Scholars working on the history of women in modern Ireland have in general followed the lead of scholars of women's...
GMAT Reading Comprehension : (RC) Questions
Scholars working on the history of women in modern Ireland have in general followed the lead of scholars of women's history in other countries, concentrating their attention on the suffrage movement. In Ireland this movement peaked in the 1920s, coinciding with the emergence of the Irish state, and the interaction between the suffrage movement in Ireland and Ireland's struggle for independence from Great Britain has been the subject of considerable analysis. From the exhilarating heights of the revolutionary period, the women's movement in Ireland appears, not surprisingly, to have undergone a major decline: descriptions of women's lives in independent Ireland provide a dreary litany of legislative restrictions on women's rights.
Focusing on the revolutionary period, however, may have exaggerated both the status accorded Irish women in the early twentieth century and the repressive nature of the new Irish state. The women involved in the suffrage movement were a small, elite minority; the extent to which the movement engaged the wider female population remains unclear. Additionally, certain features of the lives of Irish women that were economically determined and that predated the foundation of the Irish state are often attributed to political factors associated with Irish independence. As a result, little account has been taken of real, if modest, gains made by Irish women in the 1930s in the realm of employment.
The passage is primarily concerned with
1. Passage Analysis:
Progressive Passage Analysis
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| Scholars working on the history of women in modern Ireland have in general followed the lead of scholars of women's history in other countries, concentrating their attention on the suffrage movement. | What it says: Researchers studying Irish women's history have mostly focused on voting rights, copying what researchers in other countries do. What it does: Introduces the main topic and sets up the scholarly context Source/Type: Author's factual observation about research trends Connection to Previous Sentences: This is our opening - establishes the foundation for everything that follows Visualization: Think of 100 scholars studying women's history worldwide. Maybe 80 of them focus on suffrage. Irish scholars are following this same pattern. Reading Strategy Insight: This is a classic RC opening - establishing what "most people think" or "the current approach." Often signals that the author will later critique or modify this approach. |
| In Ireland this movement peaked in the 1920s, coinciding with the emergence of the Irish state, and the interaction between the suffrage movement in Ireland and Ireland's struggle for independence from Great Britain has been the subject of considerable analysis. | What it says: The Irish suffrage movement was strongest in the 1920s when Ireland became independent, and many scholars have studied how voting rights and independence movements connected. What it does: Provides specific details about when and why the suffrage movement mattered in Ireland Source/Type: Historical facts combined with author's observation about scholarly focus Connection to Previous Sentences: This builds on sentence 1 by giving us the specific timeline and context for why Irish scholars focus on suffrage - it coincided with independence, making it historically significant. Visualization: Timeline: 1920s = Peak of suffrage movement + Irish independence happening simultaneously. This overlap makes it an obvious research target. What We Know So Far: Scholars focus on suffrage (especially the 1920s period in Ireland) What We Don't Know Yet: Whether this focus is the right approach |
| From the exhilarating heights of the revolutionary period, the women's movement in Ireland appears, not surprisingly, to have undergone a major decline: descriptions of women's lives in independent Ireland provide a dreary litany of legislative restrictions on women's rights. | What it says: After the exciting 1920s, the women's movement seemed to collapse, and women faced many new legal restrictions. What it does: Describes the conventional narrative about what happened after the peak period Source/Type: Summary of existing scholarly descriptions (note: "appears" and "descriptions" suggest this might not be the full story) Connection to Previous Sentences: This continues the timeline from sentence 2, showing what supposedly happened AFTER the 1920s peak. Creates a dramatic contrast: exciting heights → major decline. Visualization: Graph showing women's status: 1920s (high point) → 1930s+ (steep decline into restrictions) Reading Strategy Insight: The phrase "appears" is a red flag - suggests the author may question this narrative. Also note "not surprisingly" - the author is presenting the conventional wisdom before challenging it. |
| Focusing on the revolutionary period, however, may have exaggerated both the status accorded Irish women in the early twentieth century and the repressive nature of the new Irish state. | What it says: But maybe this focus on the 1920s has made scholars overestimate both how good things were then AND how bad they became later. What it does: Introduces the author's main critique of existing scholarship Source/Type: Author's opinion/argument challenging the conventional view Connection to Previous Sentences: This directly challenges everything we've been told! The word "however" signals a major turn. This is the author's thesis - that focusing on the 1920s (from sentences 1-3) creates a distorted picture. Visualization: Reality check: Maybe the 1920s weren't as high as scholars think (7/10 instead of 9/10) and the later period wasn't as low as scholars think (5/10 instead of 2/10). Reading Strategy Insight: MAJOR RELIEF MOMENT! This isn't adding complexity - it's telling us the central argument. Everything that follows will support this critique. |
| The women involved in the suffrage movement were a small, elite minority; the extent to which the movement engaged the wider female population remains unclear. | What it says: Only a few wealthy, educated women participated in suffrage; we don't know if regular women cared about it. What it does: Provides first piece of evidence supporting the author's critique Source/Type: Author's factual observation challenging the significance of the suffrage movement Connection to Previous Sentences: This directly supports sentence 4's argument. Translation: "The 1920s peak wasn't as significant as scholars think because most women weren't involved." Visualization: Out of 1,000 Irish women, maybe only 50 participated in suffrage activities, and these 50 were mostly wealthy/educated. The other 950 women's experiences are unknown. Reading Strategy Insight: Feel confident here - this is just evidence for the argument we already know from sentence 4. The author is building a case, not introducing new complexity. |
| Additionally, certain features of the lives of Irish women that were economically determined and that predated the foundation of the Irish state are often attributed to political factors associated with Irish independence. | What it says: Some problems in women's lives existed before independence for economic reasons, but scholars wrongly blame these on independence politics. What it does: Provides second piece of evidence supporting the author's critique Source/Type: Author's analytical observation about misattribution in scholarship Connection to Previous Sentences: This supports the other half of sentence 4's argument. Translation: "The post-independence period wasn't as bad as scholars think because some problems weren't caused by independence." Visualization: Timeline mix-up: Economic problems from 1800s + 1900s get incorrectly labeled as "caused by 1920s independence." Reading Strategy Insight: Again, this is just more evidence for the same argument. The author is systematically supporting their critique with specific examples. |
| As a result, little account has been taken of real, if modest, gains made by Irish women in the 1930s in the realm of employment. | What it says: Because of this wrong focus, scholars have ignored the small but real improvements women made in getting jobs during the 1930s. What it does: Concludes the argument by showing the practical consequence of the misguided scholarly focus Source/Type: Author's conclusion about what scholarship has missed Connection to Previous Sentences: "As a result" directly connects this to everything before. This is the payoff - here's what we've missed because of the flawed approach described in sentences 1-3 and critiqued in sentences 4-6. Visualization: The 1930s employment gains are like a story sitting on the shelf, unread, while everyone focuses on the dramatic 1920s story. What We Now Know: • Scholars focus too much on 1920s suffrage • This creates a distorted before/after narrative • Reality: 1920s less significant, post-independence less terrible • Result: We've missed real 1930s progress Reading Strategy Insight: Perfect RC conclusion - ties everything together and shows why the argument matters. You should feel confident that you understand the author's complete point. |
2. Passage Summary:
Author's Purpose:
To critique how scholars have been studying the history of women in modern Ireland and to show why their approach creates a distorted picture of what actually happened.
Summary of Passage Structure:
The author builds their argument by first describing the current scholarly approach, then systematically challenging it:
- First, the author explains that scholars studying Irish women's history have focused mainly on the suffrage movement, especially during the 1920s when Ireland gained independence.
- Next, the author describes the standard story these scholars tell: that women's status peaked during the exciting 1920s revolutionary period, then declined sharply afterward with many new restrictions.
- Then, the author challenges this narrative by arguing that focusing too much on the 1920s has made scholars overestimate both how good things were then and how bad they became later.
- Finally, the author supports this critique with specific evidence: the suffrage movement only involved elite women, some problems blamed on independence actually had economic causes from earlier periods, and scholars have missed real progress women made in employment during the 1930s.
Main Point:
Scholars have created a misleading picture of Irish women's history by focusing too heavily on the 1920s suffrage movement, which has caused them to overlook genuine but modest improvements that women actually achieved in later periods like the 1930s.
1. Question Analysis:
This question asks us to identify the primary concern or main purpose of the entire passage. We need to determine what the author is fundamentally trying to accomplish throughout their discussion of Irish women's history scholarship.
Connecting to Our Passage Analysis:
From our detailed analysis, we can see a clear pattern in how the author structures their argument:
- The author begins by describing the current scholarly approach (focusing on suffrage movement, especially the 1920s)
- The author presents the conventional narrative that emerges from this approach (peak in 1920s, decline afterward)
- The author directly challenges this approach with the key sentence: "Focusing on the revolutionary period, however, may have exaggerated both the status accorded Irish women in the early twentieth century and the repressive nature of the new Irish state"
- The author then systematically supports this critique with specific evidence about why this scholarly focus creates distortions
The passage analysis shows that sentence 4 contains the author's thesis - a direct critique of the existing scholarly approach. Everything that follows supports this central argument about methodological problems in current scholarship.
Prethinking:
Based on this structure, the passage is primarily concerned with pointing out flaws in how scholars have been studying Irish women's history. The author isn't trying to reconcile different views, propose new theories, or describe historical developments - they're specifically identifying problems with the scholarly methodology that focuses too heavily on the 1920s suffrage movement. This creates a distorted picture that exaggerates both the heights of the revolutionary period and the depths of the subsequent decline, while missing real progress in areas like 1930s employment.
Why It's Wrong:
- The author never proposes applying a general theory to Ireland specifically
- Instead, the author notes that Irish scholars have been following the lead of scholars in other countries, which is the opposite of applying a unique theoretical approach
- The passage is critical rather than theoretical - it's about methodological problems, not theoretical applications
Common Student Mistakes:
- Thinking that because the passage mentions "scholars of women's history in other countries," it must be about applying general theories?
→ The passage actually criticizes Irish scholars for following this general approach too closely, not for applying theories - Confusing the author's critique with a theoretical proposal?
→ The author is identifying problems with existing approaches, not proposing new theoretical frameworks
Why It's Wrong:
- The author doesn't present two competing perspectives that need reconciliation
- Instead, the author challenges one dominant perspective (the suffrage-focused approach) and shows why it's flawed
- The passage structure is critique-based, not reconciliation-based
Common Student Mistakes:
- Thinking that the "before and after" narrative (1920s peak vs. later decline) represents two perspectives?
→ This is actually one flawed narrative that the author is challenging, not two competing viewpoints - Confusing the author's alternative evidence with a competing perspective that needs reconciling?
→ The author is correcting the record, not reconciling different scholarly camps
Why It's Right:
- The author systematically identifies problems with how scholars have been studying Irish women's history
- The central thesis explicitly states that "focusing on the revolutionary period...may have exaggerated" key aspects of women's experiences
- The entire passage structure supports this critique with specific evidence about methodological shortcomings
- The conclusion shows how this flawed approach has caused scholars to miss important developments like 1930s employment gains
Key Evidence: "Focusing on the revolutionary period, however, may have exaggerated both the status accorded Irish women in the early twentieth century and the repressive nature of the new Irish state."
Why It's Wrong:
- The author isn't criticizing attempts to reverse political gains
- Instead, the author is critiquing scholarly methodology and research focus
- The passage is about academic approaches to history, not about political activism or policy reversals
Common Student Mistakes:
- Thinking that because the passage mentions "legislative restrictions," it must be about political reversals?
→ The author is questioning whether scholars have correctly understood these restrictions, not defending against them - Confusing historical analysis with political advocacy?
→ The author is making an academic argument about research methodology, not a political argument about rights
Why It's Wrong:
- The author doesn't describe historical developments in the women's movement itself
- Instead, the author describes and criticizes how scholars have studied the movement
- The focus is on historiography (the study of historical writing) rather than history itself
Common Student Mistakes:
- Thinking that because the passage discusses women's history, it must be describing historical developments?
→ The passage is actually about how that history has been studied and interpreted by scholars - Missing the meta-level focus on scholarly approaches rather than historical events?
→ Pay attention to phrases like "scholars have followed," "has been the subject of analysis," and "little account has been taken"