GED Social Studies Diagnostic Practice Test

A group of historians is debating the impact of economic policies on political revolutions during the 18th century.

They are debating cultural determinism, which is the belief that the culture in which we are raised determines who we are at emotional and behavioral levels.

Each historian represents a different social studies concept.

Historian A argues that the political revolutions were primarily driven by economic inequality and the impact it had on raising a family, emphasizing the role of class struggles.

Historian B asserts that the revolutions were a result of specific historical figures and their policies, highlighting the influence of ideas and ideologies.

Historian C contends that geopolitical factors and external interventions played a crucial role in shaping the outcomes of the revolutions.

Historian D focuses on the development of political institutions and governance structures, suggesting that they were the key drivers of revolutionary changes.

Analyze the arguments presented by each historian and identify which historian has views that most align with cultural determinism.

Constitutionalism and Civil Rights

The US Constitution first guaranteed a right to vote for some citizens with the ratification of the 14th Amendment, which declares that any state denying eligible citizens the right to vote will lose representation in Congress. Constitutionalism is “the doctrine that governs the legitimacy of government action.” In other words, constitutionalism reminds us that governments must respect the rule of law and the limits placed on government power.

One way to understand constitutionalism is to think of it as the role a country’s written constitution plays in maintaining the rule of law and a country’s political culture. India’s constitution references freedom from caste-based discrimination and the freedom to preserve and speak languages, specific rights that may not be applicable in other countries because India has its own specific political culture. Mauritania’s constitution also references language. It declares Arabic the official language but recognizes three other national languages. The Mauritanian constitution also emphasizes universal suffrage and specifically states that “the law favors the equal access of women and of men to the electoral mandate and elective functions.”

The 1776 US Declaration of Independence states that all people have “unalienable rights” that they possess at birth that no government can take away. The unalienable rights to which people are entitled include the Declaration’s most famous phrase: “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” The Declaration of Independence has served as a model for contemporary independence efforts, and international organizations have incorporated the rights enshrined in the Declaration of Independence into their own formal work to promote these rights, as typified by the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

Since 1948, the Preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights  and 30 of its articles have inspired billions of people globally. Some of the human rights the Universal Declaration recognizes include protections against slavery (Article 4) and forced marriage (Article 16), freedom of movement within one’s own country (Article 13), the right to participate in government, (Article 21), freedom to join a union (Article 23), and the right to hold a nationality (Article 15).

Which of the following statements best aligns with the concept of constitutionalism, as discussed in the context of the 14th Amendment and the principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence?

Democracy

Democracy and respect for human rights have long been central components of U.S. foreign policy. Supporting democracy not only promotes such fundamental American values as religious freedom and worker rights, but also helps create a more secure, stable, and prosperous global arena in which the United States can advance its national interests. In addition, democracy is the one national interest that helps to secure all the others. Democratically governed nations are more likely to secure the peace, deter aggression, expand open markets, promote economic development, protect American citizens, combat international terrorism and crime, uphold human and worker rights, avoid humanitarian crises and refugee flows, improve the global environment, and protect human health.

With these goals in mind, the United States seeks to:

• Promote democracy as a means to achieve security, stability, and prosperity for the entire world;
• Assist newly formed democracies in implementing democratic principles;
• Assist democracy advocates around the world to establish vibrant democracies in their own countries; and
• Identify and denounce regimes that deny their citizens the right to choose their leaders in elections that are free, fair, and transparent.

Authoritarianism:

Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of democracy and political plurality. It involves the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting. Political scientists have created many typologies describing variations of authoritarian forms of government. Authoritarian regimes may be either autocratic or oligarchic and may be based upon the rule of a party or the military. States that have a blurred boundary between democracy and authoritarianism have some times been characterized as “hybrid democracies”, “hybrid regimes” or “competitive authoritarian” states.

The political scientist Juan Linz, in an influential 1964 work, An Authoritarian Regime: Spain, defined authoritarianism as possessing four qualities:

• Limited political pluralism, which is achieved with constraints on the legislature, political parties and interest groups.
• Political legitimacy based on appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat “easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency.”
• Minimal political mobilization, and suppression of anti-regime activities.
• Ill-defined executive powers, often vague and shifting, used to extend the power of the executive.

How does the rejection of democracy, as described in the Authoritarianism passage, contrast with the goals of U.S. foreign policy, as outlined in the Democracy passage?

Gideon v. Wainwright Podcast

Background:

Clarence Earl Gideon was accused of breaking into a bar in Panama City, Florida. The police arrested Gideon and put him in jail. At his trial, Gideon could not afford a lawyer and asked the judge to appoint one for him. The judge refused, and he had to represent himself in court. Gideon was found guilty and sentenced to five years in a Florida state prison.

In the prison library, he studied law and sent a petition to the Florida Supreme Court claiming his Sixth Amendment right to legal counsel was violated. The court denied his petition, so Gideon wrote a letter to the United States Supreme Court, which agreed to hear his case and determine whether poor defendants should be appointed a lawyer in state criminal trials.

Decision:

In 1963, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of Gideon, guaranteeing the right to legal counsel for criminal defendants in federal and state courts. Following the decision, Gideon was given another trial with an appointed lawyer and was acquitted of the charges.

Which piece of evidence would most effectively support the claim that the denial of legal counsel violated Clarence Earl Gideon’s Sixth Amendment rights?

Appeals

The losing party in a decision by a trial court in the federal courts normally is entitled to appeal the decision to a federal court of appeals.

The Process

Although some cases are decided based on written briefs alone, many cases are selected for an “oral argument” before the court. Oral argument in the court of appeals is a structured discussion between the appellate lawyers and the panel of judges focusing on the legal principles in dispute. Each side is given a short time — usually about 15 minutes — to present arguments to the court.

Most appeals are final. The court of appeals decision usually will be the final word in the case, unless it sends the case back to the trial court for additional proceedings, or the parties ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. In some cases the decision may be reviewed en banc, that is, by a larger group of judges (usually all) of the court of appeals for the circuit.

A litigant who loses in a federal court of appeals, or in the highest court of a state, may file a petition for a “writ of certiorari,” which is a document asking the Supreme Court to review the case. The Supreme Court, however, does not have to grant review. The Court typically will agree to hear a case only when it involves an unusually important legal principle, or when two or more federal appellate courts have interpreted a law differently. There are also a small number of special circumstances in which the Supreme Court is required by law to hear an appeal.

Different types of cases are handled differently during an appeal.

Civil Case

Either side may appeal the verdict.

Criminal Case

The defendant may appeal a guilty verdict, but the government may not appeal if a defendant is found not guilty. Either side in a criminal case may appeal with respect to the sentence that is imposed after a guilty verdict.

Bankruptcy Case

An appeal of a ruling by a bankruptcy judge may be taken to the district court. Several courts of appeals, however, have established a bankruptcy appellate panel consisting of three bankruptcy judges to hear appeals directly from the bankruptcy courts. In either situation, the party that loses in the initial bankruptcy appeal may then appeal to the court of appeals.

Appeals are decided by panels of three judges working together. The appellant presents legal arguments to the panel, in writing, in a document called a “brief.” In the brief, the appellant tries to persuade the judges that the trial court made an error, and that its decision should be reversed. On the other hand, the party defending against the appeal, known as the “appellee,” tries in its brief to show why the trial court decision was correct, or why any error made by the trial court was not significant enough to affect the outcome of the case.

In the process of appeals described in the passage, what circumstance might lead the U.S. Supreme Court to agree to hear a case?

The Neutrality Acts, 1930s

Introduction

In the 1930s, the United States Government enacted a series of laws designed to prevent the United States from being embroiled in a foreign war by clearly stating the terms of U.S. neutrality. Although many Americans had rallied to join President Woodrow Wilson’s crusade to make the world “safe for democracy” in 1917, by the 1930s critics argued that U.S. involvement in the First World War had been driven by bankers and munitions traders with business interests in Europe. These findings fueled a growing “isolationist” movement that argued the United States should steer clear of future wars and remain neutral by avoiding financial deals with countries at war.

President Woodrow Wilson
First Neutrality Act

By the mid-1930s, events in Europe and Asia indicated that a new world war might soon erupt and the U.S. Congress took action to enforce U.S. neutrality. On August 31, 1935, Congress passed the first Neutrality Act prohibiting the export of “arms, ammunition, and implements of war” from the United States to foreign nations at war and requiring arms manufacturers in the United States to apply for an export license. American citizens traveling in war zones were also advised that they did so at their own risk. President Franklin d. Roosevelt originally opposed the legislation, but relented in the face of strong Congressional and public opinion. On February 29, 1936, Congress renewed the Act until May of 1937 and prohibited Americans from extending any loans to belligerent nations.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt
Neutrality Act of 1937

The outbreak of the Spanish Civil War in 1936 and the rising tide of fascism in Europe increased support for extending and expanding the Neutrality Act of 1937. Under this law, U.S. citizens were forbidden from traveling on belligerent ships, and American merchant ships were prevented from transporting arms to belligerents even if those arms were produced outside of the United States. The Act gave the President the authority to bar all belligerent ships from U.S. waters, and to extend the export embargo to any additional “articles or materials.” Finally, civil wars would also fall under the terms of the Act.

In the context of the Neutrality Acts of the 1930s and their evolution, which statement accurately reflects a provision introduced in the Neutrality Act of 1937?

Tornado statistics for the Contiguous U.S. are provided by the Storm Prediction Center (SPC) and are available from December 2005—December 2023.

Considering the data on U.S. tornadoes from 2005 to 2023, which of the following statements best addresses the year 2023?

Muckrakers

Muckrakers were investigative journalists during the Progressive Era (1890s–1920s) who shone a light on corrupt business and government leaders as well as major social problems like racism.

The investigative techniques of the muckrakers included poring over documents, conducting countless interviews, and going undercover. This differed from yellow journalism, where some leading newspapers sensationalized stories using imagination rather than facts. In several cases, muckrakers became activists themselves and spent years speaking throughout the country about their work and the need for reform.

The term muckraking was coined by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1906, describing the crusading journalists who wrote stories in late nineteenth-century publications. Roosevelt took the word from the work The Pilgrim’s Progress by John Bunyan, written in 1678. Roosevelt criticized journalists he thought focused too much on exposing corruption in business and government and not reporting on more positive news. Journalists of the time largely took the term as a compliment and adopted it as a badge of honor for exposing misconduct.

The investigative techniques of the muckrakers included poring over documents, conducting countless interviews, and going undercover. This differed from yellow journalism, where some leading newspapers sensationalized stories using imagination rather than facts. In several cases, muckrakers became activists themselves and spent years speaking throughout the country about their work and the need for reform.

Investigative reporters like Ida Tarbell and Upton Sinclair used their writings to reveal the unsavory practices of powerful corporations and the dire conditions of workers in industries like meatpacking.

The term muckraking was coined by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1906, describing the crusading journalists who wrote stories in late nineteenth-century publications. Roosevelt took the word from the work The Pilgrim’s Progress by John Bunyan, written in 1678. Roosevelt criticized journalists he thought focused too much on exposing corruption in business and government and not reporting on more positive news. Journalists of the time largely took the term as a compliment and adopted it as a badge of honor for exposing misconduct.

What was the primary goal of muckraking journalists like Ida Tarbell and Upton Sinclair during the Progressive Era?

THE DUST BOWL

In the 1930s, drought covered virtually the entire Plains for almost a decade (Warrick, 1980). The drought’s direct effect is most often remembered as agricultural. Many crops were damaged by deficient rainfall, high temperatures, and high winds, as well as insect infestations and dust storms that accompanied these conditions. The resulting agricultural depression contributed to the Great Depression’s bank closures, business losses, increased unemployment, and other physical and emotional hardships. Although records focus on other problems, the lack of precipitation would also have affected wildlife and plant life, and would have created water shortages for domestic needs. Although the 1930s drought is often referred to as if it were one episode, there were at least 4 distinct drought events: 1930–31, 1934, 1936, and 1939–40 (Riebsame et al., 1991). These events occurred in such rapid succession that affected regions were not able to recover adequately before another drought began.

Effects of the Plains drought sent economic and social ripples throughout the country. For example, millions of people migrated from the drought areas, often heading west, in search of work. These newcomers were often in direct competition for jobs with longer-established residents, which created conflict between the groups. In addition, because of poverty and high unemployment, migrants added to local relief efforts, sometimes overburdening relief and health agencies.

Many circumstances exacerbated the effects of the drought, among them the Great Depression and economic overexpansion before the drought, poor land management practices, and the areal extent and duration of the drought. (Warrick et al., 1975, and Hurt, 1981, discuss these issues in greater detail; see the reference section for the full citations.) The peculiar combination of these circumstances and the severity and areal coverage of the event played a part in making the 1930s drought the widely accepted drought of record for the United States. To cope with and recover from the drought, people relied on ingenuity and resilience, as well as relief programs from state and federal governments. Despite all efforts, many people were not able to make a living in drought-stricken regions and were forced to migrate to other areas in search of a new livelihood. It is not possible to count all the costs associated with the 1930s drought, but one estimate by Warrick et al. (1980) claims that financial assistance from the government may have been as high as $1 billion (in 1930s dollars) by the end of the drought. Fortunately, the lessons learned from this drought were used to reduce the vulnerability of the regions to future droughts.

What was one of the significant economic and social consequences of the 1930s drought in the Plains, as mentioned in the passage?

COLD WAR HISTORIOGRAPHY

Our understanding of the Cold War has been shaped by the work of historians. Since the outbreak of global tensions in 1945, the events, ideas and complexities of the Cold War have been researched, studied and interpreted by thousands of historians.

These historians have explored and hypothesised about the causes and effects of the Cold War. They have examined the ideas, motives and actions of significant Cold War leaders. They have weighed the numerous political, social, economic and cultural factors of the period. They have evaluated the outcomes and effects of the Cold War, both globally and in particular countries and regions.

Like most historians studying a long and complex period, they formed different interpretations and reached different conclusions. As a consequence, the historiography of the Cold War, like the Cold War itself, contains a range of views, perspectives and arguments.

Why have Cold War historians formed different and often competing arguments? Fundamentally, there are two main reasons for this.

The first pertains to historians and their unique perspectives. Historians come from different backgrounds, learn history from different people and embrace different values and methodologies. Their views and priorities are shaped by their places of origin, the times in which they live and the company they keep.

Secondly, the recency of the Cold War and its political divisiveness are complicating factors. The Cold War ended a little over 30 years ago and its political tensions and competing viewpoints still reverberate through modern societies. Unlike historians who focus on the Middle Ages or the French Revolution, for example, most Cold War historians actually lived through the event they are studying.

There are three main movements or schools of thought in Cold War historiography. These are broadly known as the Orthodox, Revisionist and Post-Revisionist schools. Historians in these schools do not think alike on every or any issue, nor do they always advance similar arguments – but their general approach to or position on the Cold War tends to be similar.

Drag and drop the texts from the box that fit the blank spaces accurately:

The Cold War’s historiography, a labyrinthine tapestry woven by myriad historians, reflects the tumultuous aftermath of global strife since 1945. These scholars, entrenched in the crucible of (Box 1) perspectives, dissected the motives of Cold War leaders, scrutinized (Box 2) factors, and unraveled the intricate web of political, social, economic, and cultural nuances. Their relentless pursuit birthed disparate interpretations and conclusions, shrouding the Cold War’s legacy in a maelstrom of conflicting views and tenacious arguments. The crux of historians’ divergence emanates from the crucible of their backgrounds, entwined with distinct (Box 3) and methodologies, forging a kaleidoscope of perspectives.

Amidst this scholarly clash, three formidable movements Orthodox, Revisionist, and Post-Revisionist stand as bastions of divergent thoughts. These schools, far from a harmonious accord, engage in intellectual combat, wielding distinct (Box 4) that, while not identical, converge toward overarching positions on the Cold War’s tumultuous terrain.

THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN EDUCATION AND HEALTH

Researchers have generally drawn from three broad theoretical perspectives to hypothesize the relationship between education and health. Much of the education-health research over the past two decades has been grounded in the Fundamental Cause Theory. The FCT posits that social factors such as education are ‘fundamental’ causes of health and disease because they determine access to a multitude of material and non-material resources such as income, safe neighborhoods, or healthier lifestyles, all of which protect or enhance health. The multiplicity of pathways means that even as some mechanisms change or become less important, other mechanisms will continue to channel the fundamental dis/advantages into differential health. The Human Capital Theory (HCT), borrowed from econometrics, conceptualizes education as an investment that yields returns via increased productivity. Education improves individuals’ knowledge, skills, reasoning, effectiveness, and a broad range of other abilities, which can be utilized to produce health. The third approach, the Signaling or Credentialing perspective has been used to explain the observed large discontinuities in health at 12 or 16 years of schooling, typically associated with the receipt of a high school and college degrees, respectively.

This perspective views earned credentials as a potent signal about one’s skills and abilities, and emphasizes the economic and social returns to such signals. Thus all three perspectives postulate a causal relationship between education and health and identify numerous mechanisms through which education influences health. The HCT specifies the mechanisms as embodied skills and abilities, FCT emphasizes the dynamism and flexibility of mechanisms, and credentialism identifies social responses to educational attainment. All three theoretical approaches, however, operationalize the complex process of schooling solely in terms of attainment and thus do not focus on differences in educational quality, type, or other institutional factors that might independently influence health. They also focus on individual-level factors: individual attainment, attainment effects, and mechanisms, and leave out the social context in which the education and health processes are embedded.

According to the passage, what distinguishes the Signaling or Credentialing perspective from the Fundamental Cause Theory (FCT) and Human Capital Theory (HCT) in explaining the relationship between education and health?

Healthcare spending by age

Based on the human lifecycle, it would be reasonable to expect that healthcare expenditures are both related to, and increase with, a person’s age. That is, younger people generally need less care, and may allocate most of their health care dollars to preventative care and occasional acute needs (such as the sudden onset of a temporary illness).

Older consumers are more likely to need more costly and extensive care, medical equipment, prescription drugs, and other healthcare goods and services to maintain quality of life. Analyzing healthcare spending among the age groups can show whether this theoretical relationship exists in the data from 2020 to 2021.

Percentage change in average expenditure on healthcare (2020 to 2021)

What can be inferred from the passage and the data above?

Lend-Lease Act (1941)

Passed on March 11, 1941, this act set up a system that would allow the United States to lend or lease war supplies to any nation deemed “vital to the defense of the United States.”

English Girls from the Auxiliary Territorial Service Moving American Rifles

What concept or idea do you think is being conveyed by including background on the Lend-Lease Act with a photograph depicting English Girls from the Auxiliary Territorial Service moving American rifles received under the Lend-Lease program?

The Preamble to the Constitution: A Close Reading Lesson

The Preamble is the introduction to the United States Constitution, and it serves two central purposes. First, it states the source from which the Constitution derives its authority: the sovereign people of the United States. Second, it sets forth the ends that the Constitution and the government that it establishes are meant to serve.

Governor Morris, the man the Constitutional Convention entrusted with drafting the final version of the document, put into memorable language the principles of government negotiated and formulated at the Convention.

The Preamble to the United States Constitution, crafted by Gouverneur Morris, articulates the authority of the Constitution from the (choose a, b, or c) of the United States and delineates the objectives the Constitution aims to (choose d, e, or f).

Below are definitions for various terms:

• Federal States: Political entities where power is divided between a central government and constituent states or provinces.
• Constituent Countries: Sovereign states or territories within a larger political entity, each with its own distinct legal and political systems.
• Autonomous Regions: Defined areas within a country with self-governing powers granted by the central government.
• Confederation States: Loose associations of sovereign states or regions that come together for common purposes while retaining individual sovereignty.

The map below depicts the United Kingdom. Within the UK, there is England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Island. Each of these countries has its own distinct identity and political institutions.

Based on its political structure and governance, which term most accurately characterizes the relationship between England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom?