Explain how Michael became an award winning artist. Include two details from the selection in your answer.
The teacher booklet goes on to explain what respondents might put in their answers:
Text-based details may include, but are not limited to:
A. His mother was a potter / he helped her fix her clay
B. Playing with clay as a child
C. “I knew that what I wanted to do was be an artist someday.”
D. Making small animals in hospital after blindness/Vietnam, continued to
E. Sculptures were photographed by newspapers
F. I get a picture in my mind / make his memories come to life
G. Inspires / leads sculpture workshops
H. Sculptures can be seen in museums/public buildings/Vatican /White House
I. People collect his work
Now, it doesn't matter which two items a test-taker lists in his/her answer. All items are equal, even those--like H, I, and maybe E and G--which don't really 'explain how he became an award-winning artist.'
H and I seem more the consequence of his becoming an award-winning artist, not an explanation of how he became one. I guess 'how he became' does not mean causality. I would have thought it did. But, by their answers, I gather they really mean something more like the event sequence of his rising to 'award-winning artist status.'
I hope this passage and questions got rejected for this flaccidity. I hope it wasn't something else, and that we really are (mis)testing comprehension with items like this.