If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

### Course: Digital SAT Reading and Writing >Unit 4

Lesson 2: Command of Evidence: Quantitative

# Command of Evidence: Quantitative — Quick example

A quick example of an SAT command of quantitative evidence question. Created by David Rheinstrom.

## Want to join the conversation?

• i am confused between option A and B. maybe i couldnt identify the main argument. can anyone explain?
• Answer A shows how much the crop yields increased from the early 2010's to the mid or late 2010's. That supports the argument. Answer B mentions the 2mil peak but 1) doesn't show how much it increased and 2) it focuses on the decline of the crop yields.
Hope this helps!
• anyone having troubles with the medium unit? or is it just me
I was soo good at the foundations unit and mastered all of them but when I come to the medium unit I can't solve or understand almost all of the exercises, I literally spend a lot of time in each one but still can't get them right
Please if anyone knows why, I will be so happy if you can take the time and answer me
• hey! so idk if this would work for you but normally i just read over the notes they provide for us when they introduce the topic then i make my own. when im unsure about an answer, i read over the notes depending on the topic im doing and i almost always get the answer right
• i am confused between option A and B. maybe i couldnt identify the main argument. can anyone explain?
• Hi Isaiah!
Ok, so first notice that option a doesn't even mention that the crop yields decline after 2016.
Second, notice that option B doesn't show how the crop yields increased dramatically between 2010 and 2016. It just says that they peaked there, but that just means that that was their highest point. The lowest point could have been 1,999,999 for all we know.
So, with that in mind, let's identify the main argument. So, they're basically saying that Zambia's a really good place to grow crops and it's proven by the fact that before a famine in the late 2010's (a.k.a. 2016), when they invested more in crops, it was effective (it produced more yield). So we want evidence that before the famine in 2016, crop yields were increasing a lot due to the extra investment. Option A does that for us. Option B just tells us when it began to decline: in 2016. Well, we already knew that cause they said that there was a famine in the late 2010's.
So, yeah, that's the difference between option a and b.
Hope this helps!
• Do you guys ususally stop reading other choices when you find a collect answer, like David ususally suggests in many videos? I usually cannot finish reading in 70 seconds per a question, so I do.
• Depends for me. If I'm really sure about the answer I'll just pick it. If I'm a little sketchy about it, I make sure I can eliminate all the other options.
• my english teacher makes me do this.
• mama Mia mama Mia mama Mia mama Mia pizzeria
• Er edrrereru Dr puq
(1 vote)
• Accidental, im leaving it here though