ATI TEAS 7
Reading TEAS Practice Test Questions
Extract:
Passage I
Lethal force, or deadly force, is defined as the physical means to cause death or serious harm to another individual. The law holds that lethal force is only accepted when you or another person are in immediate and unavoidable danger of death or severe bodily harm. For example, a person could be beating a weaker person in such a way that they are suffering severe enough trauma that could result in death or serious harm. This would be an instance where lethal force would be acceptable and possibly the only way to save that person from irrevocable damage.
Another example of when to use lethal force would be when someone enters your home with a deadly weapon. The intruder's presence and possession of the weapon indicate mal-intent and the ability to inflict death or severe injury to you and your loved ones. Again, lethal force can be used in this situation. Lethal force can also be applied to prevent the harm of another individual. If a woman is being brutally assaulted and is unable to fend off an attacker, lethal force can be used to defend her as a last-ditch effort. If she is in immediate jeopardy of rape, harm, and/or death, lethal force could be the only response that could effectively deter the assailant.
The key to understanding the concept of lethal force is the term last resort. Deadly force cannot be taken back; it should be used only to prevent severe harm or death. The law does distinguish whether the means of one's self-defense is fully warranted, or if the individual goes out of control in the process. If you continually attack the assailant after they are rendered incapacitated, this would be causing unnecessary harm, and the law can bring charges against you. Likewise, if you kill an attacker unnecessarily after defending yourself, you can be charged with murder. This would move lethal force beyond necessary defense, making it no longer a last resort but rather a use of excessive force.
Passage II
Assault is the unlawful attempt of one person to apply apprehension on another individual by an imminent threat or by initiating offensive contact. Assaults can vary, encompassing physical strikes, threatening body language, and even provocative language. In the case of the latter, even if a hand has not been laid, it is still considered an assault because of its threatening nature.
Let's look at an example: A homeowner is angered because his neighbor blows fallen leaves into his freshly mowed lawn. Irate, the homeowner gestures a fist to his fellow neighbor and threatens to bash his head in for littering on his lawn. The homeowner's physical motions and verbal threat heralds a physical threat against the other neighbor. These factors classify the homeowner's reaction as an assault. If the angry neighbor hits the threatening homeowner in retaliation, that would constitute an assault as well because he physically hit the homeowner.
Assault also centers on the involvement of weapons in a conflict. If someone fires a gun at another person, it could be interpreted as an assault unless the shooter acted in self-defense. If an individual drew a gun or a knife on someone with the intent to harm them, it would be considered assault. However, it's also considered an assault if someone simply aimed a weapon, loaded or not, at another person in a threatening manner.
Question 1 of 5
Which of the following best describes the way the passages are structured?
Correct Answer: A
Rationale: The passages are structured in a way where both begin by defining a legal concept (assault and battery) and then provide further explanations and examples to help clarify and elaborate on the concepts. Both passages open with a clear definition and then proceed to discuss the concept in various situations.
Choice A is correct because it accurately captures the structure of the passages.
Choice B is incorrect because the passages do not introduce accepted definitions after presenting situations; they define the legal concepts first.
Choice C is incorrect because the first passage does not present a long definition, it begins by defining lethal force and then provides examples.
Choice D is incorrect because while the passages explain legal concepts, they do not specifically cite legal doctrines or explain rulings.
Question 2 of 5
Based on the passages, what can we infer about the relationship between assault and lethal force?
Correct Answer: C
Rationale: From the passages provided, it can be inferred that an assault with deadly intent can lead to an individual using lethal force to defend themselves and preserve their well-being. This suggests a relationship between assault with deadly intent and the potential use of lethal force in self-defense situations.
Choice A is incorrect because lethal force is not always a direct result of assault, as it depends on the circumstances.
Choice B is incorrect as not all assaults lead to the use of lethal force by someone.
Choice D is incorrect as the definition of deadly force and assault are distinct, with deadly force typically being used in self-defense situations where there is an immediate threat of severe harm or death.
Extract:
The area known as the Bermuda Triangle has become such a part of popular culture that it can be difficult to separate fact from fiction. The interest first began when five Navy planes vanished in 1945, officially resulting from "causes or reasons unknown." The explanations about other accidents in the Triangle range from the scientific to the supernatural. Researchers have never been able to find anything truly mysterious about what happens in the Bermuda Triangle, if there even is a Bermuda Triangle. What is more, one of the biggest challenges in considering the
phenomenon is deciding how much area actually represents the Bermuda Triangle. Most consider
the Triangle to stretch from Miami out to Puerto Rico and to include the island of Bermuda.
Others expand the area to include all of the Caribbean islands and to extend eastward as far as the
Azores, which are closer to Europe than they are to North America.
The problem with having a larger Bermuda Triangle is that it increases the odds of accidents.
There is near-constant travel, by ship and by plane, across the Atlantic, and accidents are expected
to occur. In fact, the Bermuda triangle happens to fall within one of the busiest navigational
regions in the world, and the reality of greater activity creates the possibility for more to go wrong.
Shipping records suggest that there is not a greater than average loss of vessels within the
Bermuda Triangle, and many researchers have argued that the reputation of the Triangle makes
any accidents seem out of the ordinary. In fact, most accidents fall within the expected margin of
error. The Increase in ships from East Asia no doubt contributes to an increase in accidents. And
as for the story of the Navy planes that disappeared within the Triangle, many researchers now
conclude that it was the result of mistakes on the part of the pilots who were flying into storm
clouds and simply got lost.
Question 3 of 5
With which of the following statements would the author most likely agree?
Correct Answer: D
Rationale: The author would most likely agree with the statement that reducing the legends about the mysteries of the Bermuda Triangle will help to reduce the number of reported accidents or shipping losses in the region. This aligns with the perspective that many events in the Bermuda Triangle can be explained logically and that dispelling myths and legends can lead to a more accurate understanding of the phenomena occurring in the area.
Choice A is incorrect because the author acknowledges that the Bermuda Triangle has sparked interest due to unexplained events.
Choice B is incorrect as expanding the focus of the Triangle to the Azores is not associated with an increase in accidents, according to the author.
Choice C is incorrect as the author does not suggest a deliberate concealment but rather points towards logical explanations for the events in the Bermuda Triangle.
Extract:
Passage I
Lethal force, or deadly force, is defined as the physical means to cause death or serious harm to another individual. The law holds that lethal force is only accepted when you or another person are in immediate and unavoidable danger of death or severe bodily harm. For example, a person could be beating a weaker person in such a way that they are suffering severe enough trauma that could result in death or serious harm. This would be an instance where lethal force would be acceptable and possibly the only way to save that person from irrevocable damage.
Another example of when to use lethal force would be when someone enters your home with a deadly weapon. The intruder's presence and possession of the weapon indicate mal-intent and the ability to inflict death or severe injury to you and your loved ones. Again, lethal force can be used in this situation. Lethal force can also be applied to prevent the harm of another individual. If a woman is being brutally assaulted and is unable to fend off an attacker, lethal force can be used to defend her as a last-ditch effort. If she is in immediate jeopardy of rape, harm, and/or death, lethal force could be the only response that could effectively deter the assailant.
The key to understanding the concept of lethal force is the term last resort. Deadly force cannot be taken back; it should be used only to prevent severe harm or death. The law does distinguish whether the means of one's self-defense is fully warranted, or if the individual goes out of control in the process. If you continually attack the assailant after they are rendered incapacitated, this would be causing unnecessary harm, and the law can bring charges against you. Likewise, if you kill an attacker unnecessarily after defending yourself, you can be charged with murder. This would move lethal force beyond necessary defense, making it no longer a last resort but rather a use of excessive force.
Passage II
Assault is the unlawful attempt of one person to apply apprehension on another individual by an imminent threat or by initiating offensive contact. Assaults can vary, encompassing physical strikes, threatening body language, and even provocative language. In the case of the latter, even if a hand has not been laid, it is still considered an assault because of its threatening nature.
Let's look at an example: A homeowner is angered because his neighbor blows fallen leaves into his freshly mowed lawn. Irate, the homeowner gestures a fist to his fellow neighbor and threatens to bash his head in for littering on his lawn. The homeowner's physical motions and verbal threat heralds a physical threat against the other neighbor. These factors classify the homeowner's reaction as an assault. If the angry neighbor hits the threatening homeowner in retaliation, that would constitute an assault as well because he physically hit the homeowner.
Assault also centers on the involvement of weapons in a conflict. If someone fires a gun at another person, it could be interpreted as an assault unless the shooter acted in self-defense. If an individual drew a gun or a knife on someone with the intent to harm them, it would be considered assault. However, it's also considered an assault if someone simply aimed a weapon, loaded or not, at another person in a threatening manner.
Question 4 of 5
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously undermine the explanation proposed by the author in Passage I, third paragraph?
Correct Answer: A
Rationale: The correct answer is A because the author in Passage I discusses the concept of lethal force in self-defense being justified and absolved from blame when used as a last resort to prevent severe harm or death.
Choice A undermines this by stating that an instance of lethal force in self-defense is not absolutely absolved from blame and highlights that the law considers the necessary use of force at the time it is committed. This challenges the absolute justification of such actions and would seriously undermine the author's argument.
Choice B is incorrect because compliance with the law does not necessarily address the justification and absolution of lethal force.
Choice C is incorrect as forgiving lethal force in all cases is not the focus of the author's argument.
Choice D is incorrect because the intent of the user is a crucial factor in evaluating the use of lethal force, contrary to what is stated.
Extract:
Announcement for all faculty members: It has come to the university's attention that there is crowding in the faculty canteen between the hours of 11 a.m. and 1 p.m., an issue that is due to the increase in staff numbers in several faculty departments. A number of faculty members have complained that hey stood in line so long that they were unable to get lunch, or did not have time to eat lunch. to offset the crowding, the university has polled the various departments about schedules, and has settled on a recommended rooster for when the members of each department should visit the faculty canteen for lunch: - Business Dept: 10:30 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. - Art Dept: 10:45 a.m. - 11:45 a.m. - Math and Science Dept: 12 p.m. - 1 p.m. - Social Sciences Dept: 12:30 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. - Humanities Dept: 1 p.m. - 2 p.m. We ask that all faculty members respect this schedule. Faculty will be expected to display a department badge before entering the canteen for lunch.
Question 5 of 5
Based on the information in the announcement, what might the reader assume about how the university determined the lunch schedule?
Correct Answer: C
Rationale: The announcement states that the university polled the various departments about schedules to determine a recommended roster for each department to visit the canteen for lunch. This indicates that the university checked to see when the most faculty members from each department would be entering the canteen to offset the crowding issue.
Therefore, the correct choice is C.
Choices A, B, and D are incorrect because there is no mention of arranging the schedule alphabetically, checking with departments in advance for agreement, or simply establishing different times without considering faculty members' schedules in the announcement. The university's approach was to tailor the lunch schedule based on each department's peak entry times to manage the crowding problem effectively.