（A） Continuity， not change， marked women's lives as they moved from East to West

　　（B） Women's experience on the North American frontier has not received enough attention from modern historians

　　（C） Despite its rigors， the frontier offered women opportunities that had not been available in the East

　　（D） Gender relations were more difficult for women in the West than they were in the East

　　（E） Women on the North American frontier adopted new roles while at the same time reaffirming traditional roles.

　　6. Which of the following best describes the organization of the passage？

　　（A） A current interpretation of a phenomenon is described and then ways in which it was developed are discussed

　　（B） Three theories are presented and then a new hypothesis that discounts those theories is described.

　　（C） An important theory and its effects are discussed and then ways in which it has been revised are described

　　（D） A controversial theory is discussed and then viewpoints both for and against it are described

　　（E） A phenomenon is described and then theories concerning its correctness are discussed.

　　7. Which of the following is true of the Stasist school as it is described in the passage？

　　（A） It provides new interpretation of women's relationship to work and the law.

　　（B） It resolves some of the ambiguities inherent in Turnerian and Reactionist thought.

　　（C） It has recently been discounted by new research gathered on women's experience.

　　（D） It avoids extreme positions taken by other writers on women's history.

　　（E） It was the first school of thought to suggest substantial revisions to the Frontier Thesis.

　　Passage 2

　　Japanese firms have achieved the highest levels of manufacturing efficiency in the would automobile industry. Some observers of Japan have assumed that Japanese as United States firms but have benefited from the unique characteristics of Japanese employees and the Japanese culture. However， if this were true， then one would expect Japanese auto plants in the United States to perform no better than factories run by United States companies. This is not the case， Japanese-run automobile plants located in the United States and staffed by local workers have demonstrated higher levels of productivity when compared with factories owned by United States companies.

　　Other observers link high Japanese productivity to higher levels of capital investment per worker. But a historical perspective leads to a different conclusion. When the two top Japanese automobile makers matched and then doubled United States productivity levels in the mid-sixties， capital investment per employee was com-parable to that of United States firms. Furthermore， by the late seventies， the amount of fixed assets required to produce one vehicle was roughly equivalent in Japan and in the United States. Since capital investment was not higher in Japan， it had to be other factors that led to higher productivity.

　　A more fruitful explanation may lie with Japanese production techniques. Japanese auto-mobile producers did not simply implement conventional processes more effectively： they made critical changes in United States procedures. For instance ， the mass-production philosophy of United States auto-makers encouraged the production of huge lots of cars in order to utilize fully expensive， component specific equipment and to copy fully workers who have been trained to execute one operation efficiently. Japanese auto-makers chose to make small-lot production feasible by introducing several departures from United States practices， including the use of flexible equipment that could be altered easily to do several different production tasks and the training of workers in multiple jobs.

　　Automakers could schedule the production of different components or models on single machines， thereby eliminating the need to store the buffer stocks of extra components that result when specialized equipment and workers are kept constantly active.

　　1. The primary purpose of the passage is to

　　（A） present the major steps of a process

　　（B） clarify an ambiguity

　　（C） chronicle a dispute

　　（D） correct misconceptions

　　（E） defend an accepted approach