The 'urban renewal' programs of the 1950s-1960s demolished 'blighted' neighborhoods—often low-income and minority communities—to make way for highways and modern buildings. Supporters at the time believed they were improving cities by removing 'slums.' Contemporary scholars view these projects as often destroying vibrant communities and displacing residents without adequate relocation assistance, calling the practice 'urban removal' to emphasize its effects on existing communities.
The passage suggests that
how policies are evaluated may shift as different stakeholders' perspectives are considered
all cities that underwent urban renewal are now abandoned
contemporary scholars fully endorse 1950s urban renewal practices
'blight' was an objective scientific measurement
Correct Answer: A
Choice A is the best answer. Contemporary evaluation differs from 1950s views.
- Context clues: Supporters saw improvement; scholars now see destruction and displacement.
- Meaning: Evaluation shifted as affected communities' perspectives gained attention.
- Verify: Renaming to 'urban removal' reflects centering displaced residents' experience.
💡 Strategy: When the same actions are evaluated differently over time, infer perspective shift.
Choice B is incorrect because the passage doesn't claim cities were abandoned. Choice C is incorrect because scholars critique these practices as "destroying vibrant communities." Choice D is incorrect because communities labeled 'blighted' were "vibrant," suggesting the label was subjective.