Critical reading – improving school lunches The passage says cafeterias long mimicked fast food, but districts now add simple, inexpensive options to make lunches healthier while still appealing to students. What statement is best supported?

Introduction / Context:
The paragraph contrasts past practice (fast-food-like fare) with a current approach (simple, inexpensive changes) that keep lunches appealing while improving healthfulness. We must select the claim most directly supported.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Cafeterias once mimicked fast food to appeal to students.
• Districts are now addressing the trend.
• They are incorporating simple and inexpensive options.
• These options aim to make lunches healthier while remaining appealing.

Concept / Approach:
Prefer the option that mirrors “simple and inexpensive” and “still appealing,” avoiding new specifics (vegetarian menus) or exaggerated claims (“major new initiatives”).

Step-by-Step Solution:
Extract the core: healthier + appealing + low cost + modest changes.Match to option D exactly.Eliminate options that contradict history (A), speculate preferences (B), add “major” initiatives (C), or inject vegetarian specifics (E).

Verification / Alternative check:
Rephrasing the text leads to D without adding content beyond what is stated.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• A: Opposite of the first sentence.
• B: No comparison of preferences.
• C: “Major new initiatives” is stronger than “simple and inexpensive.”
• E: Vegetarian options are never mentioned.

Common Pitfalls:
Choosing an answer that sounds health-focused but introduces unmentioned specifics.

Final Answer:
it is possible to make school lunches both healthier and appealing without spending a great deal of money and undertaking a radical transformation.