UPC Critical Thinking Entrance Test
Guidelines and Advice
UCL recognises that international students come from a variety of academic backgrounds and
pedagogic cultures, and that some may have received little training in critical thinking. Therefore,
the UPC Critical Thinking Entrance Test does not assess the candidates’ level of critical thinking,
rather, it aims to identify and select candidates who have a disposition in thinking critically. These
are students who are interested in engaging intellectually with ideas and willing to develop and
support their own arguments – instead of simply reproducing factual knowledge. This approach to
study and knowledge is very important in order to be successful on the UPC and later on
undergraduate degree programmes.
The UPC Critical Thinking Entrance Test
The test consists of one text followed by a number of questions marked out of 1, 2 or 3 points. The
overall test is marked out of 30.
A first set of questions assesses the candidates’ ability to understand the text: to comprehend the
vocabulary within the context of the passage, to paraphrase, to summarise, and to recognise the
theme and the main points of the text.
A second set of questions tests the candidates’ ability to analyse the text: to recognise how it is
‘built’ or structured and what arguments are used, to identify any assumptions, flaws or logical
fallacies, and to recognise signs of bias or of the author’s viewpoint.
Finally, a last set of questions assesses the candidates’ ability to respond to the passage: candidates
will be asked to use the passage to present a personal argument. These questions will ask candidates
to support their idea with arguments and to give relevant examples.
What skills do you need to pass the test?
Level 1: basic skills
These are simple questions based on reading comprehension skills. It is important to read both the text and
the questions carefully, but these questions should not present any particular difficulty. They include, for
example:
 Find the conclusion(s) of the text
 Paraphrase
 Summarise
 Explain
 Understand and address the questions
Level 2: to secure a pass
These questions relate to argumentation, in other words, the ability to give reasons which support a position.
This may be about the position expressed in the text or your own opinion(s). If you read the text carefully, take
your time to read the questions and think about your answer before you write it down, you should also do well
in these questions. They include, for example:
 Identify arguments in the text
 Provide a counter-argument to the text
 Develop your own argument and support it with relevant evidence and examples
 Consider arguments opposing your own opinion
Level 3: to secure a good result
A few questions will test your abstract thinking or ask you to discuss the main idea in the passage in order to
assess how sophisticated an argument you are able to understand, construct and present. These are the most
challenging types of question. One example would be identifying and explaining assumption and inference.
When you are asked to discuss an idea or to explain why you agree or disagree with an idea, what really
matters here is not what you answer but your ability to build an argument supported by relevant examples as
opposed to an opinion based on personal experience or anecdotes. To support your arguments, you should be
able to produce valid and relevant examples and you need to clearly explain the connection between your
examples and the point you are trying to make. A personal opinion with poor examples can still score 1 mark
out of 3, but only a well-developed and convincing answer will score 2 or 3 out of 3.
6 tips for a successful test
Remember that grammar and vocabulary are not the focus of this test (your level of English will be
tested separately (IELTS, TOEFL or equivalent) when you apply to the UPC). The focus of the test is
on thought rather than on grammatical accuracy. However, a good range of vocabulary will help you
to express your ideas more clearly and effectively and to propose more sophisticated answers.
#1
A good way to prepare is to become familiar with the following terms: theme, conclusion, paradox,
inference, premise, argument, counter-argument, fallacy, generalization, and paraphrase. Check
what these mean in a dictionary and look up examples on line.
#2
You can also try the sample test available online; this will allow you to become more familiar with
the format of the test and typical questions that can be asked.
#3
One of the best ways to prepare would be to read challenging texts in English as frequently as
possible. You should follow international news in a wide variety of issues: ethical, political,
environmental, artistic, etc. and favour articles written by a named expert or writer commenting on
a piece of news over factual or content-based articles.
#4
When you read, read actively! You could try to identify important words and concepts. If you think
you know what they mean, test yourself: imagine a friend does not understand an idea or a concept,
how would you explain it to him/her? Check in a dictionary. Also, when you read or watch the news,
try to be active, to engage with the material: what do you think? Why? Make notes.
#5
You could also engage in debates and discussions in English with friends and teachers whenever you
have a chance. Join a debate club if this is possible. In general you should train yourself in finding
reasons and arguments to support your opinions. For instance if you believe a government is right in
making a decision, you should be able to explain why you think this decision is good. Try to avoid
personal examples – e.g. referring to your family and friends – and anecdotes.
#6
During the test you should read the text very carefully, probably more than once, before you read
the questions. Then you should read each question carefully to make sure that you have understood
it and know exactly what is being asked: how many arguments or examples do you need to present,
must you refer to the passage and quote from it, or should you write an answer using your own
arguments and examples? It can be stressful not to find the right answer immediately. If this
happens, then it is better to skip this part of the test, answer the other questions and come back to
it if you have time.
UNIVERSITY PREPARATORY CERTIFICATE
CRITICAL THINKING ENTRANCE TEST
Text and questions with examples of answers and further guidance.
1
During the last world financial crisis, some people decided that it was all the fault of
the banks. They relentlessly attacked bankers for being the cause of all the evil,
making them scapegoats in the eyes of the general public. In truth there seemed not
to be one sin they were not guilty of having committed! But the last world financial
5
crisis was not the fault of the banks. It was the fault of the people who borrowed
money from the banks – that is, mostly ordinary people like shop-workers and
labourers. These people are used to living poorly as they can only have jobs that give
them low salaries. If these people had not been so greedy and borrowed money to
buy houses they could not really afford and luxury items they did not really need,
10
then there would never have been an economic bubble which led to the recent
global problems. Why did they want to have expensive jewellery, designer handbags,
sports cars and gold watches if they could not really afford them? Having something
that you cannot pay for is really just like stealing it. It is therefore quite justified that
the bankers take large bonuses for lending this money. After all, they are just doing
15
their job, which is to lend money to people and businesses who ask for it. It is not the
fault of bankers if people ask for too much money and then get into debt. And
anyway, bankers are taking risks and so they should be rewarded with very large
sums of money if those risks turn out to be successful. Because the people
responsible for the bubble are ordinary people, it is now morally correct that these
20
people pay for the banks to survive by increased taxes on their earnings.
The test is marked out of 30.
Please answer the following questions using your own words as far as possible.
1. Describe, in your own words, TWO conclusions the passage is trying to draw. (2 marks)
Examples of answers
 Bankers are not responsible for the economic crisis.
 Ordinary people are responsible for the economic crisis.
 Ordinary people should pay for the economic crisis.
Further advice
 Do not consider that the conclusion is automatically the last sentence of the passage.
It can be, but it is not always the case. There might also be a more complete answer
elsewhere in the text.
 Some candidates provide only one conclusion when the question asks for two. Make
sure you answer the question completely.
2. Focus on ONE of these conclusions. Discuss whether you think the argument in the
passage is solid enough to arrive at this conclusion or not. (3 marks)
Examples of answers
 Bankers are not responsible for the economic crisis. The passage demonstrates this
well: it shows/establishes that it is ordinary people who borrowed too much and this
led to the economic crisis.
 I think the conclusion that banks have no responsibility is weak: the passage does
argue that ordinary people borrowed too much, but that does not mean bankers
have no responsibility. In fact the question of the banks’ responsibility is never
addressed.
Further advice
 Do not discuss both conclusions chosen for question 1. This question asks for only
one.
 Do not assume that the text is right. The question asks for your own evaluation. You
can agree or disagree with the text – this will not affect your mark.
3. Paraphrase: “They relentlessly attacked bankers for being the cause of all the evil” (line
2) (2 marks)
Example of a good answer
 They kept on criticising the people working in banks because they thought everything
that had gone wrong was their fault.
Further advice
When you provide a paraphrase you must make sure that all elements of the sentence are
explained. Paraphrasing is giving a restatement of the sentence in another form: you must
use other words.
4. Generalizations can often lead to invalid conclusions. Explain the generalization that is
made about ‘ordinary people’, lines 7-8: “These people are used to living poorly as they
can only have jobs that give them low salaries.” (2 marks)
Examples of answers
 The passage generalizes about ordinary people by saying that all these people are
the same. It groups them into one category by saying that they all live poorly and all
have poorly paid jobs.

The passage also generalizes that people who live poorly and have low salaries are
all ‘ordinary’/ that they are the majority of people.
Further advice
Avoid simply paraphrasing the passage. Here, many applicants simply answer: “These people
are poor and have poorly paid jobs”. However, this question asks you to clarify the
generalization made about people in the context of the text.
5. Explain the meaning of the following words in the context of the passage:
- ‘scapegoats’ (line 3) (2 marks)
Example of a good answer
 The word ‘scapegoats’ is used to describe the bankers that were unfairly criticized for
the financial crisis. The author believes they were taking the blame for those people
who really caused the crisis / who were the true culprits.
- ‘greedy’ (line 8) (2 marks)
Example of a good answer
 The word ‘greedy’ is used to describe the people who have borrowed money from the
banks. It means that these people are excessively keen on having more than they can
afford or that they should want.
Further advice
Make sure you read the full sentence where the words appear in the text. Also, avoid
repeating the words you are asked to explain: find synonyms to explain them.
6. Paraphrase: “It is (…) quite justified that the bankers take large bonuses”. (lines 13-14)
(2 marks)
Example of a good answer
 It is reasonable / fair that the officers or directors working in banks are given large
financial rewards / are rewarded financially / Bank officers deserve to receive a lot of
money.
Further advice
 Do not use the same words as the sentence in the text but in a different order.
Example: “if the bankers take big bonuses, this is justified / ok”. Most words here are
the same as in the passage and so this is an unacceptable answer.
 It is acceptable to keep one key word unchanged in your answer (here, ‘bankers’) but
you should replace other words with synonyms / words of similar meaning.
7. Explain the term ‘morally correct’ (line 19) in the present context. (2 marks)
Example of a good answer

The text argues that ordinary people should be held responsible, and pay for the
damage they have caused. This would be morally right / the right thing to do from an
ethical perspective: whoever has done wrong needs to pay for /repair the situation.
Further advice
This can be confused with a question simply asking you to paraphrase. Here, many
applicants simply answer “ethically right”. However, this question asks you to clarify a
phrase in the context of the passage.
8. State ONE assumption which the author has used to build his case. (1 mark)
Examples of answers
 People are greedy and borrow too much / are unreasonable /cannot budget properly.
 Bankers have lent money / taken risks for people.
9. The word ‘therefore’ is usually part of an inference in English. Find the inference
in the text and comment on whether it is valid. Give reasons for your answer.
(2 marks)
Example of a good answer
 The inference is in line 13: “therefore” connects the irresponsible behaviour of
ordinary people to the bonuses given to bankers. The passage concludes (“therefore”)
that, because ordinary people have been irresponsible, bankers should get large
bonuses. This is not a valid inference: just because one borrows too much does not
mean bankers should get rewards. There is no logical connection here between the
two points.
10. Who in your view might have written this text? Explain your answer by giving specific
examples from the text. (3 marks)
Example of a good answer
 The text was probably written by a banker or somebody working in a bank, or
possibly it was written by somebody whose job it is to defend bankers: a lawyer or a
PR adviser. The main reason for thinking this is that the passage is heavily biased in
favour of the banks: see line 1 (‘it is not the fault of the banks’), lines 8-9 (‘they are
just doing their job’). Also it is very critical / accusatory of people who have borrowed
money by referring to them as “greedy” and saying it is “their fault”.
Further advice
 To score full marks in this question, you can describe in some detail who you think the
author might be (their job, position in society, gender, etc, as appropriate).
 Remember to give examples to support your opinion by referring to specific words /
phrases / lines in the text, or by quoting from the text.
11. The text states that it is bankers who take risks with money. Without using the
text, discuss whether this is, in fact, the case. (3 marks)
Example of a good answer
 When assessing the risk banks take, one has to question what they are actually
risking. In fact, they play with their customers’ money, not theirs. Therefore, I would
argue against the passage. Yes, they risk money, but the assumption that they are
the risk-takers does not work. There has, in fact, been very little risk to the banks with
only a few allowed to fail. Most banks have survived the financial crisis thanks to
public money. So even when they fail, they survive. This demonstrates that they did
not really take risks. Therefore I do not agree that it is the bankers who take risks
with money, it is in fact the state, and ultimately the general public.
Example of a poor answer
 Banks juggle millions of units of money throughout the world. They have to take risks
to make money. This is the rule of today’s world. I think it is fair to risk a lot and to
gain a lot, so I agree with the passage. For example my uncle works for a big bank.
He travels a lot and works really hard. He has huge responsibility. So it is reasonable
that he gets bonuses.
The answer above is too general, opinionated and relies on a personal example for support.
Further advice
 This is an open question and requires that you take a position. Just as in question 2,
your position will not affect your grade. What matters here is not your opinion, but
the construction of and support to your argument.
 Your answer needs to be structured: you need to introduce your position, give
relevant support to show why you think you are right, and conclude.
 Many applicants fail to read the questions carefully enough. The main mistake here
would be to discuss the theme of banks in general, but not the actual question. This is
a very frequent error.
 It is also a mistake to use personal examples in your answer.
12. The text argues that the economic crisis is due to the incompetence of the banks. Do
you agree? Without using the passage, support your idea by giving at least 2 arguments
and illustrating them with specific examples. (3 marks)
Examples of poor answers
“I disagree with the passage. For instance, Santander is very competent and very successful.
Another example of a competent bank is HSBC: they are all over the world.”
There are two examples here but no argument. This fails to answer the question.
“I agree with the author: ordinary people are to blame for the economic crisis because they
borrowed too much and were irresponsible. For instance a friend of my dad bought an
expensive car, but now he finds it difficult to pay for it.”
This is a poor answer because the argument repeats the passage (so there is no argument
proposed by the candidate) and the example is simply an anecdote, a personal example that
is not informative.
Further advice
 Make sure you understand the difference between an argument and an example. Do
not confuse the two.
 Check whether the question is asking you NOT to refer to the passage - as in this case:
you will have to find different arguments and ideas.
13. Which of the following summarises the overall theme of the text? (1 mark)
Tick the correct answer:
o The world financial crisis
o Responsibility for the world financial crisis
o The differences between bankers and ordinary people