The Reading for Understanding paper is less about knowing terms than about doing exactly what the question asks, and this practice is built around the places where candidates do something slightly different instead. An own-words question offers an option that says the right thing in the passage's own words, which is precisely how the mark is lost. A summary question offers an option that is entirely reasonable and says something the passage never said, because adding is as wrong as leaving out. A statistics question offers the observation that four in ten dying means six in ten survived — true, and an answer to a question nobody asked. The ten items cover putting a point in your own words, working a word's meaning out from what surrounds it, finding the key point in a short paragraph, a link question where one sentence looks back and the next turns forward, and an evaluation of a final sentence that closes an argument on a judgement rather than a fact. There is also the distinction between the part of a sentence that could be checked and the part that could only be agreed with, and what a writer gains by opening with one named person instead of the figures. Every passage is invented. Zestly is an independent study tool. It is not affiliated with any exam board and it is not an exam centre.
"Four in every ten of the trees planted under the scheme were dead within a year." What does the figure do for the argument? — It puts a scale on the failure, so the criticism rests on evidence rather than impression. Noting that six in ten survived is true, and answers a different question.
The text states: "The scheme was abandoned after three years, having consumed a great deal of public money and achieved almost nothing that its supporters had promised." Which of the following options correctly puts this into your own words?
The project was stopped after three years; it had cost taxpayers a lot and had delivered very little of what was expected of it.
The correct paraphrase carries every part of the original in different words: 'stopped' for 'abandoned', 'cost taxpayers a lot' for 'consumed a great deal of public money', and 'delivered very little of what was expected' for 'achieved almost nothing that its supporters had promised'. The option saying the scheme was abandoned because it consumed public money lifts the original wording and leaves out the failure; the options about a better replacement scheme and about public unpopularity add ideas the sentence never states.
Try this quiz →Try this exam →Practice these flashcards →Try this written work →
↑ National 5 and Higher (Scotland)
National 5 and Higher qualifications are awarded by Qualifications Scotland, which took over the awarding functions of the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) in February 2026. Zestly is not affiliated with or endorsed by Qualifications Scotland or the SQA. These materials are our own and reproduce no past-paper content.