RBI Assistant PRE 2023 English Language Quiz
English Language is a part of almost all major competitive exams in the country and is perhaps the most scoring section also. Aspirants who regularly practice questions have a good chance of scoring well in the English Language Section. So here we are providing you with the RBI Assistant PRE 2023 English Language Quiz to help you prepare better. This RBI Assistant PRE 2023 English Language Quiz includes all of the most recent pattern-based questions, as well as Previous Year Questions. This RBI Assistant PRE 2023 English Language Quiz is available to you at no cost. Candidates will be provided with a detailed explanation of each question in this RBI Assistant PRE 2023 English Language Quiz. Candidates must practice this RBI Assistant PRE 2023 English Language Quiz to achieve a good score in the English Language Section.
RBI Assistant PRE 2023 English Language Quiz – 2
Aspirants have a strong possibility of scoring well in the English Language section if they practice quality questions on a regular basis. This section takes the least amount of time if the practice is done every day in a dedicated manner. In this article, we have come up with the RBI Assistant PRE 2023 English Language Quiz to help you prepare better. Candidates will be provided with a detailed solution for each question in this RBI Assistant PRE 2023 English Language Quiz. This RBI Assistant PRE 2023 English Language Quiz includes a variety of questions ranging in difficulty from easy to tough. This RBI Assistant PRE 2023 English Language Quiz is totally FREE. This RBI Assistant PRE 2023 English Language Quiz has important English Language Questions and Answers that will help you improve your exam score. Aspirants must practice this RBI Assistant PRE 2023 English Language Quiz in order to be able to answer questions quickly and efficiently in upcoming exams.
Directions (1-5): Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below them. Certain words/phrases have been printed in bold to help you locate them while answering some of the questions.
For years I kept a phrenology bust in my office. My colleagues had various reactions to it: some were amused; some were perplexed or even embarrassed. But it reminded us of the perils of junk science, proof that a little learning is a dangerous thing. Phrenology, the “science” of attributing one’s personality to cranial features, arose in the nineteenth century, at the dawn of the field of psychology. At that time, the notion of personality entered the popular mind and physiological foundations for personality, if not rigorously documented, seemed plausible. More than a century later, the field of psychobiology is booming, and phrenology has no place in it. The wheels of scientific study grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly fine. Discredited by the absence of rigorous theory or empirical evidence, phrenology was tossed into the dustbin. A lot of learning overcame the initial error caused by a little learning.
Every field has its equivalent to phrenology. Business is no exception. Business practitioners are pragmatists, prone to assume that what works is what works. Where markets function smoothly and there is open competition among ideas, pragmatism serves pretty well. But like phrenologists in an earlier day, pragmatists are occasionally seized by ideas that seem plausible and help to explain events in a limited arena but are backed by no evidence, sound logic, or general efficacy. Such ideas can do more harm than good. In my writing, I have criticized some of the modern-day phrenologies: conglomerate diversification, bigger is better, the merger of equals, and momentum management. The worst phrenologies of the twentieth century, Marxism and Nazism, taught us the evil consequence of failing to challenge humbug and to do so quickly.
But ideas mill about because of a little learning. Thomas Jefferson argued that the antidote to a little leaning is a lot of learning: “Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day.” The key to Jefferson’s antidote is the liberality of one’s learning, the sampling of diverse ideas and facts. About 50 years ago, A. Whitney Griswold, president of Yale University, wrote, “The only sure weapon against bad ideas is better ideas. The source of better ideas is wisdom. The surest path to wisdom is a liberal education.”
With alarm I note the educational trend toward narrow vocationalism, even in business schools. Business phrenologies breed in the back alleys of the field. Where thinking can get warped – The poster child here is Enron’s aggressive use of special purpose entities. Though the practitioner needs to be his or her own best teacher, business schools and institutes can help one get a lot of learning. At its best, the M.B.A. has stood for liberal training across the business specialties and for a graduate who can smell humbug and not be afraid to say so. Learning based on uncritical, rote memorization is no preparation for a career of action and risk taking but is exactly what your local phrenologist depends on. Instead, the learning that matter, requires testing and debate. That’s why discussion-based education is so important: it exercises skills of analysis and argument. And it is why penetrating research is crucial. The humanistic tradition of transparent documentation, hypothesis testing, replication of experiments, and debate is the antidote to a little learning. And it is the source of ideas from academics that improve business practice, such as business ethics, linear programming, conjoint analysis, and theory of option pricing.
Do we need schools to help us learn? The internet has sprouted many degree programs. Aren’t these just as good as the program based in physical places? I do not think so, for at least two reasons. First, learning is deeper and richer when it occurs in a group. As T.S. Eliot said. “There is no life that is not lived in community.” Learning on the Internet remains a solitary experience. I doubt that the chat room can replace in-person peer coaching, challenge, and debate. Second, learning is better with a teacher. Raw ingredients and a good kitchen aren’t enough to make a great meal. Economist Paul Romer has argued that a good cooking requires the human elements of creativity and leadership. So it is with learning: the teacher’s creativity organizes the resources and leads the students to insight.
Disillusionment about the mission of business learning creates a downward spiral of poor engagement between practitioners and business schools. It’s a race to the bottom: practitioners ask less and less and the schools oblige. For instance, executives seem to want fewer days in training and less nuance, discussion and recollection. Corporate recruiters are demanding narrowly trained M.B.A.s exactly when we need liberally trained professionals. At the heart of each of the 22 business scandals that erupted between 1998 and 2002 lay a bad idea cradled by narrow, self-serving professionalism. The slump in corporate and individual philanthropy will chill the business learning that occurs through research, especially the challenging, provocative new work. Many schools, in turn, humbled by their financial problems and the business scandals, have hunkered down into a customer-service mentality, focusing on marketing and league tales. Rapid imitation, and toning down the mission of social criticism, testing and argument. Put this all together and it’s like a picture by Brueghel or Hogarth, in which people are leaving undone the things that ought to be done and doing the other.
Yes, I remain cautiously optimistic. The interface between business practice and the academy is a market of ideas. As Joseph Schumpeter wrote 62 years ago, free markets will self-correct, led by entrepreneurs, agents of charge who find their opportunities whatever they see room for improvement. Dissatisfaction with the race to the bottom will eventually spur agents of change – both scholars and thoughtful practitioners – to offer a better model for business learning.
- Author compares phrenology with present day management education in business schools because
(a) management education prepares the students to take decisions on the basis of cranial features.
(b) both phrenology and management education prepares students to become pragmatists.
(c) management education is not preparing the students in the area of critically analyzing the modern-day business phrenologies.
(d) wheels of scientific study grind slowly and over a period of time phrenology has transitioned into management science.
(e) None of the above
- Which of the following statement is false in the context of the passage?
(a) Author argues that little learning can lead to situation like that of Enron where aggressive use of special purpose entities resulted in mismanagement of the organization.
(b) Pragmatists are occasionally seized by ideas, e.g., conglomerate diversification, bigger is better, the merger of equals, etc., that seem plausible but are not backed by evidence, or logic.
(c) Ideas of Joseph Schumpeter are not applicable as they were not based on rigorous research.
(d) Learning is better with a teacher as it requires active involvement of teacher for organizing the resources and leading the students to develop insights.
(e) All of the above
- Self-serving professionalism, as used in the passage, refers to
(a) professionalism for serving the cause of management
(b) professionalism of selfish people
(c) professionalism that excludes stakeholders
(d) Both (b) and (c)
(e) None of the above
- If the author of this passage becomes director of a business school then he is likely to do which of the following?
(a) Invite practitioners from industry for guest lectures
(b) Stop summer internship for M.B.A. students
(c) Discontinue short term management education programmes
(d) both (a) and (c)
(e) All of the above
- Author believes that business learning is required more than ever in present times because
(a) corporate recruiters are demanding narrowly trained business graduates (M.B.A.).
(b) business schools can teach modern-day business phrenlogies.
(c) slump in corporate and individual philanthropy, which has a negative impact on the financial conditions of business school, need to be corrected with the help of business education.
(d) business learning and penetrating research can provide ideas for improving business practices.
(e) None of the above
Directions (6-10): In the following paragraph, there is a set of four highlighted words against each number indicated in bold in the beginning of the sentences. One of the given set of words may or may not fit into the statement. Choose the word which is not suitable in the context of the paragraph. If all the four words are correct and feasible, choose (e) i.e. “No error” as your answer.
(6) Changes in future land use, increased fragmentation of tiger habitat and the applauding loss in genetic diversity puts tiger populations at small and isolated reserves at high risk of extinction. (7) Progressive development can increase the probability of extinction by over 50%, a recent study has found. (8) The study, Maintaining Tiger Connectivity and Minimising Extinction into the Next Century: Insights from Landscape Genetics and Spatially-Explicit Simulations, dispatched in the February 2018 issue of the Biological Conservation journal, examined the population connectivity of tigers across nine reserves, (9) and used genetic data to infer the impact of changing landscapes on the species and simulate their extinction probability in different scenarios. (10) Increasing tiger numbers in such a scenario will decrease the extinction probability in just 12 percentage points (from 56% to 44%), the study found.
- (a) changes
(b) fragmentation
(c) applauding
(d) populations
(e) no error
- (a) Progressive
(b) probability
(c) extinction
(d) found
(e) no error
- (a) minimising
(b) dispatched
(c) issue
(d) examined
(e) no error
- (a) genetic
(b) impact
(c) simulate
(d) extinction
(e) no error
- (a) increasing
(b) scenario
(c) in
(d) study
(e) no error
