The correct answer is (B).
Mario García and the Mexican American Generation
Step 1: Read the Passage Strategically
Sample Highlighting
In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the "Mexican American Generation" was more radical and politically diverse than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era's most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.
First, García's analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation's political diversity is not entirely consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.
Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase in the ethnic Mexican population's political activism.
Passage Notes
Paragraph 1
García's arg
Auth: García Persuasive
Auth: study flawed
Paragraph 2
Flaw #1
García hides differences among groups
Ex: two opposing groups
García: differences not significant
Auth: differences significant
Paragraph 3
Flaw #2 García overstates representativeness of views
García: new generation more politically active
Auth: unclear if population shared views
Discussion
A quick scan of this Social Sciences passage reveals an easily digestible structure, with many helpful Keywords at the beginnings and ends of each paragraph. The passage also follows a common LSAT pattern: It begins by introducing a scholar's argument and then evaluates it. The more Reading Comprehension you do in practice, the better you'll become at anticipating this pattern and knocking out passages like this early in your 35 minutes.
Paragraph 1 gives García's argument—the so-called Mexican American Generation was more radical and diverse than scholars had previously thought. And in the second sentence of the first paragraph, the author gives him some credit for making a persuasive case. But the Contrast Keyword however in the last sentence of that paragraph tells you that the author has some critiques in store—two, to be exact. The Topic is therefore García's study, and the Scope appears to be its strengths and weaknesses, with a heavy lean toward the weaknesses.
Paragraph 2 outlines the author's first gripe with García's study. García undermines his argument about the Mexican American Generation's political diversity by downplaying the very real differences among various groups. The details about the League of United Latin American Citizens and the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People are examples that should be marked for reference later—extended examples tend to show up in questions. The Keyword but in the last sentence of paragraph 2 signals the author's objection to García's characterization of these differences as insignificant.
Paragraph 3 gives the author's second critique of García's study. The passage alleges that García extended the views of activists to cover the ethnic Mexican population as a whole. García cites the increased political activity of the Mexican American Generation as proof of an increase in the activism of the whole ethnic population. However, says the author in the next-to-last sentence of the last paragraph, García doesn't take into account the variables that could have rendered the Mexican American Generation politically unrepresentative.
The author's overall Purpose is to critically evaluate García's study. The Main Idea, therefore, is that despite some persuasive evidence, García's study suffers from inconsistent historical analysis and a failure to demonstrate the representativeness of the political views he analyzes.
(B) Inference
Step 2: Identify the Question Type
This is an Inference question because it asks about what "the passage suggests."
Step 3: Research the Relevant Text
This question stem has a couple of important content clues. First, it focuses on García's views, narrowing the relevant text to the first sentence of the passage, the fourth sentence of paragraph 2, and the second sentence of paragraph 3. Second, note the timeframe: between 1930 and 1960. That interval is mentioned explicitly in the second sentence of paragraph 3, so read around that sentence.
Step 4: Make a Prediction
Between 1930 and 1960, according to García, a new generation of Mexican Americans arose that was more politically active than the previous generation due to its being more acculturated, or assimilated to the dominant culture. The correct answer is the one that must be true based on this assertion.
Step 5: Evaluate the Answer Choices
(B) is an almost direct paraphrase of García's argument in the third sentence in paragraph 3.
(A) goes outside García's argument to bring in ethnic consciousness, a concept that doesn't arise until the author brings it up in the last sentence of the passage.
(C) is a 180. García argues that the acculturation of the new Mexican American generation increased their level of political activity.
(D) distorts García's argument in the third sentence of paragraph 3. García does argue that these Mexican American leaders wanted to achieve full civil rights for all Mexican Americans. However, the passage doesn't say that they used "political militancy" to achieve this end.
(E) also distorts the third sentence of paragraph 3. It's not valid to equate "moved to political protest" with "determined to achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent." Furthermore, the passage says that the rhetoric of World War II slogans was inclusive, which isn't the same as patronizing.
