According to Susan Reverby's Ordered to Care, the most salient fact about the occupation of nursing has been its traditional...
GMAT Reading Comprehension : (RC) Questions
Source: Mock
...
...
Post a Query
According to Susan Reverby's Ordered to Care, the most salient fact about the occupation of nursing has been its traditional conceptualization by both the public and medical professionals as women's work, a judgment that has had a dramatic impact both on the nature of the tasks nurses perform and on the status of the profession. Reverby demonstrates how this ideology of nursing grew, not out of a belief in women's rights but from eighteenth- and nineteenth-century understandings of womanly character and duty.
Before 1870, nursing took place either in the home, where women nursed their loved ones as part of their familial obligations, or in hospitals, which were custodial institutions for the poor. Despite the differences in the settings, women in each of these roles were assumed to be "naturals" for the job, so hospital nurses were paid wages whose meagerness suggested money's irrelevance to the true character of nursing.
Even after 1870, when scientific and medical advances hastened the development of nursing as skilled paid labor, the ideology concerning nursing changed very little. True, leaders in nursing education advocated professionalism: being a woman was necessary, but not sufficient, for nursing. They envisioned the establishment of strict training schools, controlled by women, to teach the elements of health care that were no longer attended to by the rapidly specializing physician. They were pleased to be aided in their efforts by hospital administrators and doctors, who understood that the movement to upgrade and standardize nursing education would support their own plans for reforming medicine.
But the goals of the three groups, Reverby argues, were radically divergent. Hospital administrators realized that training schools attached to their own institutions could become sources of cheap and malleable labor. Doctors saw nursing education as a way of improving care in the hospital, but they opposed any move to bolster nurses' control of their own labor or to improve their scientific skills, arguing that nurses should remain submissive and nurturing. As hospital exigencies quickly came to dominate the decision-making process in the training schools, nursing educators lost control over admission standards, the quality of education, and the labor of students on the wards.
Ques. 1/4
The information in the passage suggests that Susan Reverby would be most likely to DISAGREE with which of the following statements about nursing education?
Solution
1. Passage Analysis:
Progressive Passage Analysis
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| According to Susan Reverby's Ordered to Care, the most salient fact about the occupation of nursing has been its traditional conceptualization by both the public and medical professionals as women's work, a judgment that has had a dramatic impact both on the nature of the tasks nurses perform and on the status of the profession. | What it says: Nursing has historically been seen as "women's work" by both regular people and doctors, and this view has strongly affected what nurses actually do and how respected the profession is. What it does: Introduces the main thesis/central argument of the passage Source/Type: Researcher's claim (Reverby's findings) Connection to Previous Sentences: This is the opening sentence - establishes the foundation for everything that follows Visualization: Think of nursing's reputation like a building's foundation. If the foundation is "women's work" (historically less valued), then everything built on top - the actual job tasks and professional respect - gets shaped by that shaky foundation. What We Know So Far: Nursing = "women's work" perception = affects job tasks + professional status What We Don't Know Yet: How this perception developed, specific examples of impact, historical details Reading Strategy Insight: This is a classic thesis sentence - everything else will likely explain, support, or elaborate on this central claim. |
| Reverby demonstrates how this ideology of nursing grew, not out of a belief in women's rights but from eighteenth- and nineteenth-century understandings of womanly character and duty. | What it says: The "women's work" view of nursing didn't come from believing women deserved rights, but from old ideas about what women's personalities and responsibilities were supposed to be. What it does: Begins explaining HOW the perception mentioned in sentence 1 developed historically Source/Type: Researcher's claim (Reverby's findings) Connection to Previous Sentences: This builds on sentence 1 by starting to explain the origins of the "women's work" ideology. Note the contrast: NOT from women's rights beliefs Visualization: Imagine two different reasons for women becoming nurses: Path A: "Women deserve equal opportunities in careers" (women's rights) Path B: "Women are naturally caring and dutiful" (character assumptions) History took Path B, not Path A What We Know So Far: Nursing = "women's work" → came from 1700s-1800s ideas about women's nature What We Don't Know Yet: Specific examples of how this played out in practice |
| Before 1870, nursing took place either in the home, where women nursed their loved ones as part of their familial obligations, or in hospitals, which were custodial institutions for the poor. | What it says: Before 1870, there were two types of nursing: 1) Women caring for family members at home (seen as family duty), 2) Hospital nursing (mainly for poor people) What it does: Provides concrete historical examples to support the ideology explanation Source/Type: Historical facts Connection to Previous Sentences: This builds on sentences 1-2 by giving us the actual historical picture that created the "women's work" ideology Visualization: Pre-1870 nursing landscape: Setting 1: Family homes - Wife/mother caring for sick husband/children (unpaid family duty) Setting 2: Hospitals - Women caring for poor sick people (low-status work) Both settings = women doing "natural" caring work What We Know So Far: "Women's work" perception → rooted in 1700s-1800s ideas → manifested in two pre-1870 settings Reading Strategy Insight: The author is giving us concrete examples to make the abstract "ideology" concept clearer - feel more confident here, not more confused! |
| Despite the differences in the settings, women in each of these roles were assumed to be "naturals" for the job, so hospital nurses were paid wages whose meagerness suggested money's irrelevance to the true character of nursing. | What it says: Even though home and hospital nursing were different, people thought women were just naturally good at nursing, so hospital nurses got paid very little because money supposedly wasn't the point of nursing. What it does: Restates and reinforces the core "women's work" ideology with a concrete consequence Source/Type: Historical analysis Connection to Previous Sentences: This directly connects the ideology from sentences 1-2 with the practical reality from sentence 3. Shows how the "natural" assumption led to low pay. Visualization: Think of the logic chain: "Women are natural nurses" → "If it's natural, it's not really skilled work" → "If it's not skilled, why pay much?" → Very low wages What We Know So Far: Pre-1870: Women = "natural" nurses → low/no pay → reinforced "women's work" status Reading Strategy Insight: This sentence helps by connecting the dots between ideology and real consequences - you should feel like pieces are clicking together, not getting more complex! |
| Even after 1870, when scientific and medical advances hastened the development of nursing as skilled paid labor, the ideology concerning nursing changed very little. | What it says: After 1870, medical science advanced and nursing became more skilled and professional, but people's attitudes about nursing being "women's work" barely changed. What it does: Introduces a time shift and sets up a contrast between changing reality vs. unchanging perception Source/Type: Historical analysis Connection to Previous Sentences: This contrasts with the pre-1870 picture by showing change in nursing's actual requirements, but reinforces the main thesis that the "women's work" ideology persisted Visualization: Timeline view: Before 1870: Basic nursing + "women's work" attitude After 1870: Advanced/skilled nursing + STILL "women's work" attitude (The job evolved but the perception stuck) What We Know So Far: The "women's work" perception was so strong it persisted even when nursing became more scientific What We Don't Know Yet: Specific details about post-1870 developments Reading Strategy Insight: This is still supporting the main thesis - the author is showing how persistent the ideology was by showing it survived major changes |
| True, leaders in nursing education advocated professionalism: being a woman was necessary, but not sufficient, for nursing. | What it says: Nursing education leaders did try to make nursing more professional - they said being female was required but you also needed proper training. What it does: Introduces a specific group trying to change nursing's status Source/Type: Historical facts Connection to Previous Sentences: This builds on the post-1870 period by showing one group's efforts to change the "women's work" perception, though they still maintained the "women only" requirement Visualization: Nursing education leaders' position: Old view: "Any woman can nurse (it's natural)" New view: "Only women can nurse, but they need professional training" (Still gender-restricted, but adding skill requirements) What We Know So Far: Post-1870: Some nursing leaders tried to add professionalism while keeping the female requirement Reading Strategy Insight: The word "True" signals the author is acknowledging a counter-example to the "little change" claim, but watch for limitations to this progress |
| They envisioned the establishment of strict training schools, controlled by women, to teach the elements of health care that were no longer attended to by the rapidly specializing physician. | What it says: These nursing leaders wanted to create rigorous nursing schools run by women, to teach medical skills that doctors (who were specializing) no longer handled themselves. What it does: Elaborates on the nursing education leaders' specific goals and strategy Source/Type: Historical description Connection to Previous Sentences: This builds on the previous sentence by detailing what "professionalism" meant to nursing education leaders - formal schools and filling gaps left by specializing doctors Visualization: The nursing leaders' vision: Doctors: Becoming specialists → leaving basic care tasks Nurses: Formal training schools → taking over those tasks professionally Control: Women-led institutions creating professional female nurses What We Know So Far: Nursing education leaders had a clear plan: professional schools to create skilled nurses for tasks doctors were abandoning Reading Strategy Insight: This continues elaborating on the nursing leaders' goals - still building the picture of their reform efforts |
| They were pleased to be aided in their efforts by hospital administrators and doctors, who understood that the movement to upgrade and standardize nursing education would support their own plans for reforming medicine. | What it says: The nursing education leaders were happy to get help from hospital administrators and doctors, who realized that better nursing education would help their own medical reform goals. What it does: Introduces additional stakeholders who seemed to support nursing education reform Source/Type: Historical description Connection to Previous Sentences: This builds on the nursing leaders' plans by showing they had apparent allies in their professionalization efforts Visualization: Alliance picture (as it initially appeared): Nursing education leaders: "We want professional training!" Hospital administrators: "That sounds helpful to us!" Doctors: "That would support our medical reforms!" Everyone seems to be working together What We Know So Far: Three groups seemed aligned on improving nursing education What We Don't Know Yet: Whether this partnership actually worked out as hoped Reading Strategy Insight: The phrase "were pleased to be aided" suggests the nursing leaders felt optimistic, but watch for potential complications to this alliance |
| But the goals of the three groups, Reverby argues, were radically divergent. | What it says: But Reverby claims the three groups' actual goals were completely different from each other. What it does: Reveals that the apparent alliance was misleading - introduces major contrast Source/Type: Researcher's analysis (Reverby's argument) Connection to Previous Sentences: This directly contradicts the previous sentence's suggestion of cooperation. The word "But" signals we're about to learn the cooperation was superficial Visualization: Reality vs. Appearance: Surface level: All three groups supporting nursing education Reality: Three completely different hidden agendas Like three people agreeing to meet for "dinner" but one wants pizza, one wants sushi, and one wants to just drink coffee What We Know So Far: What looked like cooperation was actually three groups with conflicting goals What We Don't Know Yet: What each group actually wanted Reading Strategy Insight: This is a classic "setup and reveal" - the author set up the apparent cooperation to make the hidden conflicts more dramatic |
| Hospital administrators realized that training schools attached to their own institutions could become sources of cheap and malleable labor. | What it says: Hospital administrators figured out that nursing schools connected to their hospitals could give them access to inexpensive, easily controlled workers. What it does: Reveals the first group's true motivation - exploitation, not professional advancement Source/Type: Historical analysis Connection to Previous Sentences: This begins explaining the "radically divergent" goals by exposing what hospital administrators really wanted Visualization: Hospital administrators' real thinking: Public position: "We support professional nursing education!" Private reality: "Free student labor for our hospitals!" Students as: Unpaid workforce rather than future professionals What We Know So Far: Hospital administrators wanted nursing schools as sources of cheap labor, not professional development Reading Strategy Insight: This explains why the "cooperation" was problematic - administrators had exploitative motives |
| Doctors saw nursing education as a way of improving care in the hospital, but they opposed any move to bolster nurses' control of their own labor or to improve their scientific skills, arguing that nurses should remain submissive and nurturing. | What it says: Doctors wanted nursing education to improve hospital care, but they were against giving nurses more control over their work or better scientific training. They said nurses should stay obedient and caring. What it does: Reveals the second group's true motivation - better care but maintained hierarchy and limited nurse authority Source/Type: Historical analysis Connection to Previous Sentences: This continues explaining the "radically divergent" goals by showing doctors wanted improvement but with strict limitations on nurse autonomy and expertise Visualization: Doctors' position: What they wanted: Better trained nurses for better patient care What they opposed: Nurse independence, scientific expertise, professional control Goal: Competent but subordinate assistants, not professional equals What We Know So Far: Doctors wanted limited nursing improvement - better skills but continued submissiveness Reading Strategy Insight: This reinforces the main theme about nursing being constrained by "women's work" ideology - doctors wanted "submissive and nurturing" (traditional feminine traits) |
| As hospital exigencies quickly came to dominate the decision-making process in the training schools, nursing educators lost control over admission standards, the quality of education, and the labor of students on the wards. | What it says: Because hospitals' immediate needs became the most important factor in running nursing schools, the nursing education leaders lost control over who got admitted, how good the education was, and how students were used as workers in the hospital. What it does: Provides the outcome - restates and concludes the conflict by showing who won Source/Type: Historical conclusion Connection to Previous Sentences: This concludes the "radically divergent goals" explanation by showing the final result - hospital needs (cheap labor) overwhelmed nursing education goals (professionalism) Visualization: Final outcome: Nursing educators' original vision: Professional schools → high standards → graduate professionals What actually happened: Hospital needs → low standards → student laborers The administrators' agenda won completely What We Know So Far: The nursing education reform effort failed - hospitals got their cheap labor, nursing remained non-professional Reading Strategy Insight: This sentence ties everything together - it shows how the persistent "women's work" ideology (from the beginning) ultimately defeated attempts at professionalization. The passage comes full circle to reinforce the main thesis! |
2. Passage Summary:
Author's Purpose:
To explain how the view of nursing as "women's work" has consistently prevented the profession from gaining real respect and independence, even when people tried to make it more professional.
Summary of Passage Structure:
The author builds their argument by tracing the historical development of nursing's status problem:
- First, the author states the main problem - nursing has always been seen as "women's work," which has hurt both what nurses do and how much respect they get.
- Next, the author explains where this "women's work" idea came from - old beliefs about women being naturally caring and dutiful, not from any belief in women's rights.
- Then, the author shows how this played out before 1870, with women doing unpaid family nursing or low-paid hospital work, both seen as "natural" for women.
- Finally, the author demonstrates that even when nursing became more scientific after 1870 and education leaders tried to professionalize it, the effort failed because hospital administrators and doctors had different goals that kept nurses subordinate.
Main Point:
The idea that nursing is naturally "women's work" has been so powerful and persistent that it has successfully blocked every attempt to turn nursing into a truly respected, independent profession, even when the job itself became more skilled and scientific.
Answer Choices Explained
A
Nursing education in the nineteenth century dramatically changed the ideology of nursing.
Why It's Right:
- This directly contradicts a central claim in the passage: "Even after 1870, when scientific and medical advances hastened the development of nursing as skilled paid labor, the ideology concerning nursing changed very little."
- The passage shows that despite nursing education reforms, the fundamental "women's work" perception persisted
- Reverby's entire argument demonstrates that nursing education failed to change the core ideology because hospital needs and medical hierarchy maintained nurses' subordinate status
B
Nursing education did not significantly affect the professional relationship between nurses and doctors.
Why It's Wrong:
- This statement actually aligns with Reverby's findings - the passage shows nursing education didn't significantly change the nurse-doctor relationship
- Doctors specifically "opposed any move to bolster nurses' control of their own labor or to improve their scientific skills"
- The professional relationship remained hierarchical with nurses expected to be "submissive and nurturing"
C
Hospital exigencies limited the autonomy of nurses in relation to doctors.
Why It's Wrong:
- This aligns perfectly with Reverby's argument that hospital needs dominated nursing education
- The passage explicitly states that "hospital exigencies quickly came to dominate the decision-making process in the training schools"
- This limitation of nurse autonomy is exactly what Reverby documented
D
Hospital administrators hoped that standardized nursing education would promote their own goals.
Why It's Wrong:
- This statement is completely supported by the passage's description of hospital administrators' motivations
- The passage explicitly states that administrators "understood that the movement to upgrade and standardize nursing education would support their own plans"
- Reverby documents that administrators saw nursing schools as "sources of cheap and malleable labor"
E
Prior to 1870, there was no formal education for nurses because women were assumed to be naturally capable of the work.
Why It's Wrong:
- This accurately reflects the pre-1870 situation described in the passage
- The passage states that women "were assumed to be 'naturals' for the job" in both home and hospital settings
- This assumption of natural ability meant no formal training was considered necessary before 1870
Rate this Solution
Tell us what you think about this solution
Forum Discussions
Start a new discussion
Post
Load More