+20 Writing Questions for SAT Prep - Group 1

Choice A is the best answer because a comma after the word “hydrant” separates the phrase “a pigeon pecking for crumbs around a fire hydrant” from the phrase “an old man tending to a baby outside a doorway.” A comma is also consistent with the punctuation choice made to separate the first two phrases in the asyndetic series following the colon in the sentence.

Choice B is not the best answer because a dash is not a conventional choice for punctuating items in a series.

Choice C is not the best answer because although a colon can be used to introduce a series, it is not an conventional choice for separating items within a series.

Choice D is not the best answer because it fuses together two items in the series. Separating the phrases “a pigeon pecking for crumbs around a fire hydrant” and “an old man tending to a baby outside a doorway” requires punctuation and/or a coordinating conjunction.

Choice D is the best answer because the phrase “enormous ships docking at busy urban ports” effectively continues the sentence’s series of details (“skyscrapers towering in the background” and “bridges connecting neighborhoods”) conveying the majesty of city skylines as depicted by Kingman. 

Choice A is not the best answer because the phrase “delicately painted creatures, such as a tiny, barely visible cat prowling in the bushes of a park” does not convey a sense of the majesty of city skylines as depicted by Kingman and thus does not effectively continue the sentence’s series of details (“skyscrapers towering in the background” and “bridges connecting neighborhoods”).

Choice B is not the best answer because the phrase “exquisitely lettered street and storefront signs” does not convey a sense of the majesty of city skylines as depicted by Kingman and thus does not effectively continue the sentence’s series of details (“skyscrapers towering in the background” and “bridges connecting neighborhoods”).

Choice C is not the best answer because the phrase “other details that help define Kingman’s urban landscapes” is too vague and general to constitute a third example that conveys a sense of the majesty of city skylines as depicted by Kingman and thus does not effectively continue the sentence’s series of details (“skyscrapers towering in the background” and “bridges connecting neighborhoods”).

Choice D is the best answer because it combines the sentences logically and efficiently, with the original second sentence becoming a participial phrase describing Kingman.

Choice A is not the best answer because it creates a wordy and awkward construction and because it fails to link the acclaim Kingman received with the exhibition of his work.

Choice B is not the best answer because it creates a repetitive and awkward construction.

Choice C is not the best answer because “but” suggests contrast or exception, neither of which makes sense in the context of the sentence.

Choice B is the best answer because it concludes the passage with a sentence that emphasizes the enduring legacy of Kingman’s work by indicating that museums continue to make Kingman’s iconic paintings accessible to the public.

Choice A is not the best answer because it concludes the passage with a sentence that acknowledges that other painters’ work is more famous than Kingman’s (which downplays, rather than emphasizes, the enduring legacy of Kingman’s work) and offers only a general assertion that Kingman’s work is “well regarded by many people.”

Choice C is not the best answer because instead of referring to the enduring legacy of Kingman’s work, it concludes the passage with a sentence that recalls a detail the passage provides about Kingman’s early life.

Choice D is not the best answer because it concludes the passage with a sentence that is too vague and general to emphasize effectively an enduring legacy of Kingman’s work. It is not clear what the idea of refreshing a long-lasting tradition is intended to mean or how (or even whether) this represents an enduring legacy. Moreover, referring to Kingman’s work as “but one example” downplays the significance of any potential legacy that might be suggested.