and put the packets back together at the other end, usually without a person touching them.
[11] Telegraph companies charged by the word, so senders cut their messages down to the fewest possible words, and a long message could cost more than a day's wages. [12] Most home internet users pay a flat monthly fee, and they send as much as they like. [13] Both systems shrank distance, but only one made messages cheap enough to send without a second thought.
Jun links paragraph 2 and paragraph 3. Which choice gives the right label and the right reason?
- Unlike: in paragraph 1 the article says both systems carry signals between distant places, but in paragraph 4 it says the telegraph was priced by the word, so long messages cost a great deal.
- Unlike: in paragraph 2 the article says both systems use a code, but in paragraph 3 it says the internet delivers a message much faster than a telegraph ever could.
- Unlike: in paragraph 2 both systems turn words into signals and back again, but in paragraph 3 people handled each telegram while machines handle internet messages.
- Like: in paragraph 2 the article says both systems turn words into signals and back again, and in paragraph 3 it says both rely on people to pass each message along from place to place.
Luz asks which distinction explains why senders cut their telegrams down to the fewest possible words. Which choice states it?
- Operators copied each telegram down and passed it on from station to station, while machines break messages into packets and pass them along open routes.
- Both systems turn words into signals that the receiving end can reverse to recover the message, as paragraph 2 explains.
- Telegraph wires could carry just a few words at a time, so long messages had to be sent in pieces and put back together later.
- Telegraph companies charged by the word, so a long message cost a great deal, while most home internet users pay a flat fee for any amount.
Viruses and Bacteria (article)
[1] Viruses and bacteria are often grouped together as germs, because both can make people sick and both are too small to see without a microscope. [2] Yet biologists treat them as very different things, and the difference shapes how doctors fight each one. [3] A bacterium is a living cell that can feed, grow and divide on its own, while a virus is a tiny package of genes wrapped in a coat of protein.
[4] That difference explains why a virus is not usually counted as fully alive. [5] Outside a living cell a virus does nothing, because it cannot grow or make energy. [6] It spreads only by entering a cell and using the cell's machinery to make copies of itself. [7] A bacterium, by contrast, carries its own machinery, and many kinds live harmlessly in soil, water and the human gut.
[8] Doctors use the difference when they choose a treatment. [9] Antibiotics work by blocking parts that bacteria have and human cells do not, such as the wall around each bacterial cell. [10] Viruses have no such parts, so an antibiotic has nothing to attack, and a cold or the flu will not respond to one. [11] Taking antibiotics for a viral illness gives no benefit and can help resistant bacteria survive.
[12] The main tools against viral disease are vaccines and antiviral drugs, which interfere with how a virus copies itself. [13] Knowing which kind of germ causes an illness is therefore the first step toward a treatment that works.
Milo links paragraph 1 and paragraph 3. Which choice gives the right label and the right reason?
- Unlike: in paragraph 1 the article says viruses and bacteria are grouped as germs because both can make people sick, but in paragraph 3 it says antibiotics can harm people who take them for a long time.
- Unlike: in paragraph 2 the article says a virus cannot grow outside a living cell, but in paragraph 4 it says vaccines interfere with how a virus copies itself.
- Unlike: in paragraph 1 the article says viruses and bacteria are grouped as germs because both can make people sick, but in paragraph 3 it says an antibiotic works on one and not the other.
- Like: in paragraph 1 the article says viruses and bacteria are grouped as germs, and in paragraph 3 it says an antibiotic works on both of them.
Noah asks about paragraph 2. According to it, where does grouping viruses with bacteria as germs stop being accurate?
- Antibiotics block parts that bacteria have and viruses lack, such as the wall around each bacterial cell, as the third paragraph explains.
- A bacterium carries its own machinery and lives on its own, while a virus does nothing outside a living cell and copies itself only inside one.
- Both can make people sick and both are too small to see without a microscope, which is why the first paragraph groups them together as germs.
- Viruses are not really germs at all, because they cannot make anyone sick and cannot spread from one person to another.
Does a River Join or Divide? (article)
[1] A river looks like a boundary on a map, but historians point out that it can serve as a link just as often as a barrier. [2] The Rhine, for example, separated peoples who lived on opposite banks, yet it was also a highway that carried grain, timber and ideas deep into Europe. [3] Which role a river plays depends on what people can do with it.
[4] Where a river is shallow, swift or wide, travelers on foot or in wagons find it a barrier. [5] Until a bridge or ferry was built, crossing could take days, and armies sometimes chose a river as the line they would defend. [6] Many borders still follow rivers, partly because the water was easy to describe in a treaty and hard to cross.
[7] Where the water is calm and deep enough for boats, the same river becomes a road. [8] Water carries heavy loads more cheaply than wagons, so merchants settled along navigable rivers, and cities such as Cairo, Baghdad and Paris grew where goods changed hands. [9] Communities on both banks often shared a language, a market and a set of customs, even when a border ran down the middle of the stream.
[10] Technology can change a river's role without changing the river. [11] A bridge turns a barrier into a crossing, and a dam can turn a highway into a lake that boats cannot pass. [12] So the more useful question is not whether a river joins or divides, but who is trying to cross it, carry something along it, or claim it.
Ren links paragraph 2 and paragraph 3. Which choice gives the right label and the right reason?
- Unlike: in paragraph 1 the article says the Rhine separated peoples, but in paragraph 4 it says a dam can turn a highway into a lake.
- Like: in paragraph 2 the article says a shallow, swift or wide river is a barrier to travelers on foot or in wagons, and in paragraph 3 it says it is a barrier to boats too, so the river keeps one role.
- Unlike: in paragraph 2 the article says a shallow, swift or wide river is a barrier to travelers on foot or in wagons, but in paragraph 3 it says a calm, deep river becomes a road for boats.
- Unlike: in paragraph 2 the article says rivers make good borders, but in paragraph 3 it says no border has ever followed a river.
Tala asks about paragraph 3. According to it, where does the idea that a river is a barrier stop holding?
- A bridge turns a barrier into a crossing, and a dam can turn a highway into a lake, as the last paragraph says.
- A river stops being a barrier once a city has been built beside it, because merchants will find a way across.
- Where the water is calm and deep enough for boats, a river carries goods cheaply and becomes a road that joins communities.
- Where a river is shallow, swift or wide, travelers on foot or in wagons find it hard to cross, as the second paragraph says.
Zee asks which distinction the author relies on to answer whether a river joins or divides. Which choice states it?
- A river is a barrier for armies and a road for merchants, so it cannot be both things for one traveler.
- Water carries heavy loads more cheaply than wagons, so merchants settled along rivers that boats could use.
- Whether a river joins or divides depends on who is trying to cross it, carry something along it or claim it, and on the tools they have.
- Communities on both banks often shared a language, a market and customs, even when a border ran down the middle of the stream, as paragraph 3 explains.
