What Counts as Evidence in a Local Policy Trial
About this practice test
An explanatory account of a town’s street trial, examining how traffic, safety, business data, and residents’ experiences can be combined without overstating uncertain results.
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.
What to expect:
8 questions with explanations to review after submission.
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
- C1. 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
- Multiple 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.
What Counts as Evidence in a Local Policy Trial
In the river town of Hartham, the council launched a twelve-week trial on Maple Street. At school opening and closing times, one lane was reserved for buses and cycles, and a short stretch outside the primary school was narrowed with temporary planters. The aim was not to prove that the street had become “better” in some general sense. The aim was narrower: to see whether children crossed more safely, whether congestion moved elsewhere, and whether the change could survive daily life rather than just public enthusiasm. By the first week, everyone seemed to have an opinion, but the project manager, Leena Moss, kept repeating that opinion was not the same as evidence. The council therefore promised to track several kinds of information. It would count vehicles, measure air quality, record pedestrian numbers, ask traders about takings, and interview parents and bus drivers. That list sounded comprehensive, yet it already implied a judgment: some signs would be stronger than others. A rise in walking, for example, might be welcome, but if it happened only because heavy rain kept drivers at home, the rise would mean less than it first appeared. Similarly, a short-term drop in traffic could reflect the trial itself, or it could reflect roadworks two blocks away, which had already altered the traffic pattern before the scheme began. This problem of attribution came into sharper focus after the first fortnight. The count of cars on Maple Street fell by almost a third, and the number of children arriving on foot rose. Supporters called the figures proof that the street had been transformed. But the weather had been unusually wet, and several families had shifted routines because a bridge on the direct commuter route was being repaired. The temporary lane also displaced some traffic into neighbouring streets, where residents complained that the experiment had simply moved pressure from one place to another. In other words, even a clean-looking number may describe a mixed reality. Shopkeepers raised a different objection. One café owner said her card machine receipts had not fallen, so the scheme must be harmless; another trader said receipts were the wrong measure because many customers now ordered online and collected goods later. The council economist agreed that takings were important but incomplete. A higher total could hide fewer visits but larger purchases, while a lower total could be caused by a local festival, a delivery strike, or a payday cycle. For that reason, the council asked shops not only for receipts but also for information on footfall, return visits, and the times when people entered and left. Evidence, in this setting, had to be interpreted rather than simply collected. Safety data posed still another challenge. The absence of a crash in twelve weeks was encouraging, but it was not a firm demonstration that the design was safe. Serious incidents are rare, which means that a short trial may be too brief to capture them. The council therefore looked at near-miss camera footage, the time it took children to cross, and police logs from the surrounding area. These signs did not offer certainty, but they did show patterns: whether drivers slowed, whether bus stops felt calmer, and whether parents trusted the crossing points enough to let children walk alone. A public meeting later that month showed why lived experience mattered even when it was messy. Several residents spoke about feeling less rushed and hearing fewer horns. Others described detours, lost parking spaces, and confusion about delivery access. The chair of the meeting reminded people that feelings were neither trivial nor conclusive. They could reveal harms that a spreadsheet missed, such as anxiety, inconvenience, or a sense that one group was being asked to absorb the costs for another. Yet feelings could also magnify a nuisance into a principle. A single loud complaint might travel further than a quieter benefit that touched many households. By then, the debate had shifted from “Did the trial work?” to “What kind of answer would count?” The consultants warned against treating the project like a referendum, because a vote would reveal preference, not effect. They also warned against demanding impossible purity, as if every change in a living town could be separated neatly from every other change. The sensible test was comparative: what happened on Maple Street after the plan began, what happened before it began, and what happened on similar streets that had not changed. That did not eliminate uncertainty, but it reduced the risk of mistaking coincidence for causation. When the report was finally drafted, it resisted a grand conclusion. It did not claim that the scheme was either a triumph or a failure. Instead, it argued that the trial had changed the terms of the argument. The strongest case for any decision would combine measured change, ordinary experience, and a clear statement of what remained uncertain. In the end, what counts as evidence is not fixed in advance by a slogan like “hard data” or “community voice”. It depends on the question being asked, the time available to answer it, and the degree of risk the town is prepared to accept.
-
Question 1 · Multiple choice
Choose all the correct answers.
Choose TWO options. Which two signs are named as direct indicators of how the crossing was working for children?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- near-miss camera footage
- journey times for deliveries
- the time it took children to cross
- parking-space occupancy
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- near-miss camera footage; the time it took children to cross
The passage says the council looked at “near-miss camera footage” and “the time it took children to cross” to judge safety. These two show what happened at the crossing itself. Police logs were also consulted, but they are a wider surrounding-area source rather than one of the two direct indicators asked for.
The council therefore looked at near-miss camera footage, the time it took children to cross, and police logs from the surrounding area
-
Question 2 · Multiple choice
Choose all the correct answers.
Choose TWO options. Which two factors made the first fortnight’s traffic figures hard to interpret?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- a school holiday
- unusually wet weather
- a bridge repair on the commuter route
- a rise in fuel prices
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- unusually wet weather; a bridge repair on the commuter route
The writer says the weather was unusually wet and that a bridge on the direct commuter route was being repaired. Both could change traffic independently of the trial. The other options are not given as reasons in the passage.
But the weather had been unusually wet, and several families had shifted routines because a bridge on the direct commuter route was being repaired
-
Question 3 · Multiple choice
Choose all the correct answers.
Choose TWO options. According to the passage, why were shop receipts incomplete evidence about the scheme’s effect on traders?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- a local festival could change the totals
- receipt totals showed how long customers stayed
- many customers ordered online and collected goods later
- receipts captured whether customers returned later in the week
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- a local festival could change the totals; many customers ordered online and collected goods later
Receipts were incomplete because many customers ordered online and collected later, and because totals could be distorted by events such as a local festival. The other two options sound plausible, but the passage does not say receipts showed how long customers stayed or whether they returned later in the week.
another trader said receipts were the wrong measure because many customers now ordered online and collected goods later
A higher total could hide fewer visits but larger purchases, while a lower total could be caused by a local festival, a delivery strike, or a payday cycle
-
Question 4 · Multiple choice
Choose all the correct answers.
Choose TWO options. Which two ideas about evidence in the trial are made explicit in the passage?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- the council planned to use several kinds of information
- the council expected one measure to settle the question
- evidence had to be interpreted rather than simply collected
- the public meeting replaced the need for data
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- the council planned to use several kinds of information; evidence had to be interpreted rather than simply collected
The passage says the council would use several kinds of information, and it also says evidence had to be interpreted rather than merely gathered. These are the two ideas the writer highlights. The other options contradict the passage: the council did not expect one measure to settle everything, and the public meeting did not replace data.
The council therefore promised to track several kinds of information
Evidence, in this setting, had to be interpreted rather than simply collected
-
Question 5 · Multiple choice
Choose all the correct answers.
Choose TWO options. Which two points does the writer make about residents’ feelings at the public meeting?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- they are always more reliable than counts
- they prove the scheme has no value
- they may magnify a nuisance into a principle
- they can reveal harms that a spreadsheet misses
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- they may magnify a nuisance into a principle; they can reveal harms that a spreadsheet misses
The writer says feelings can reveal harms that a spreadsheet misses, and that they can also magnify a nuisance into a principle. The other two options are contradicted by the passage, which treats feelings as useful but not conclusive.
They could reveal harms that a spreadsheet missed, such as anxiety, inconvenience, or a sense that one group was being asked to absorb the costs for another
Yet feelings could also magnify a nuisance into a principle
-
Question 6 · Multiple choice
Choose all the correct answers.
Choose TWO options. Which two standards did the consultants say were sensible for judging the trial?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- compare the street after the plan with how it was before
- hold a town-wide referendum
- compare Maple Street with similar streets that had not changed
- ignore all uncertainty and take the first result as final
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- compare the street after the plan with how it was before; compare Maple Street with similar streets that had not changed
The consultants recommend comparison with the street before the plan and with similar streets that had not changed. They reject turning the trial into a referendum and reject the idea that every influence can be perfectly separated.
The sensible test was comparative: what happened on Maple Street after the plan began, what happened before it began, and what happened on similar streets that had not changed
-
Question 7 · Multiple choice
Choose all the correct answers.
Choose TWO options. Which two claims about the report are supported by the passage?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- it refused to call the scheme a triumph or a failure
- it recommended making the lane closure permanent immediately
- it argued that the trial changed the terms of the argument
- it said all uncertainty had been removed
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- it refused to call the scheme a triumph or a failure; it argued that the trial changed the terms of the argument
The report is described as refusing to call the scheme either a triumph or a failure, and as changing the terms of the argument. It did not recommend a permanent closure, nor did it say uncertainty had disappeared.
When the report was finally drafted, it resisted a grand conclusion. It did not claim that the scheme was either a triumph or a failure
Instead, it argued that the trial had changed the terms of the argument
-
Question 8 · Multiple choice
Choose all the correct answers.
Choose TWO options. Which two elements are named first in the final paragraph’s description of the strongest case, before the writer adds the point about uncertainty?
Return to the passage, recording or visual- measured change
- ordinary experience
- a town-wide vote
- a promise of certainty
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- measured change; ordinary experience
The final paragraph says the strongest case would combine measured change, ordinary experience, and a clear statement of what remained uncertain. Because the question asks for the first two elements named in that combination, the correct answers are measured change and ordinary experience.
The strongest case for any decision would combine measured change, ordinary experience, and a clear statement of what remained uncertain
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.