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: Official Guide
...
...
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
Which of the following best states the central idea of the passage?
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: A researcher named Susan Reverby says the most important thing about nursing is that everyone has always thought of it as "women's work," and this belief has really affected what nurses do and how respected nursing is as a profession. What it does: Introduces the main thesis/argument of the passage by citing expert research Source/Type: Researcher's claim (Susan Reverby's findings) Connection to Previous Sentences: This is our starting point - establishes the central argument we'll explore Visualization: Think of nursing like a job that society put in a "women's work" box, and that box determined: (1) what tasks nurses got assigned, and (2) how much respect the profession received Reading Strategy Insight: This opening sentence gives us the roadmap - everything that follows will likely explain HOW this "women's work" perception developed and WHY it mattered so much What We Know So Far: Nursing = seen as "women's work" = affects tasks and status What We Don't Know Yet: How this perception developed, specific examples of impact |
| 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: Reverby shows that viewing nursing as "women's work" didn't come from thinking women deserved equal rights, but from old ideas about what women were naturally like and what they were supposed to do. What it does: Explains the historical origin of the "women's work" concept from sentence 1 Source/Type: Researcher's historical analysis Connection to Previous Sentences: This builds directly on sentence 1 by explaining WHERE the "women's work" ideology came from. Important contrast: NOT about women's rights, but about traditional gender roles Visualization: 1800s society had a mental box labeled "What Women Are Like" containing ideas like "naturally caring, dutiful, meant to serve others" → this box got applied to nursing Reading Strategy Insight: Notice how this clarifies and focuses our understanding from sentence 1 - we now know the specific historical roots What We Know So Far: "Women's work" perception → came from 1700s-1800s ideas about female character and duty → NOT from women's rights thinking |
| 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, nursing happened in two places: (1) at home, where women took care of family members because that was their family duty, or (2) in hospitals, which were basically places to house poor people. What it does: Provides specific historical context and examples to support the previous claims Source/Type: Historical facts Connection to Previous Sentences: This gives us concrete examples of how the "womanly duty" concept from sentence 2 actually played out in real settings before 1870 Visualization: Pre-1870 Nursing World: Home (women caring for sick family = family duty) + Hospitals (basically poorhouses with some medical care) Reading Strategy Insight: This is helpful concrete detail that makes the abstract "ideology" concept more understandable through real examples What We Know So Far: Historical ideology about women's nature → led to nursing being seen as natural female duty → showed up in homes (family care) and hospitals (caring for 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. | What it says: Even though home nursing and hospital nursing were different, people thought women were naturally good at nursing in both cases. Because of this, hospital nurses got paid very little money - as if the work was so "natural" for women that money didn't matter. What it does: Shows a specific consequence of the "women as naturals" belief - terrible pay Source/Type: Historical analysis with logical reasoning Connection to Previous Sentences: This connects the two settings from sentence 3 and shows how the "womanly character" ideology from sentence 2 led to a concrete negative outcome - low pay Visualization: Society's Logic Chain: "Women are natural caregivers" → "This work comes naturally to them" → "If it's natural, they don't need much money for it" → Tiny paychecks for hospital nurses Reading Strategy Insight: This is a key moment - we're seeing how the abstract ideology created real economic harm. The author is building a clear cause-and-effect chain. What We Know So Far: "Natural" assumption → led to viewing nursing as inherent female trait → resulted in very low hospital wages |
| 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, science and medicine improved a lot, which made nursing become more of a skilled job that people got paid for, but people's basic beliefs about nursing (as women's natural work) stayed almost the same. What it does: Introduces a time transition and shows the persistence of old attitudes despite changing circumstances Source/Type: Historical analysis Connection to Previous Sentences: This contrasts with everything before 1870 that we just learned about, but shows that even though the job itself changed, the underlying "women's work" ideology from sentences 1-2 persisted Visualization: Timeline: Before 1870 (basic care, family duty, low/no pay) → After 1870 (skilled medical work, actual wages) BUT the mental box labeled "women's natural work" stayed the same Reading Strategy Insight: This sets up tension - if nursing became skilled work but kept the old ideology, there must have been conflicts. Expect to learn about those conflicts next. What We Know So Far: Persistent ideology + changing job reality = potential for conflict in post-1870 period |
| True, leaders in nursing education advocated professionalism: being a woman was necessary, but not sufficient, for nursing. | What it says: The people in charge of teaching nursing did want nursing to become a real profession. They said: yes, you need to be a woman to be a nurse, but just being a woman isn't enough - you need training too. What it does: Introduces a new group (nursing educators) and their perspective on professionalizing nursing Source/Type: Historical description of a group's position Connection to Previous Sentences: This shows one response to the post-1870 situation from sentence 5 - nursing leaders tried to work within the "women's work" framework while pushing for more professionalism Visualization: Nursing Educators' Formula: Female gender (necessary) + Professional training (also necessary) = Qualified nurse Reading Strategy Insight: The word "True" signals this will be followed by a "but" or complication. Notice how this group tried to balance old ideology with new professional standards. |
| 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 education leaders wanted to create tough training schools run by women. These schools would teach the parts of healthcare that doctors were no longer handling because doctors were becoming more specialized. What it does: Provides specific details about the nursing educators' professional vision Source/Type: Description of a group's goals/plans Connection to Previous Sentences: This elaborates on the "professionalism" concept from the previous sentence, showing exactly what nursing leaders wanted to create Visualization: Nursing Leaders' Vision: Rigorous schools (run by women) → teaching healthcare skills → filling gaps left by increasingly specialized doctors Reading Strategy Insight: This is still explaining the same group's position - we're getting more detail, not new complexity. Notice how they wanted to claim a specific professional territory. What We Know So Far: Nursing educators wanted: female-controlled schools + rigorous training + defined professional scope (areas doctors were abandoning) |
| 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, because these other groups realized that making nursing education better and more standardized would help with their own medical reform goals. What it does: Introduces two additional groups (hospital administrators, doctors) who initially supported nursing education reform Source/Type: Historical description of group alliances Connection to Previous Sentences: This shows that the nursing educators' plans from sentences 6-7 got support from other powerful groups, which seemed promising Visualization: Temporary Alliance: Nursing educators (want professionalism) + Hospital administrators + Doctors (want medical reform) = Everyone supporting better nursing education Reading Strategy Insight: The phrase "They were pleased" suggests this cooperation seemed good initially, but given the overall passage tone, expect this alliance to have problems. This sets up for conflict. |
| But the goals of the three groups, Reverby argues, were radically divergent. | What it says: However, according to Reverby, the three groups (nursing educators, hospital administrators, and doctors) actually wanted completely different things. What it does: Reveals that the apparent alliance from the previous sentence was based on conflicting motivations Source/Type: Researcher's analysis (Reverby's argument) Connection to Previous Sentences: This directly contrasts with sentence 8's description of cooperation. The "But" signals that the apparent harmony was misleading. Visualization: Surface level: All three groups supporting nursing education ↓ Reality: Three completely different motivations pulling in different directions Reading Strategy Insight: Feel relieved here - this isn't new complexity! The author is about to clarify the confusing cooperation by explaining each group's real motives. Expect specific explanations of each group's different goals next. |
| 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 if they had nursing schools connected to their hospitals, they could get workers who were both cheap and easy to control. What it does: Explains the first group's real motivation (exploitation of student labor) Source/Type: Historical analysis of motivations Connection to Previous Sentences: This is the first specific example of the "radically divergent goals" from sentence 9. Shows how administrators' support was self-serving, not about nursing professionalism Visualization: Hospital Administrators' Real Plan: Nursing school students = Built-in workforce (low cost + controllable + always available) Reading Strategy Insight: This clarifies the "divergent goals" - we're getting concrete examples, not new abstract concepts. Notice how this directly conflicts with nursing educators' professional goals. |
| 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 because it would improve patient care in hospitals, but they didn't want nurses to have more control over their own work or to get better scientific training. They said nurses should stay obedient and caring. What it does: Explains the second group's real motivation (better care without nurse empowerment) Source/Type: Historical analysis of group positions Connection to Previous Sentences: This is the second example of "divergent goals" from sentence 9. Shows doctors wanted some benefits of education but with strict limits to maintain hierarchy Visualization: Doctors' Position: Better nursing education (YES) + Nurse autonomy (NO) + Advanced nurse training (NO) = Improved care with maintained control Reading Strategy Insight: Still clarifying "divergent goals" - this is the second of three motivations. Notice the internal contradiction: wanting better education but opposing the elements that would actually make it professional. |
| 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 had urgent practical needs, those needs took over the decision-making in nursing schools. As a result, the nursing educators lost control over who got admitted, how good the education was, and how student nurses were used as workers in hospital wards. What it does: Shows the final outcome - which group's goals actually won Source/Type: Historical conclusion/outcome Connection to Previous Sentences: This resolves the conflict between the three groups' divergent goals (sentences 9-11). Hospital administrators' exploitation model won; nursing educators' professional vision lost. Visualization: Final Result: Hospital needs (cheap labor) > Nursing educators' goals (professional standards) = Schools became labor sources rather than true professional training Reading Strategy Insight: This conclusion ties back to the original thesis - the "women's work" ideology ultimately prevented true professionalization, even when nursing leaders tried to change it. The passage has come full circle, reinforcing rather than complicating the main argument. |
2. Passage Summary:
Author's Purpose:
To explain how the view of nursing as "women's work" developed historically and continued to harm the nursing profession 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 problematic status:
- First, the author introduces the main problem by citing research showing that nursing has always been seen as "women's work," which has hurt both what nurses do and how respected they are.
- Next, the author explains where this "women's work" idea came from - not from believing in women's rights, but from old-fashioned ideas about what women were naturally supposed to do.
- Then, the author gives examples of how this played out before and after 1870, showing that even when nursing became more skilled work, the old attitudes stuck around and kept nurses' pay low.
- Finally, the author shows how efforts to professionalize nursing failed because different groups had conflicting goals, with hospitals ultimately winning by using nursing schools as sources of cheap labor rather than real professional training.
Main Point:
The idea that nursing is "women's work" has been so powerful throughout history that it prevented nursing from becoming a truly respected profession, even when nursing leaders tried to change things by creating professional training programs.
3. Question Analysis:
This question asks us to identify the central idea of the passage - the main overarching argument that ties together all the historical examples and analysis presented.
Connecting to Our Passage Analysis:
From our progressive analysis, we can see that the passage follows a clear argumentative structure:
- Opening thesis: The passage begins by establishing that nursing has been conceptualized as "women's work" and this has dramatically impacted both tasks and status
- Historical origins: Shows this ideology came from 18th-19th century ideas about "womanly character and duty" - NOT from women's rights
- Persistence over time: Demonstrates how this ideology remained powerful even as nursing evolved from basic care to skilled labor after 1870
- Failed professionalization attempt: Shows how even when nursing educators tried to create professional standards, the underlying "women's work" ideology allowed hospitals to exploit this situation for cheap labor
The passage analysis reveals that the author is building a case about how traditional gender ideology created lasting barriers to nursing's professional development.
Prethinking:
Based on our analysis, the central idea should capture:
- The persistence of traditional views about women's work
- How these views created obstacles for nursing's development
- The connection between gender ideology and professional limitations
The correct answer should reflect how old-fashioned ideas about women hindered nursing's evolution as a profession.
Answer Choices Explained
A
The ideology of nursing as a profession has been informed by a commitment to women's rights.
Why It's Wrong:
- Directly contradicts the passage's explicit statement that nursing ideology grew "not out of a belief in women's rights"
- The passage shows that women's rights thinking was specifically excluded from nursing's development
- Misses the entire point about how traditional gender roles (not progressive rights) shaped nursing
Common Student Mistakes:
- Did the passage discuss women's rights positively since it talks about women?
→ No, the passage explicitly states the ideology came "not out of a belief in women's rights but from eighteenth- and nineteenth-century understandings of womanly character and duty" - Since nursing educators wanted professionalism, does that mean they supported women's rights?
→ The passage shows they worked within the existing "women's work" framework rather than challenging it with rights-based arguments
B
Conflicts between leaders in nursing education and hospital administrators prevented the professionalization of nursing.
Why It's Wrong:
- Too narrow - focuses only on conflicts between educators and administrators
- Ignores the deeper ideological issues that created these conflicts
- Misses the role of doctors and the broader "women's work" concept that underlies everything
Common Student Mistakes:
- Since the passage talks about conflicts between groups, isn't that the main point?
→ The conflicts were symptoms of the deeper problem - traditional gender ideology that made nursing vulnerable to exploitation - Doesn't the passage end with nursing educators losing control?
→ Yes, but that outcome illustrates the power of traditional "women's work" thinking, not just administrative conflicts
C
Traditional ideas about women's work hindered the evolution of the ideology of nursing.
Why It's Right:
- Captures the opening thesis about how "women's work" conceptualization had "dramatic impact"
- Reflects the historical progression from traditional gender roles through failed professionalization
- Encompasses all the specific examples (low pay, exploitation as "naturals," failed training schools) as manifestations of this broader ideological problem
Key Evidence: "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."
D
Doctors did not recognize nurses as professionals because the nursing school curriculum was too general.
Why It's Wrong:
- Misrepresents doctors' motivations - they opposed nursing professionalization to maintain hierarchy, not because of curriculum issues
- The passage shows doctors wanted nurses to "remain submissive and nurturing," not become more scientifically trained
- Focuses on curriculum rather than the underlying gender ideology that shaped all professional interactions
Common Student Mistakes:
- Since doctors wanted better nursing education, were they supporting professionalization?
→ No, they wanted "improved care" but opposed "any move to bolster nurses' control" or "improve their scientific skills" - Was the nursing curriculum actually too general?
→ The issue wasn't curriculum quality but doctors' desire to keep nurses "submissive" regardless of their training
E
Scientific and medical advances of the late nineteenth century had little effect on the practice of nursing.
Why It's Wrong:
- Contradicts the passage's clear statement that "scientific and medical advances hastened the development of nursing as skilled paid labor"
- Ignores how these advances created the context for professionalization attempts
- Misses that the problem was ideological persistence despite technological/medical changes
Common Student Mistakes:
- Since traditional ideology persisted, did scientific advances not matter?
→ The advances mattered but weren't enough to overcome entrenched gender ideology - that's what made the situation problematic - Does the passage focus more on ideology than scientific changes?
→ Yes, but it shows how ideology prevented nursing from benefiting fully from scientific progress, not that the progress was irrelevant
Rate this Solution
Tell us what you think about this solution
Forum Discussions
Start a new discussion
Post
Load More