El-Sayed and Stevens Trade Sharp Comments in Michigan Senate Race
About this practice test
Practice B2 English reading with 7 questions based on the Daily News article “El-Sayed and Stevens Trade Sharp Comments in Michigan Senate Race”.
What you’ll practice
Finding detail
Locate specific information and evidence.
Interpreting ideas
Connect main points and inferences.
Evaluating arguments
Assess claims, evidence, and limitations.
Study the questions and tasks
Work through the material below, or start the interactive practice above to complete an attempt. Try the exercises before opening any answer or transcript sections, then use them to review your work.
- Practice level
- B2. Try this level if you can follow the instructions and understand most of the language; choose an earlier level if you need more support.
- Question formats
- Single choice
How to approach this practice
Read the passage for its main idea, then return to the relevant sentence or paragraph for each question. Base answers on the passage.
News lesson for this practice
Read the complete article and use its text or audio alongside these exercises: El-Sayed and Stevens Trade Sharp Comments in Michigan Senate Race.
El-Sayed and Stevens Trade Sharp Comments in Michigan Senate Race
Dr. Abdul El-Sayed and Representative Haley Stevens traded sharp public criticism Friday, increasing tensions in Michigan’s pivotal Senate race. Their exchange brought a former primary rivalry back into campaign discussion. Stevens demanded an apology from El-Sayed, although the available facts do not describe what led to that demand. The dispute involved two politicians who had previously competed in a primary. A primary is an election in which political parties select…
-
Question 1 · Single choice
Choose one answer.
What is the article’s main purpose?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- To explain a confirmed political dispute and its possible significance
- To prove that one politician caused the entire conflict
- To predict the final result of Michigan’s Senate race
- To compare the candidates’ detailed policy proposals
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- To explain a confirmed political dispute and its possible significance
It explains the dispute’s significance while separating confirmed facts from unknown results.
The confirmed event is the exchange of critical comments and the tension it intensified.
-
Question 2 · Single choice
Choose one answer.
What does “Their exchange” refer to in the second sentence?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- Their previous primary election
- Their exchange of sharp public criticism
- Their cooperation with political allies
- Their discussion of election policies
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- Their exchange of sharp public criticism
The phrase refers to the public criticism described immediately beforehand.
Their exchange brought a former primary rivalry back into campaign discussion.
-
Question 3 · Single choice
Choose one answer.
Why does the article explain what a primary is?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- To explain why Senate races are always decisive
- To clarify the political stage where they previously competed
- To show that the candidates currently share the same voters
- To establish that the primary caused Friday’s criticism
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- To clarify the political stage where they previously competed
The explanation helps readers understand the source of the politicians’ rivalry.
A primary is an election in which political parties select or help select their candidates.
-
Question 4 · Single choice
Choose one answer.
What contrast does the fourth paragraph emphasize?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- Candidates must compete and still seek support from related groups.
- Candidates should avoid public attention during every campaign.
- Candidates usually agree about policies after a primary ends.
- Candidates need different voters when they belong to one party.
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- Candidates must compete and still seek support from related groups.
It contrasts competition between parties with disagreement within one party.
It can affect an election because candidates need to distinguish themselves from rivals while also seeking support from many of the same voters and political allies.
-
Question 5 · Single choice
Choose one answer.
Why is the clash considered important despite no established further result?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- It immediately changed the election’s confirmed outcome.
- It made their relationship visible during an important race.
- It revealed the reason Stevens demanded an apology.
- It ended competition between the two politicians.
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- It made their relationship visible during an important race.
Its importance comes from its visibility during a pivotal contest.
Still, the clash matters because it places the relationship between El-Sayed and Stevens in view during a pivotal Senate race.
-
Question 6 · Single choice
Choose one answer.
How is the article organized overall?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- Event, background, implications, limitations, and voter perspective
- Policy comparison, polling results, biography, and election prediction
- Historical overview, personal profile, interview, and campaign schedule
- Claim, counterclaim, detailed evidence, and confirmed final outcome
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- Event, background, implications, limitations, and voter perspective
It moves from the event to context, implications, limits, and voters’ perspectives.
For voters, public exchanges can become part of the wider picture of a campaign.
-
Question 7 · Single choice
Choose one answer.
What can public criticism do according to the article?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- It always improves cooperation within a party.
- It can clarify differences while making cooperation harder.
- It prevents voters from considering candidate policies.
- It proves that former rivals will compete again.
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- It can clarify differences while making cooperation harder.
The article presents both a clarifying effect and a damaging effect.
Public criticism may clarify differences, but it can also make cooperation more difficult.
What to review next
Find the words that support each answer. For a mistake, compare the question with the evidence and identify the detail or inference you missed.
A focused practice result shows how you did on these tasks. Use several activities across skills to decide what to study next; one practice score does not certify an overall CEFR level.
Before you practise: a worked example
Look for evidence in the text. Separate what the writer says from what you already know about the topic.
The library normally closes at six, but on Fridays it stays open until eight. When does it close on Friday?
The answer is eight. But introduces an exception to the normal closing time, so the first time mentioned is not the answer.
This teaching example is separate from the scored questions. After your test, compare any mistakes with the explanation and revisit the topic before trying again.