I call our world Flatland, not because we call it so, but to make its nature clearer to you, my happy readers, who are privileged to live in Space.
Imagine a vast sheet of paper on which straight Lines, Triangles, Squares, Pentagons, Hexagons, and other figures, instead of remaining fixed in their places, move freely about, on or in the surface, but without the power of rising above or sinking below it, very much like shadows — only hard and with luminous edges — and you will then have a pretty correct notion of my country and countrymen. Alas! a few years ago, I should have said, “my universe;” but now my mind has been opened to higher views of things.
In such a country, you will perceive at once that it is impossible that there should be anything of what you call a “solid” kind; but I dare say you will suppose that we could at least distinguish by sight the Triangles, Squares, and other figures moving about as I have described them. On the contrary, we could see nothing of the kind, not at least so as to distinguish one figure from another. Nothing was visible, nor could be visible, to us, except straight Lines; and the necessity of this I will speedily demonstrate.
Place a penny on the middle of one of your tables in Space; and leaning over it, look down upon it. It will appear a circle.
But now, drawing back to the edge of the table, gradually lower your eye (thus bringing yourself more and more into the condition of the inhabitants of Flatland), and you will find the penny becoming more and more oval to your view; and at last when you have placed your eye exactly on the edge of a table (so that you are, as it were, actually a Flatland citizen) the penny will then have ceased to appear oval at all, and will have become, so far as you can see, a straight line.

I never thought about that! If you lived in a place that was flat, like you were really small and lived between two sheets of paper, you would only see lines. And so if you think about it, we only see two dimentions at one time, even though our world has three dimentions (like height, width, and depth). We can sorta see in 3D because we can tell if something’s close or far away, but we can’t see someone from the front, and the back, and the top and bottom all at the same time! So could there be like a 4th dimention or a 5th dimention? Could someone in a 4th dimentional world see us from the top and bottom and even our insides all at once? See, it gets really confusing! I bet this is the kind of thing Dwayne would like. It sounds all like science fiction! But I guess it’s just math, really. Here’s a practice question about the book.

According to the above passage, who is the narrator in Flatland?

1. A Man
2. A Line
3. A 2D Shape
4. A 3D Shape
5. Impossible to Know

At first I might think that answer 1 is right, because it’s not like a shape could write a book. But you gotta remember that the narrator and the author are two different things, so even though only a man or a woman could write the book, the narrator could be a shape or an animal or anything!

If you re-read the passage, you notice a line right away that mostly explains this answer.

“Imagine a vast sheet of paper on which straight Lines, Triangles, Squares, Pentagons, Hexagons, and other figures, instead of remaining fixed in their places, move freely about… and you will then have a pretty correct notion of my country and countrymen.”

He says right there that his “countrymen” are “Lines, Triangles, Squares, Pentagons, Hexagons, and other figures” all living in a “flat” land. So it can’t be a man or a 3D shape.

That means it’s either 2, 3 or 5. Later on, he talks about how things look like a line, but are really a shape. Like how he says that when you look at a penny with your eye right on the table its on, it looks like a line. So you might think the narrator is a shape. However, in that first line I quoted, it said, “Imagine a vast sheet of paper on which straight Lines, Triangles, Squares…” Lines were included! So that means some of his “countrymen” might be lines, and so he might be a line too. It’s impossible to know from just this passage. So, the answer is number 5.

Pretty loco, huh? This is the kinda book where it’s not like the words themselves are hard or anything. There’s not really anything I have to look up in the dictionary. But his ideas that he’s talking about are kinda weird and I’m not used to thinking that way, so I have to read it a few times to get what he’s really saying. But in the end, it’s fun to read things like this once you understand them. Now I can understand the things like 2D and 3D and maybe even 4D a little better. So if someone starts talking about it, I don’t feel completely lost (and by SOMEONE it’s probably going to be Dwayne)!

For more information about the GED test and GED test preparation, visit the GED Academy at http://www.passGED.com.

It’s all interesting stuff, but sometimes if we want to know more about it, we gotta read science books, like On the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin. He’s the guy who came up with this idea of evolution. I don’t know if he thought we all came from some sorta primordial soup though. I think he just mostly noticed that animals can change to fit their environment, and that eventually all of that species changes too. Here’s a paragraph from his book:

If we suppose any habitual action to become inherited—and I think it can be shown that this does sometimes happen—then the resemblance between what originally was a habit and an instinct becomes so close as not to be distinguished. If Mozart, instead of playing the pianoforte at three years old with wonderfully little practice, had played a tune with no practice at all, he might truly be said to have done so instinctively. But it would be the most serious error to suppose that the greater number of instincts have been acquired by habit in one generation, and then transmitted by inheritance to succeeding generations. It can be clearly shown that the most wonderful instincts with which we are acquainted, namely, those of the hive-bee and of many ants, could not possibly have been thus acquired.

What point is the author trying to make in this passage?

1. Talented people inherit their abilities.

2. It is difficult to know the difference between a learned habit and an inherited one.

3. Learned habits and inherited habits are the same thing.

4. Animals can not learn.

5. People do not have instincts.

Ay, I had to read this several times to understand it all. Immediately, I understood about Mozart. I know about him, he was a famous composer. Darwin says that he could play piano when he was tres años. That’s impressive, but it doesn’t mean he was born being able to play piano, right? He had to practice a little. So I guess Darwin’s trying to make a point about what you’re born with, and what you’re not born with. Like he says about what instincts get acquired by habit. So if you play piano a lot, then you eventually can play it just like it was an instinct. But it’s not an instinct you were born with, so you don’t necessarily pass it down to your children, like a basic instinct to find food.

That means number one isn’t right, because Darwin says right in the Mozart part that “it would be the most serious error” to guess that someone could inherit their talent just because their father or mother could do it. There’s a possibility that maybe they could inherit it, but that’s not what the author is saying here.

I think number two is right. Darwin says something really similar at the beginning: “If we suppose any habitual action to become inherited—and I think it can be shown that this does sometimes happen—then the resemblance between what originally was a habit and an instinct becomes so close as not to be distinguished.” Look at the last part. “…so as not to be distinguished.” That means they’re almost the same, so you can’t tell the difference. If you can’t tell the difference, then it would be hard to know which is one and which is the other. That’s exactly what number two says!

Number three is really close to number two. How do we know that Darwin isn’t just saying that there’s no difference at all? Well, He says that it would be wrong to say that instincts developed by habit in one generation are transmitted down to their children through inheritance. That’s making a strong point that they’re not the same. Otherwise it wouldn’t matter if your parents developed something from habit or from inheritance themselves. You’d have an equal possibility of inheriting either.

Number four and five are both wrong. It doesn’t say anything about either of these. Though, I think it’s important to realize that they’re wrong because the passage doesn’t talk about them. I know that animals can learn. People teach dogs tricks all the time! And I’m pretty sure everyone has instincts. That’s how we survive! But the question doesn’t ask about what’s true and what’s not true. It asks about what the author is saying. But here, we can see that he doesn’t say anything about that. He mostly talks about the difference between instincts and whether they’re developed in your life or inherited from your parents. That’s why I’m pretty sure that number two is right.

This was a really challenging question. If you could answer it right, you’re doing really well! Challenging yourself with difficult readings can make the kind of things you normally read a lot easier! It’s like running a little extra sometimes so that when it’s time for the big race, you know you can do it and more!

For more information about the GED test and GED test preparation, visit the GED Academy at  http://www.passGED.com.

What’s more frustrating is when I have to read English in a book with strange accents I’ve never heard before. A lot of books have different kinds of writing for the dialogue… you know, when people talk. Like different dialects. They can be so confusing. Here’s a GED practice question that shows what I mean. The passage is from “Pollyanna,” by Eleanor Hodgeman Porter.

“For the land’s sake, Miss Pollyanna, what a scare you did give me,” panted Nancy, hurrying up to the big rock, down which Pollyanna had just regretfully slid.

“Scare? Oh, I’m so sorry; but you mustn’t, really, ever get scared about me, Nancy. Father and the Ladies’ Aid used to do it, too, till they found I always came back all right.”

“But I didn’t even know you’d went,” cried Nancy, tucking the little girl’s hand under her arm and hurrying her down the hill. “I didn’t see you go, and nobody didn’t. I guess you flew right up through the roof; I do, I do.”

Pollyanna skipped gleefully.

“I did, ‘most—only I flew down instead of up. I came down the tree.”

Nancy stopped short.

“You did—what?”

“Came down the tree, outside my window.”

“My stars and stockings!” gasped Nancy, hurrying on again. “I’d like ter know what yer aunt would say ter that!”

What does this passage reveal about Pollyanna’s personality?

1) She is gloomy and pessimistic.

2) She is adventurous and carefree.

3) She is easily scared.

4) She is a mischievous troublemaker.

5) She is studious and strict.

When I first look at this passage, I immediately feel so confused. What does “For the land’s sake” mean? And what does she mean by, “Ladies’ Aid?” There are so many things they say here that I just don’t get. But I’ve figured out that you can’t get discouraged if you don’t understand everything in a passage. There are still a lot of things that I can understand, especially after I read the question.

It asks about Pollyanna’s personality. So, I look for things that answer the question, and don’t worry too much about what I don’t understand! Let’s see. In the second sentence, Pollyanna tells Nancy that “you mustn’t, really, ever get scared about me.” And later on she is skipping gleefully. Does that sound gloomy? I don’t think so. Gloomy is the opposite of gleefull!Even if I’m not sure what “gleeful” means, she’s skipping, and just doesn’t seem gloomy at all. Later it says that she just “came down the tree.” This scares Nancy! But it doesn’t scare Pollyanna, so I know #3 isn’t right. I don’t think studious and strict people would climb trees or run off without telling anyone, so #5 doesn’t sound right.

I think that #4 could be the answer. Troublemakers don’t always follow the rules (just look, it has the word “trouble” in it), and it doesn’t sound like Pollyanna is following them either. This is the one you might guess. But what does “mischievous” mean? Have you heard the word “mischief?” It’s more trouble. It’s kind of being mean and making problems. I think that Pollyanna might be causing trouble for Nancy, but she isn’t doing it to be harmful or mean. She even apologizes to Nancy when she realizes that she had scared her!

So, I think the best answer is #2. That one says “adventurous and carefree.” Pollyanna sure seems to like adventure… doing new things… and she doesn’t seem to worry, that makes her “carefree.” It’s a better answer, because Pollyanna doesn’t seem to want to cause trouble, particularly. She just seems to want to go out and have fun.

See, you can figure out the main idea of a reading, even if you can’t understand every word. Sometimes it’s important to look words up. But you don’t want to get bogged down with looking up every word! Especially if it seems likeit’s not part of the main point . Or like with the “Ladies’ Aid.” I don’t know exactly what that is, but I can guess that it is someone who most likely looked after Pollyanna, and that’s good enough for the time being. Unless, of course, the question asks specifically, “Who is the Ladies’ Aid?” Then we have some more thinking to do!

Good luck studying for the GED.

For more information about the GED test and GED test preparation, visit the GED Academy at  http://www.passGED.com

when I see a paragraph like this I get scared I feel like its to many words on the page can anyone give me suggestion on reading passage like these and understand what I’m reading I get lost after a few minutes of reading …

I know a lot of people feel this way! I guess the problem is that it’s just overwhelming! I mean, it kinda makes you just not want to even try to read it. Well. I really felt that way a lot when I was first learning English. You look at all the writing, and you don’t know all the words, and you don’t even know where to start or how to figure it out.

But it’s sorta like studying for the GED, you know. You can’t let it get to you, but just take it a little at a time. Here’s a strategy that helps me a lot:

1) When you first look at something you need to read, just look at the headline, the first sentence, the last sentence, and any pictures, diagrams, subheads, or labels you see. Try to get an overview of what it’s about from the clues in the title or in parts of the reading. If there’s just text, read the first sentence of each paragraph, and the last sentence, just to get an idea and start asking questions about it. What do you get from doing this? You get an idea of what the text is about, a background to read it. In your brain, you’re making connections between things you already know and the text you’ll need to read. Try to make as many connections as you can, by thinking of things you know about the topic and asking yourself questions about what you’re going to read!

2) If you’re reading a GED passage, read the questions first. Find out what it is they’re going to ask you about. Now, what are you get by reading the question? You get a goal! You get a real idea of why you actually want to read this. That means, your reading is directed. It gives you a way to make sense of what you’re getting out of reading.

3) Now, start reading, with the question in mind. You’re not just reading, you’re looking for the answer. That will help you understand what you’re reading. Think about it while you’re reading, and it’ll help.

4) What happens when you get to a word you don’t know? Try to understand the word by what the word sounds like or is similar to, and by the context of the word–what’s around it, what the sentence is saying. Don’t worry if you can’t understand every word. You can still get an idea of what the whole text is talking about.

5) Go back to the question after you finished reading. Does the question make more sense now? Do you know what the answer is? You might not be able to answer all the questions, but you’ll be able to improve a lot by taking reading one step at a time, giving it context, and thinking while you’re reading.

Good luck with your GED!

For more information about the GED test and GED test preparation, visit The GED Academy at http://www.passGED.com.

There are lots of things you can do to become a better reader. The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Learning Centre has some great advice online to help you read better… Click the links to read the advice on:

How Do You Become a Better Reader?

Thinking About Reading

Evaluating How Much You Have Improved in Reading

Improving Reading Speed<–Faster reading will give you more time to think about questions on the GED!

Reading for Main Points <–The GED will ask questions about main ideas or main points in the readings.

Reading for Specific Information <–This is really helpful to find answers fast on the GED tests!

Reading Critically <–A lot of GED questions…the critical thinking questions that ask you to evaluate or analyze…ask you to use this skill.

Devising a Reading Plan

How to Enjoy Reading <–This is the best worksheet. The more you enjoy reading, the more you’ll read… and you’ll become a better reader without even trying, by doing something you enjoy.

Here’s another great idea… Goodreads is a website where you can contact friends. Everyone who’s on the site lists books they’ve read or want to read or are reading right not. You can say whether you liked or didn’t like a book, and why. You can look and see what your friends think of different books, start a book club, or even contact an author. This is a great way to start enjoying reading with your friends and classmates!

Good luck with your GED reading! Chao!

For more information about the GED test or GED test preparation, visit The GED Academy at http://www.passGED.com or call 1-888-880-2164.