325 Reading Comprehension questions written for the TEAS 7, each with a rationale explaining why the correct answer is correct and why the others are not. Free, no account required. 10 examples are shown below.
Practice all 325 questions →Answers are shown so you can read these as worked examples. To answer them yourself and track what you get wrong, start a practice set.
The answer: A — Identifying asthma triggers and using appropriate medications can help manage asthma effectively Think of it this way: The main idea must cover EVERYTHING the passage discusses — both the triggers AND the medications. A main idea that only mentions one of those two topics would be too narrow. Option A is the only choice that encompasses both key topics the pamphlet addresses. Why A is right: The pamphlet discusses (1) asthma triggers (dust mites, pet dander, pollen, tobacco smoke) and (2) two types of medication management (controller medications for prevention, rescue inhalers for acute relief). The main idea must reflect both concepts as they contribute to comprehensive asthma management. Option A encompasses both trigger identification and medication use — it is broad enough to be the "umbrella" claim that the supporting details all serve. Why the others are wrong: - B (Dust mites and pet dander most common): This is a SUPPORTING DETAIL (one subset of the trigger list), not the main idea. It focuses on only two of the four triggers listed and ignores medication management entirely. - C (Rescue inhalers more important): This contradicts the pamphlet, which presents BOTH types as important for different purposes. The pamphlet does not rank one type over the other. - D (Tobacco smoke should be avoided): This is a single supporting detail — one trigger — not the comprehensive main idea. Remember: Main idea identification strategy: (1) Read the full passage. (2) Ask: "What is EVERY paragraph/section ABOUT?" (3) Find the answer choice that acts as an umbrella covering ALL the details, not just one. Main idea ≠ supporting detail. Supporting details PROVE the main idea. If an answer only addresses part of the passage → too narrow → not main idea. If an answer addresses something NOT in the passage → out of scope.
The answer: B — The patient's smoking history contributed to the current respiratory symptoms Think of it this way: The chart lists a 20 pack-year smoking history alongside respiratory symptoms and abnormal findings. Smoking is a major, established risk factor for respiratory disease. The inference: smoking likely contributed. Why B is right: A 20 pack-year smoking history is a major, well-documented risk factor for chronic respiratory diseases (COPD, lung cancer, increased infection susceptibility). The patient presents with fever, cough, dyspnea, diminished breath sounds, and bilateral infiltrates — all pulmonary findings. Given smoking's known impact on lung health, it is reasonable to infer the history contributed to the current condition. Why the others are wrong: - A ("DEFINITELY has pneumonia"): The clinical picture is concerning, but a definitive diagnosis requires testing (sputum culture, PCR). The word "definitely" is too strong for inference. - C ("needs immediate cardiac evaluation"): The presentation is respiratory — cough, dyspnea, diminished breath sounds, interstitial infiltrates. No cardiac symptoms (chest pain, S3 gallop, edema) are mentioned. - D ("likely due to an allergic reaction"): No allergic history, no mention of allergen exposure, and bilateral interstitial infiltrates suggest infection, not allergy. Remember: Clinical inferences must match the presented evidence. Smoking history + respiratory symptoms = likely smoking-related pulmonary contribution. The word "contributed" appropriately hedges the conclusion without claiming definitive causation.
The answer: B — Objective and formal Think of it this way: Legal contracts are defined by their precision and formality. "Party A agrees to..." "Party B agrees to..." "Failure to make timely payment shall result in..." — these are formal, precise, unemotional clauses. No jokes, no personal feelings, no trying to convince you of something. Pure formality and objectivity. Why B is right: Legal documents use: (1) Formal language — structured, technical, no contractions or colloquialisms; (2) Objective tone — no emotional language, bias, or personal opinion; (3) Precise specifications — exact dollar amounts ($500/month, $25/day late fee), exact timing ("first business day"), exact services (numbered list). This combination = objective and formal. The author's goal is to specify obligations clearly, not to entertain or persuade. Why the others are wrong: - A (Humorous and casual): Legal documents are the opposite of humorous and casual. Casual language (contractions, slang, jokes) is explicitly avoided because ambiguity in legal language creates disputes and liability. - C (Emotional and persuasive): The passage states obligations and consequences without trying to convince either party of anything — the contract is already agreed to. Persuasive language (appeals to emotion, benefits, urgency) is absent. - D (Angry and accusatory): The passage is neutral and procedural. "Failure to make timely payment shall result in a late fee" is a neutral statement of consequence — not angry accusation. Legal language describes outcomes without attributing fault or expressing emotion. Remember: Identifying tone in written texts: Formal: follows strict conventions, uses standard grammar, avoids colloquialisms. Objective: presents facts without personal opinion or emotional bias. Subjective: reflects the author's personal perspective or feelings. Emotional: uses language that appeals to feelings (fear, hope, anger). Critical: evaluates and judges. Tone vocabulary: sardonic, didactic, nostalgic, reverent, sarcastic, earnest — recognize these for context clue questions.
The answer: B — Informational Think of it this way: Consider why the document was written and what it is designed to do for the reader. A user agreement's job is to communicate terms — not entertain, persuade emotionally, or express feelings. Why B is right: A user agreement (Terms of Service) is a legal document that informs users about the rules, limitations, rights, and obligations associated with using the software. Its purpose is disclosure and communication of legally binding terms — this is definitionally informational. Why the others are wrong: - A (Entertainment): Entertainment texts aim to engage or amuse the reader. Legal agreements are deliberately dry and technical — designed to be accurate, not enjoyable. - C (Persuasive): Persuasive writing uses emotional appeals, arguments, and rhetorical devices to change opinions or behavior. A user agreement doesn't persuade — it states terms. It is a required disclosure, not an advertisement. - D (Expressive): Expressive writing conveys the author's personal feelings or artistic vision — poetry, personal essays, creative writing. A legal document contains no personal expression. Remember: The four main author purposes — Inform (textbooks, news, manuals, legal docs), Persuade (editorials, ads, political speeches), Entertain (fiction, poetry, humor), Express (diaries, personal essays, creative writing). Real texts often blend purposes, but identify the PRIMARY purpose. A user agreement = inform (legal obligation).
The answer: B — The claim is that vitamin C prevents colds, and the evidence from the review shows it does not prevent colds. Think of it this way: The doctor's claim is directly stated, and the review provides evidence that contradicts it. Why B is right: The passage clearly states the doctor's claim that vitamin C can prevent colds. Then it presents evidence from a large review that found vitamin C does not prevent colds in the general population. Why the others are wrong: - A (The claim is that vitamin C reduces cold duration): This is not the doctor's claim; it is a separate finding from the review. - C (The claim is that vitamin C is ineffective): The doctor's claim is that it is effective, not ineffective. - D (The claim is that 29 studies were reviewed): This is not a claim; it is part of the evidence. Remember: To identify a claim and its evidence, find the main assertion and then look for the data or reasoning that supports or refutes it.
The answer: C — Regular physical activity is beneficial for cardiovascular health. Think of it this way: Both passages agree exercise helps the heart, even if they differ on how much. Why C is right: Passage 1 directly states exercise reduces heart disease risk. Passage 2 says exercise is beneficial, even though it argues diet is more important. So both agree exercise is good for cardiovascular health. Why the others are wrong: - A (Exercise is the only important factor): Passage 2 emphasizes diet, so they disagree. - B (Diet is more important than exercise): Only Passage 2 makes this claim; Passage 1 does not address it. - D (Exercise has no effect on cholesterol levels): Passage 2 says diet lowers cholesterol more effectively, implying exercise has some effect, not none. Remember: To find agreement between two passages, look for statements that both authors would endorse, not just one.
The answer: B — Getting fewer than 6 hours of sleep per night is associated with a higher risk of high blood pressure. Think of it this way: The study found a link between short sleep and higher risk, but it didn't prove that short sleep causes high blood pressure in every person. Why B is right: The passage directly states that those who slept 7-8 hours had a 25% lower risk compared to those who slept fewer than 6 hours. This means the group with less sleep had a higher risk. The statement is a supported claim because it directly reflects the study's finding. Why the others are wrong: - A (Guarantees you will not develop high blood pressure): The passage talks about lower risk, not elimination of risk. This is an overstatement. - C (Sleep is the most important factor): The passage does not compare sleep to other factors, so this cannot be concluded. - D (All adults who sleep 7-8 hours have lower blood pressure): The passage discusses group averages and risk, not individual blood pressure readings. Remember: A supported claim is one that is directly stated or logically derived from the evidence presented. Be careful not to overgeneralize or add information not found in the text.
The answer: C — "One solution" Think of it this way: The passage presents a problem (plastic waste) and then offers solutions, so the phrase "one solution" is a direct signal of the problem-and-solution structure. Why C is right: The phrase "one solution" directly introduces a remedy to the stated problem, which is the hallmark of problem-and-solution text structure. It tells the reader that the author is addressing how to fix the issue. Why the others are wrong: - A ("Many"): This is a general quantifier and does not indicate any specific text structure. - B ("Problem"): While the word "problem" is present, the question asks for the signal word that indicates the structure; "problem" alone does not signal the structure as clearly as "one solution" does, because a problem can appear in many structures. - D ("Additionally"): This signals addition of information, not the problem-and-solution structure itself. Remember: In problem-and-solution texts, look for signal phrases like "one solution," "the problem is," "to solve this," and "a possible answer." These words directly connect the issue to the fix.
The answer: B — A cloud of ash and pumice rose from the volcano Think of it this way: The passage uses 'initially' and 'hours later' to establish a clear timeline, with the ash cloud happening first. Why B is right: The passage states: 'Initially, a massive cloud of ash and pumice rose from the volcano... Hours later, a pyroclastic surge... swept through the cities.' The word 'initially' indicates that the ash cloud occurred before the surge. Why the others are wrong: - A (Excavations began in the 18th century): This happened nearly 1,700 years after the eruption, long after the surge. - C (The cities remained buried for nearly 1,700 years): This period of burial occurred after the eruption and surge. - D (Pompeii and Herculaneum were rediscovered): The passage implies rediscovery before excavations, but both occur after the eruption, not before the surge. Remember: Words like 'initially' and 'hours later' help establish the order of events in historical passages. Look for these temporal cues to determine what came first.
The answer: B — The patient is having a myocardial infarction Think of it this way: Clinical reasoning means connecting dots between symptoms and lab/diagnostic results. The chart gives you three types of evidence — read them together. Why B is right: The triad of (1) chest pain radiating to the left arm, (2) elevated cardiac enzymes (troponin/CK-MB), and (3) ST-segment elevation on ECG is the classic presentation of a STEMI — ST-elevation myocardial infarction (heart attack). Each finding alone could have other explanations, but together they are definitive for MI. Why the others are wrong: - A (Anxiety): Anxiety can cause chest pain, but it does not elevate cardiac enzymes or produce ST-segment changes on ECG. The objective findings rule out anxiety. - C (Medication adjustment): Nothing in the chart findings — chest pain, elevated enzymes, ECG changes — points to a medication problem. - D (Respiratory infection): Infection could cause nausea and discomfort, but not chest pain radiating to the arm, elevated cardiac enzymes, or ST-elevation. Remember: Classic MI triad: chest pain radiating to left arm/jaw + elevated troponin or CK-MB + ST-elevation on ECG. Each piece confirms the others. This is an emergency — time to reperfusion is critical.
