Reading UTBK 3

Text 1

Economic mobility describes how someone's economic well-being changes over time. Most often, economic mobility looks at how someone's income changes over their lifetime. When someone's income improves over their life, that person is considered upwardly mobile. This means their economic situation is getting better over the course of their life. By contrast, when someone's income stays flat or decreases over their life, that person is considered downwardly mobile.

 

Economic mobility, therefore, describes the opportunity available to one individual. However, economic mobility is often more useful when scaled to summarize the overall opportunity in a neighborhood, city, state. For example, due to historical policy decisions, some neighborhoods provide a higher rate of upward mobility. Considering this, some families may use measures of economic mobility to decide where to live. Alternatively, lawmakers may decide on different policies and programs to improve mobility in a neighborhood, city, or state.

 

Economic mobility can also refer to the changes in economic outcomes for groups of people, or generations over time. For example, since the 1940s, fewer children in each generation are earning as much as their parents' generation. Additionally, certain places provide greater economic mobility than others. For example, low-income children growing up in Denver's Washington Park neighborhood, on average, grow up to have an income of approximately US 40,000. By contrast, in Denver's Elyria-Swansea neighborhood, low-income children on average grow up to earn incomes in the mid-US 20.000s.

 

Source: The Bell Policy Center (with modifications)

Text 2

 

Economic mobility is the ability of someone to change their income or wealth. It is measured over generations or during one's lifetime. Research has found that the best way to improve one's mobility is through education.

 

Research shows that the greatest single correlation of high income is the education level of one's parents. The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis study found that income, earnings, and wealth increased with education levels. It also found that college graduates had the most wealth compared to earnings than those without college. They were able to save and invest more of their earnings.

 

In 2019, 28% of American adults had only a high school education. On average, they earned US 746 per week. Those without a high school degree only earned US 592 a week. Another 10% had an associate's degree. They earned US 887 a week. About 21% of Americans had a college degree in 2019. Weekly media earnings, on average, for this group was about US 1,248. Only 9% had a master's, earning an average of about US 1,497 per week. Even fewer, 1%, had a professional degree, such as a doctor or lawyer. They earned an average of about US 1,861 a week. The 2% of the population who has doctorate degrees earned an average of about US 1,833 a week. In conclusion, the best way to provide better prospects of upward mobility is to create more equity in education. It would provide more resources to low- income families to help them catch up.

 

Source: The Balance (with modifications)

Which of the following details do both writers mention in their discussion of the economic mobility?

• Welfare plans to help those in need

• Recommendations to Increase economic mobility

• Education's role in accelerating economic mobility

• The concept of economic mobility

• Equity in education for low-income students

Text 1

Economic mobility describes how someone's economic well-being changes over time. Most often, economic mobility looks at how someone's income changes over their lifetime. When someone's income improves over their life, that person is considered upwardly mobile. This means their economic situation is getting better over the course of their life. By contrast, when someone's income stays flat or decreases over their life, that person is considered downwardly mobile.

 

Economic mobility, therefore, describes the opportunity available to one individual. However, economic mobility is often more useful when scaled to summarize the overall opportunity in a neighborhood, city, state. For example, due to historical policy decisions, some neighborhoods provide a higher rate of upward mobility. Considering this, some families may use measures of economic mobility to decide where to live. Alternatively, lawmakers may decide on different policies and programs to improve mobility in a neighborhood, city, or state.

 

Economic mobility can also refer to the changes in economic outcomes for groups of people, or generations over time. For example, since the 1940s, fewer children in each generation are earning as much as their parents' generation. Additionally, certain places provide greater economic mobility than others. For example, low-income children growing up in Denver's Washington Park neighborhood, on average, grow up to have an income of approximately US 40,000. By contrast, in Denver's Elyria-Swansea neighborhood, low-income children on average grow up to earn incomes in the mid-US 20.000s.

 

Source: The Bell Policy Center (with modifications)

Text 2

 

Economic mobility is the ability of someone to change their income or wealth. It is measured over generations or during one's lifetime. Research has found that the best way to improve one's mobility is through education.

 

Research shows that the greatest single correlation of high income is the education level of one's parents. The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis study found that income, earnings, and wealth increased with education levels. It also found that college graduates had the most wealth compared to earnings than those without college. They were able to save and invest more of their earnings.

 

In 2019, 28% of American adults had only a high school education. On average, they earned US 746 per week. Those without a high school degree only earned US 592 a week. Another 10% had an associate's degree. They earned US 887 a week. About 21% of Americans had a college degree in 2019. Weekly media earnings, on average, for this group was about US 1,248. Only 9% had a master's, earning an average of about US 1,497 per week. Even fewer, 1%, had a professional degree, such as a doctor or lawyer. They earned an average of about US 1,861 a week. The 2% of the population who has doctorate degrees earned an average of about US 1,833 a week. In conclusion, the best way to provide better prospects of upward mobility is to create more equity in education. It would provide more resources to low- income families to help them catch up.

 

Source: The Balance (with modifications)

What is the purpose of the author of Text 2?

• To elaborate on how educational background impacts economic mobility

• To explain why underprivileged students face difficulties earning a degree

• To argue that education should be provided equally to everyone

• To inform the readers about the significance of economic mobility

• To convince the readers to acknowledge the importance of education

Text 1

Economic mobility describes how someone's economic well-being changes over time. Most often, economic mobility looks at how someone's income changes over their lifetime. When someone's income improves over their life, that person is considered upwardly mobile. This means their economic situation is getting better over the course of their life. By contrast, when someone's income stays flat or decreases over their life, that person is considered downwardly mobile.

 

Economic mobility, therefore, describes the opportunity available to one individual. However, economic mobility is often more useful when scaled to summarize the overall opportunity in a neighborhood, city, state. For example, due to historical policy decisions, some neighborhoods provide a higher rate of upward mobility. Considering this, some families may use measures of economic mobility to decide where to live. Alternatively, lawmakers may decide on different policies and programs to improve mobility in a neighborhood, city, or state.

 

Economic mobility can also refer to the changes in economic outcomes for groups of people, or generations over time. For example, since the 1940s, fewer children in each generation are earning as much as their parents' generation. Additionally, certain places provide greater economic mobility than others. For example, low-income children growing up in Denver's Washington Park neighborhood, on average, grow up to have an income of approximately US 40,000. By contrast, in Denver's Elyria-Swansea neighborhood, low-income children on average grow up to earn incomes in the mid-US 20.000s.

 

Source: The Bell Policy Center (with modifications)

Text 2

 

Economic mobility is the ability of someone to change their income or wealth. It is measured over generations or during one's lifetime. Research has found that the best way to improve one's mobility is through education.

 

Research shows that the greatest single correlation of high income is the education level of one's parents. The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis study found that income, earnings, and wealth increased with education levels. It also found that college graduates had the most wealth compared to earnings than those without college. They were able to save and invest more of their earnings.

 

In 2019, 28% of American adults had only a high school education. On average, they earned US 746 per week. Those without a high school degree only earned US 592 a week. Another 10% had an associate's degree. They earned US 887 a week. About 21% of Americans had a college degree in 2019. Weekly media earnings, on average, for this group was about US 1,248. Only 9% had a master's, earning an average of about US 1,497 per week. Even fewer, 1%, had a professional degree, such as a doctor or lawyer. They earned an average of about US 1,861 a week. The 2% of the population who has doctorate degrees earned an average of about US 1,833 a week. In conclusion, the best way to provide better prospects of upward mobility is to create more equity in education. It would provide more resources to low- income families to help them catch up.

 

Source: The Balance (with modifications)

Which item below most accurately describes the similarity between the two authors?

• Both authors analyze data to propose a concept of economic mobility.

• Authors 1 and 2 provide an explanation of the concept of economic mobility.

• Author 1 and Author 2 approach the issue from a political perspective.

• Both authors make a strong conviction that education increases social mobility.

• Author 1 and Author 2 try to portray economic mobility as a problem in the society.

Text 1

Economic mobility describes how someone's economic well-being changes over time. Most often, economic mobility looks at how someone's income changes over their lifetime. When someone's income improves over their life, that person is considered upwardly mobile. This means their economic situation is getting better over the course of their life. By contrast, when someone's income stays flat or decreases over their life, that person is considered downwardly mobile.

 

Economic mobility, therefore, describes the opportunity available to one individual. However, economic mobility is often more useful when scaled to summarize the overall opportunity in a neighborhood, city, state. For example, due to historical policy decisions, some neighborhoods provide a higher rate of upward mobility. Considering this, some families may use measures of economic mobility to decide where to live. Alternatively, lawmakers may decide on different policies and programs to improve mobility in a neighborhood, city, or state.

 

Economic mobility can also refer to the changes in economic outcomes for groups of people, or generations over time. For example, since the 1940s, fewer children in each generation are earning as much as their parents' generation. Additionally, certain places provide greater economic mobility than others. For example, low-income children growing up in Denver's Washington Park neighborhood, on average, grow up to have an income of approximately US 40,000. By contrast, in Denver's Elyria-Swansea neighborhood, low-income children on average grow up to earn incomes in the mid-US 20.000s.

 

Source: The Bell Policy Center (with modifications)

Text 2

 

Economic mobility is the ability of someone to change their income or wealth. It is measured over generations or during one's lifetime. Research has found that the best way to improve one's mobility is through education.

 

Research shows that the greatest single correlation of high income is the education level of one's parents. The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis study found that income, earnings, and wealth increased with education levels. It also found that college graduates had the most wealth compared to earnings than those without college. They were able to save and invest more of their earnings.

 

In 2019, 28% of American adults had only a high school education. On average, they earned US 746 per week. Those without a high school degree only earned US 592 a week. Another 10% had an associate's degree. They earned US 887 a week. About 21% of Americans had a college degree in 2019. Weekly media earnings, on average, for this group was about US 1,248. Only 9% had a master's, earning an average of about US 1,497 per week. Even fewer, 1%, had a professional degree, such as a doctor or lawyer. They earned an average of about US 1,861 a week. The 2% of the population who has doctorate degrees earned an average of about US 1,833 a week. In conclusion, the best way to provide better prospects of upward mobility is to create more equity in education. It would provide more resources to low- income families to help them catch up.

 

Source: The Balance (with modifications)

You can infer that the authors of both passages would agree with which of the following statements?

• Upward economic mobility can achieved through hard work and perseverance.

• To improve economic mobility, education must be made available to everyone equally.

• Living in a neighbourhood increases the prospects of upward economic mobility.

• The government needs to step up its efforts to address the problems in economic mobility.

• The background of a person may have a impact on their economic mobility.

Text 1

Economic mobility describes how someone's economic well-being changes over time. Most often, economic mobility looks at how someone's income changes over their lifetime. When someone's income improves over their life, that person is considered upwardly mobile. This means their economic situation is getting better over the course of their life. By contrast, when someone's income stays flat or decreases over their life, that person is considered downwardly mobile.

 

Economic mobility, therefore, describes the opportunity available to one individual. However, economic mobility is often more useful when scaled to summarize the overall opportunity in a neighborhood, city, state. For example, due to historical policy decisions, some neighborhoods provide a higher rate of upward mobility. Considering this, some families may use measures of economic mobility to decide where to live. Alternatively, lawmakers may decide on different policies and programs to improve mobility in a neighborhood, city, or state.

 

Economic mobility can also refer to the changes in economic outcomes for groups of people, or generations over time. For example, since the 1940s, fewer children in each generation are earning as much as their parents' generation. Additionally, certain places provide greater economic mobility than others. For example, low-income children growing up in Denver's Washington Park neighborhood, on average, grow up to have an income of approximately US 40,000. By contrast, in Denver's Elyria-Swansea neighborhood, low-income children on average grow up to earn incomes in the mid-US 20.000s.

 

Source: The Bell Policy Center (with modifications)

Text 2

 

Economic mobility is the ability of someone to change their income or wealth. It is measured over generations or during one's lifetime. Research has found that the best way to improve one's mobility is through education.

 

Research shows that the greatest single correlation of high income is the education level of one's parents. The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis study found that income, earnings, and wealth increased with education levels. It also found that college graduates had the most wealth compared to earnings than those without college. They were able to save and invest more of their earnings.

 

In 2019, 28% of American adults had only a high school education. On average, they earned US 746 per week. Those without a high school degree only earned US 592 a week. Another 10% had an associate's degree. They earned US 887 a week. About 21% of Americans had a college degree in 2019. Weekly media earnings, on average, for this group was about US 1,248. Only 9% had a master's, earning an average of about US 1,497 per week. Even fewer, 1%, had a professional degree, such as a doctor or lawyer. They earned an average of about US 1,861 a week. The 2% of the population who has doctorate degrees earned an average of about US 1,833 a week. In conclusion, the best way to provide better prospects of upward mobility is to create more equity in education. It would provide more resources to low- income families to help them catch up.

 

Source: The Balance (with modifications)

According to the text, which of the following statements is true about education's role in economic mobility?

• It improves personal qualities that would guide people's choices in order to increase their economic mobility.

• A rise in education costs is affecting people's ability to accelerate their economic mobility and growth.

• There are more prospects for upward economic mobility for those who acquire higher levels of education.

• Only a small part of American adults received a higher level of education due to childhood poverty.

• The most efficient way to give people opportunity to obtain a degree is to implement educational equity.

Text 1

Economic mobility describes how someone's economic well-being changes over time. Most often, economic mobility looks at how someone's income changes over their lifetime. When someone's income improves over their life, that person is considered upwardly mobile. This means their economic situation is getting better over the course of their life. By contrast, when someone's income stays flat or decreases over their life, that person is considered downwardly mobile.

 

Economic mobility, therefore, describes the opportunity available to one individual. However, economic mobility is often more useful when scaled to summarize the overall opportunity in a neighborhood, city, state. For example, due to historical policy decisions, some neighborhoods provide a higher rate of upward mobility. Considering this, some families may use measures of economic mobility to decide where to live. Alternatively, lawmakers may decide on different policies and programs to improve mobility in a neighborhood, city, or state.

 

Economic mobility can also refer to the changes in economic outcomes for groups of people, or generations over time. For example, since the 1940s, fewer children in each generation are earning as much as their parents' generation. Additionally, certain places provide greater economic mobility than others. For example, low-income children growing up in Denver's Washington Park neighborhood, on average, grow up to have an income of approximately US 40,000. By contrast, in Denver's Elyria-Swansea neighborhood, low-income children on average grow up to earn incomes in the mid-US 20.000s.

 

Source: The Bell Policy Center (with modifications)

Text 2

 

Economic mobility is the ability of someone to change their income or wealth. It is measured over generations or during one's lifetime. Research has found that the best way to improve one's mobility is through education.

 

Research shows that the greatest single correlation of high income is the education level of one's parents. The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis study found that income, earnings, and wealth increased with education levels. It also found that college graduates had the most wealth compared to earnings than those without college. They were able to save and invest more of their earnings.

 

In 2019, 28% of American adults had only a high school education. On average, they earned US 746 per week. Those without a high school degree only earned US 592 a week. Another 10% had an associate's degree. They earned US 887 a week. About 21% of Americans had a college degree in 2019. Weekly media earnings, on average, for this group was about US 1,248. Only 9% had a master's, earning an average of about US 1,497 per week. Even fewer, 1%, had a professional degree, such as a doctor or lawyer. They earned an average of about US 1,861 a week. The 2% of the population who has doctorate degrees earned an average of about US 1,833 a week. In conclusion, the best way to provide better prospects of upward mobility is to create more equity in education. It would provide more resources to low- income families to help them catch up.

 

Source: The Balance (with modifications)

The word "prospects" in paragraph 4 (Text 2) can be best replaced with....

• chances

• hopes

• expectations

• future

• certainty

Text 1

Economic mobility describes how someone's economic well-being changes over time. Most often, economic mobility looks at how someone's income changes over their lifetime. When someone's income improves over their life, that person is considered upwardly mobile. This means their economic situation is getting better over the course of their life. By contrast, when someone's income stays flat or decreases over their life, that person is considered downwardly mobile.

 

Economic mobility, therefore, describes the opportunity available to one individual. However, economic mobility is often more useful when scaled to summarize the overall opportunity in a neighborhood, city, state. For example, due to historical policy decisions, some neighborhoods provide a higher rate of upward mobility. Considering this, some families may use measures of economic mobility to decide where to live. Alternatively, lawmakers may decide on different policies and programs to improve mobility in a neighborhood, city, or state.

 

Economic mobility can also refer to the changes in economic outcomes for groups of people, or generations over time. For example, since the 1940s, fewer children in each generation are earning as much as their parents' generation. Additionally, certain places provide greater economic mobility than others. For example, low-income children growing up in Denver's Washington Park neighborhood, on average, grow up to have an income of approximately US 40,000. By contrast, in Denver's Elyria-Swansea neighborhood, low-income children on average grow up to earn incomes in the mid-US 20.000s.

 

Source: The Bell Policy Center (with modifications)

Text 2

 

Economic mobility is the ability of someone to change their income or wealth. It is measured over generations or during one's lifetime. Research has found that the best way to improve one's mobility is through education.

 

Research shows that the greatest single correlation of high income is the education level of one's parents. The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis study found that income, earnings, and wealth increased with education levels. It also found that college graduates had the most wealth compared to earnings than those without college. They were able to save and invest more of their earnings.

 

In 2019, 28% of American adults had only a high school education. On average, they earned US 746 per week. Those without a high school degree only earned US 592 a week. Another 10% had an associate's degree. They earned US 887 a week. About 21% of Americans had a college degree in 2019. Weekly media earnings, on average, for this group was about US 1,248. Only 9% had a master's, earning an average of about US 1,497 per week. Even fewer, 1%, had a professional degree, such as a doctor or lawyer. They earned an average of about US 1,861 a week. The 2% of the population who has doctorate degrees earned an average of about US 1,833 a week. In conclusion, the best way to provide better prospects of upward mobility is to create more equity in education. It would provide more resources to low- income families to help them catch up.

 

Source: The Balance (with modifications)

Which of the following questions can be answered by the information in the passages?

• What are some other measures besides income that can be used to assess economic mobility?

• What is the impact of economic mobility on overall economic growth in a country?

• How does economic mobility differ between different racial and ethnic groups?

• What programs can be implemented to improve economic mobility?

• How does economic mobility vary across different neighborhoods, cities, and states?

Despite some of the rhetoric in Washington, there's far less agreement among economists on the total impact of the China shock on American jobs. An economist from MIT, David Autor and his co-authors have consistently found that areas that were more exposed to trade with China experienced a net job loss that was not compensated by workers moving to more vibrant places or growth in employment in sectors other than manufacturing.

Nicholas Bloom (Stanford University) and his co-authors take a different approach by trying to account for the effects of trade with China on the service sector in addition to manufacturing. They find that loss of employment in areas with low levels of human capital was compensated for by an increase in service jobs in areas with high human capital, such as the West coast and the Northeast. Consequently, they argue that trade with China did not cause a net loss of American jobs. This does not mean that there were no significant losses within regions. Like Autor and his co- authors, Bloom and his colleagues did not find that workers migrated in response to the changing job Thus, Chinese imports may have caused jobs and earnings to move from the heartland of the United States the coasts.

A third research effort by Zhi Wang (George Mason University) and colleagues finds an increase in service jobs even in the regions that experienced the sharpest fall in manufacturing jobs due to import competition with China.. According to their data, which they claim captures employment changes throughout the entire supply chain, trade led to an increase in other job opportunities in the service sector even within areas that were hit by import competition.

And all three groups find that education. significantly reduced the negative effects of the China shock: regions with higher shares of college graduates were less negatively. affected.

Source: Harvard Business Review (with modifications)

 

Which of the following questions is answered by the passage?

• How do Chinese imports impenetrate the American economy?

• What is the impact of trade with China on jobs in the United States?

• What are the most important research findings on China-US trade relationship?

• Does trade with China cause a net negative impact on the US economy?

• Do people who lost their jobs in manufacturing move to another industry?

Despite some of the rhetoric in Washington, there's far less agreement among economists on the total impact of the China shock on American jobs. An economist from MIT, David Autor and his co-authors have consistently found that areas that were more exposed to trade with China experienced a net job loss that was not compensated by workers moving to more vibrant places or growth in employment in sectors other than manufacturing.

Nicholas Bloom (Stanford University) and his co-authors take a different approach by trying to account for the effects of trade with China on the service sector in addition to manufacturing. They find that loss of employment in areas with low levels of human capital was compensated for by an increase in service jobs in areas with high human capital, such as the West coast and the Northeast. Consequently, they argue that trade with China did not cause a net loss of American jobs. This does not mean that there were no significant losses within regions. Like Autor and his co- authors, Bloom and his colleagues did not find that workers migrated in response to the changing job Thus, Chinese imports may have caused jobs and earnings to move from the heartland of the United States the coasts.

A third research effort by Zhi Wang (George Mason University) and colleagues finds an increase in service jobs even in the regions that experienced the sharpest fall in manufacturing jobs due to import competition with China.. According to their data, which they claim captures employment changes throughout the entire supply chain, trade led to an increase in other job opportunities in the service sector even within areas that were hit by import competition.

And all three groups find that education. significantly reduced the negative effects of the China shock: regions with higher shares of college graduates were less negatively. affected.

Source: Harvard Business Review (with modifications)

The word 'compensated' in the first paragraph nearly means.....

• reimbursed

• counteracted

• made up for

• nullified

• requited

Despite some of the rhetoric in Washington, there's far less agreement among economists on the total impact of the China shock on American jobs. An economist from MIT, David Autor and his co-authors have consistently found that areas that were more exposed to trade with China experienced a net job loss that was not compensated by workers moving to more vibrant places or growth in employment in sectors other than manufacturing.

Nicholas Bloom (Stanford University) and his co-authors take a different approach by trying to account for the effects of trade with China on the service sector in addition to manufacturing. They find that loss of employment in areas with low levels of human capital was compensated for by an increase in service jobs in areas with high human capital, such as the West coast and the Northeast. Consequently, they argue that trade with China did not cause a net loss of American jobs. This does not mean that there were no significant losses within regions. Like Autor and his co- authors, Bloom and his colleagues did not find that workers migrated in response to the changing job Thus, Chinese imports may have caused jobs and earnings to move from the heartland of the United States the coasts.

A third research effort by Zhi Wang (George Mason University) and colleagues finds an increase in service jobs even in the regions that experienced the sharpest fall in manufacturing jobs due to import competition with China.. According to their data, which they claim captures employment changes throughout the entire supply chain, trade led to an increase in other job opportunities in the service sector even within areas that were hit by import competition.

And all three groups find that education. significantly reduced the negative effects of the China shock: regions with higher shares of college graduates were less negatively. affected.

Source: Harvard Business Review (with modifications)

According to the research done by Nicholas Bloom, if Chinese imports had not caused fierce competition in the US market, jobs and earnings probably................ from the heartland to places like the West coast.

• would not have shifted

• would have shifted

• would not shift

• would shift

• will not shift