HSBC Reading Comprehensions Questions and Answers Quiz-1

DIRECTIONS for question 1-5 : Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

Political education has many connotations. It may be defined as the preparation of a citizen to take well informed, responsible and sustained action for participation in the national struggle in order to achieve the socio-economic objectives of the country. The predominant socio- economic objectives in India are the abolition of poverty and the creation of a modern democratic, secular and socialist society in place of the present traditional, feudal, hierarchical and in egalitarian one.
Under the colonial rule, the Congress leaders argued that political education was an important part of education and refused to accept the official view that education and politics should not be mixed with one another. But when they came to power in 1947 they almost adopted the British policy and began to talk of education being defiled by politics. ‘Hands off education’ was the call to political parties. But in spite of it, political infiltration into the educational system has greatly increased in the sense that different political parties vie with each other to capture the mind of teachers and students. The wise academicians wanted political support, without political interference. What we have actually received is infinite political interference with little genuine political support. This interference with the educational system by political parties for their own ulterior motives is no political education at all and with the all round growth of elitism, it is hardly a matter for surprise that real political education within the school system (which really means the creation of a commitment to social transformation) has been even weaker than in the pre-independence period.
During that time only, the struggle for freedom came to an end and the major non- formal agency of political education disappeared. The press played a major role by providing some political education. But it did not utilize the opportunity to the full and the strangle hold of vested interests continued to dominate it. The same can be said of political parties as well as of other institutions and agencies outside the school system which can be expected to provide political education. After analyzing all these things , it appears that we have made no progress in genuine political education in the post-education period and have even slided back in some respects. For instance, the education system has become even more elite-oriented. Patriotism has become the first casualty. The father of the nation gave us the courage to oppose government when it was wrong, in a disciplined fashion and on basic principles. Today, we have even lost the courage to fight on basic issues in a disciplined manner because agitational and anarchic politics for individual, group or party aggrandizement has become common. In the recent times the education system continues to support domination of the privileged groups and domestication of the under- privileged ones. The situation will not change unless we take vigorous steps to provide genuine political education on an adequate scale. This is one of the major educational reforms we need, and if it is not carried out, mere linear expansion of the existing system of formal education will only support the status quo and hamper radical social transformation.

Which word is nearly opposite in meaning as “defile” as used in the passage?

Political education has many connotations. It may be defined as the preparation of a citizen to take well informed, responsible and sustained action for participation in the national struggle in order to achieve the socio-economic objectives of the country. The predominant socio- economic objectives in India are the abolition of poverty and the creation of a modern democratic, secular and socialist society in place of the present traditional, feudal, hierarchical and in egalitarian one.
Under the colonial rule, the Congress leaders argued that political education was an important part of education and refused to accept the official view that education and politics should not be mixed with one another. But when they came to power in 1947 they almost adopted the British policy and began to talk of education being defiled by politics. ‘Hands off education’ was the call to political parties. But in spite of it, political infiltration into the educational system has greatly increased in the sense that different political parties vie with each other to capture the mind of teachers and students. The wise academicians wanted political support, without political interference. What we have actually received is infinite political interference with little genuine political support. This interference with the educational system by political parties for their own ulterior motives is no political education at all and with the all round growth of elitism, it is hardly a matter for surprise that real political education within the school system (which really means the creation of a commitment to social transformation) has been even weaker than in the pre-independence period.
During that time only, the struggle for freedom came to an end and the major non- formal agency of political education disappeared. The press played a major role by providing some political education. But it did not utilize the opportunity to the full and the strangle hold of vested interests continued to dominate it. The same can be said of political parties as well as of other institutions and agencies outside the school system which can be expected to provide political education. After analyzing all these things , it appears that we have made no progress in genuine political education in the post-education period and have even slided back in some respects. For instance, the education system has become even more elite-oriented. Patriotism has become the first casualty. The father of the nation gave us the courage to oppose government when it was wrong, in a disciplined fashion and on basic principles. Today, we have even lost the courage to fight on basic issues in a disciplined manner because agitational and anarchic politics for individual, group or party aggrandizement has become common. In the recent times the education system continues to support domination of the privileged groups and domestication of the under- privileged ones. The situation will not change unless we take vigorous steps to provide genuine political education on an adequate scale. This is one of the major educational reforms we need, and if it is not carried out, mere linear expansion of the existing system of formal education will only support the status quo and hamper radical social transformation.

According to the passage, what should be the main purpose of political education?

Political education has many connotations. It may be defined as the preparation of a citizen to take well informed, responsible and sustained action for participation in the national struggle in order to achieve the socio-economic objectives of the country. The predominant socio- economic objectives in India are the abolition of poverty and the creation of a modern democratic, secular and socialist society in place of the present traditional, feudal, hierarchical and in egalitarian one.
Under the colonial rule, the Congress leaders argued that political education was an important part of education and refused to accept the official view that education and politics should not be mixed with one another. But when they came to power in 1947 they almost adopted the British policy and began to talk of education being defiled by politics. ‘Hands off education’ was the call to political parties. But in spite of it, political infiltration into the educational system has greatly increased in the sense that different political parties vie with each other to capture the mind of teachers and students. The wise academicians wanted political support, without political interference. What we have actually received is infinite political interference with little genuine political support. This interference with the educational system by political parties for their own ulterior motives is no political education at all and with the all round growth of elitism, it is hardly a matter for surprise that real political education within the school system (which really means the creation of a commitment to social transformation) has been even weaker than in the pre-independence period.
During that time only, the struggle for freedom came to an end and the major non- formal agency of political education disappeared. The press played a major role by providing some political education. But it did not utilize the opportunity to the full and the strangle hold of vested interests continued to dominate it. The same can be said of political parties as well as of other institutions and agencies outside the school system which can be expected to provide political education. After analyzing all these things , it appears that we have made no progress in genuine political education in the post-education period and have even slided back in some respects. For instance, the education system has become even more elite-oriented. Patriotism has become the first casualty. The father of the nation gave us the courage to oppose government when it was wrong, in a disciplined fashion and on basic principles. Today, we have even lost the courage to fight on basic issues in a disciplined manner because agitational and anarchic politics for individual, group or party aggrandizement has become common. In the recent times the education system continues to support domination of the privileged groups and domestication of the under- privileged ones. The situation will not change unless we take vigorous steps to provide genuine political education on an adequate scale. This is one of the major educational reforms we need, and if it is not carried out, mere linear expansion of the existing system of formal education will only support the status quo and hamper radical social transformation.

How has politics been related to educational institutions after independence?

Political education has many connotations. It may be defined as the preparation of a citizen to take well informed, responsible and sustained action for participation in the national struggle in order to achieve the socio-economic objectives of the country. The predominant socio- economic objectives in India are the abolition of poverty and the creation of a modern democratic, secular and socialist society in place of the present traditional, feudal, hierarchical and in egalitarian one.
Under the colonial rule, the Congress leaders argued that political education was an important part of education and refused to accept the official view that education and politics should not be mixed with one another. But when they came to power in 1947 they almost adopted the British policy and began to talk of education being defiled by politics. ‘Hands off education’ was the call to political parties. But in spite of it, political infiltration into the educational system has greatly increased in the sense that different political parties vie with each other to capture the mind of teachers and students. The wise academicians wanted political support, without political interference. What we have actually received is infinite political interference with little genuine political support. This interference with the educational system by political parties for their own ulterior motives is no political education at all and with the all round growth of elitism, it is hardly a matter for surprise that real political education within the school system (which really means the creation of a commitment to social transformation) has been even weaker than in the pre-independence period.
During that time only, the struggle for freedom came to an end and the major non- formal agency of political education disappeared. The press played a major role by providing some political education. But it did not utilize the opportunity to the full and the strangle hold of vested interests continued to dominate it. The same can be said of political parties as well as of other institutions and agencies outside the school system which can be expected to provide political education. After analyzing all these things , it appears that we have made no progress in genuine political education in the post-education period and have even slided back in some respects. For instance, the education system has become even more elite-oriented. Patriotism has become the first casualty. The father of the nation gave us the courage to oppose government when it was wrong, in a disciplined fashion and on basic principles. Today, we have even lost the courage to fight on basic issues in a disciplined manner because agitational and anarchic politics for individual, group or party aggrandizement has become common. In the recent times the education system continues to support domination of the privileged groups and domestication of the under- privileged ones. The situation will not change unless we take vigorous steps to provide genuine political education on an adequate scale. This is one of the major educational reforms we need, and if it is not carried out, mere linear expansion of the existing system of formal education will only support the status quo and hamper radical social transformation.

Based on the passage, which is the major drawback of the present education system?

Political education has many connotations. It may be defined as the preparation of a citizen to take well informed, responsible and sustained action for participation in the national struggle in order to achieve the socio-economic objectives of the country. The predominant socio- economic objectives in India are the abolition of poverty and the creation of a modern democratic, secular and socialist society in place of the present traditional, feudal, hierarchical and in egalitarian one.
Under the colonial rule, the Congress leaders argued that political education was an important part of education and refused to accept the official view that education and politics should not be mixed with one another. But when they came to power in 1947 they almost adopted the British policy and began to talk of education being defiled by politics. ‘Hands off education’ was the call to political parties. But in spite of it, political infiltration into the educational system has greatly increased in the sense that different political parties vie with each other to capture the mind of teachers and students. The wise academicians wanted political support, without political interference. What we have actually received is infinite political interference with little genuine political support. This interference with the educational system by political parties for their own ulterior motives is no political education at all and with the all round growth of elitism, it is hardly a matter for surprise that real political education within the school system (which really means the creation of a commitment to social transformation) has been even weaker than in the pre-independence period.
During that time only, the struggle for freedom came to an end and the major non- formal agency of political education disappeared. The press played a major role by providing some political education. But it did not utilize the opportunity to the full and the strangle hold of vested interests continued to dominate it. The same can be said of political parties as well as of other institutions and agencies outside the school system which can be expected to provide political education. After analyzing all these things , it appears that we have made no progress in genuine political education in the post-education period and have even slided back in some respects. For instance, the education system has become even more elite-oriented. Patriotism has become the first casualty. The father of the nation gave us the courage to oppose government when it was wrong, in a disciplined fashion and on basic principles. Today, we have even lost the courage to fight on basic issues in a disciplined manner because agitational and anarchic politics for individual, group or party aggrandizement has become common. In the recent times the education system continues to support domination of the privileged groups and domestication of the under- privileged ones. The situation will not change unless we take vigorous steps to provide genuine political education on an adequate scale. This is one of the major educational reforms we need, and if it is not carried out, mere linear expansion of the existing system of formal education will only support the status quo and hamper radical social transformation.

Which is the most opposite in meaning to the word ‘hamper’ as used in the passage?

DIRECTIONS for the question 6-10 : Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

A fact that draws our attention is that, according to his position in life, an extravagant man is either admired or loathed. A successful business man does nothing to increase his popularity by being prudent with his money. A person who is wealthy is expected to lead a luxurious life and to be lavish with his hospitality. If he is not so, he is considered mean, and his reputation in business may even suffer in consequence. The paradox remains that he had not been careful with his money in the first place; he would never have achieved his present wealth.
Among the low income group, a different set of values exists. The young clerk, who makes his wife a present of a new dress when he has not paid his house rent, is condemned as extravagant. Carefulness with money to the point of meanness is applauded as a virtue. Nothing in his life is considered more worthy than paying his bills. The ideal wife for such a man separates her housekeeping money into joyless little piles – so much for rent, for food, for the children’s shoes, she is able to face the milkman with equanimity every, month satisfied with her economizing ways , and never knows the guilt of buying something she can’t really afford .
As for myself, I fall neither of these categories. If I have money to spare I can be extravagant, but when, as is usually the case, I am hard up and then I am the meanest man imaginable.

Which of the following would be the most appropriate title for the passage:

A fact that draws our attention is that, according to his position in life, an extravagant man is either admired or loathed. A successful business man does nothing to increase his popularity by being prudent with his money. A person who is wealthy is expected to lead a luxurious life and to be lavish with his hospitality. If he is not so, he is considered mean, and his reputation in business may even suffer in consequence. The paradox remains that he had not been careful with his money in the first place; he would never have achieved his present wealth.
Among the low income group, a different set of values exists. The young clerk, who makes his wife a present of a new dress when he has not paid his house rent, is condemned as extravagant. Carefulness with money to the point of meanness is applauded as a virtue. Nothing in his life is considered more worthy than paying his bills. The ideal wife for such a man separates her housekeeping money into joyless little piles – so much for rent, for food, for the children’s shoes, she is able to face the milkman with equanimity every, month satisfied with her economizing ways , and never knows the guilt of buying something she can’t really afford .
As for myself, I fall neither of these categories. If I have money to spare I can be extravagant, but when, as is usually the case, I am hard up and then I am the meanest man imaginable.

According to the passage the person, who is a successful businessman and wealthy

A fact that draws our attention is that, according to his position in life, an extravagant man is either admired or loathed. A successful business man does nothing to increase his popularity by being prudent with his money. A person who is wealthy is expected to lead a luxurious life and to be lavish with his hospitality. If he is not so, he is considered mean, and his reputation in business may even suffer in consequence. The paradox remains that he had not been careful with his money in the first place; he would never have achieved his present wealth.
Among the low income group, a different set of values exists. The young clerk, who makes his wife a present of a new dress when he has not paid his house rent, is condemned as extravagant. Carefulness with money to the point of meanness is applauded as a virtue. Nothing in his life is considered more worthy than paying his bills. The ideal wife for such a man separates her housekeeping money into joyless little piles – so much for rent, for food, for the children’s shoes, she is able to face the milkman with equanimity every, month satisfied with her economizing ways , and never knows the guilt of buying something she can’t really afford .
As for myself, I fall neither of these categories. If I have money to spare I can be extravagant, but when, as is usually the case, I am hard up and then I am the meanest man imaginable.

The phrase ‘lavish with his hospitality’ in the third sentence of the first paragraph means

A fact that draws our attention is that, according to his position in life, an extravagant man is either admired or loathed. A successful business man does nothing to increase his popularity by being prudent with his money. A person who is wealthy is expected to lead a luxurious life and to be lavish with his hospitality. If he is not so, he is considered mean, and his reputation in business may even suffer in consequence. The paradox remains that he had not been careful with his money in the first place; he would never have achieved his present wealth.
Among the low income group, a different set of values exists. The young clerk, who makes his wife a present of a new dress when he has not paid his house rent, is condemned as extravagant. Carefulness with money to the point of meanness is applauded as a virtue. Nothing in his life is considered more worthy than paying his bills. The ideal wife for such a man separates her housekeeping money into joyless little piles – so much for rent, for food, for the children’s shoes, she is able to face the milkman with equanimity every, month satisfied with her economizing ways , and never knows the guilt of buying something she can’t really afford .
As for myself, I fall neither of these categories. If I have money to spare I can be extravagant, but when, as is usually the case, I am hard up and then I am the meanest man imaginable.

The word ‘paradox’ in the last sentence of the first paragraph means

A fact that draws our attention is that, according to his position in life, an extravagant man is either admired or loathed. A successful business man does nothing to increase his popularity by being prudent with his money. A person who is wealthy is expected to lead a luxurious life and to be lavish with his hospitality. If he is not so, he is considered mean, and his reputation in business may even suffer in consequence. The paradox remains that he had not been careful with his money in the first place; he would never have achieved his present wealth.
Among the low income group, a different set of values exists. The young clerk, who makes his wife a present of a new dress when he has not paid his house rent, is condemned as extravagant. Carefulness with money to the point of meanness is applauded as a virtue. Nothing in his life is considered more worthy than paying his bills. The ideal wife for such a man separates her housekeeping money into joyless little piles – so much for rent, for food, for the children’s shoes, she is able to face the milkman with equanimity every, month satisfied with her economizing ways , and never knows the guilt of buying something she can’t really afford .
As for myself, I fall neither of these categories. If I have money to spare I can be extravagant, but when, as is usually the case, I am hard up and then I am the meanest man imaginable.

What is the meaning of the word “equanimity”?