Question

review the seventh paragraph.
steeled for battle
1 as a single parent working night shifts at u.s. steels south works in southeast chicago in the 1950s, alice peurala wanted a day job. she heard that product testers in the metallurgical division had an appealing daytime schedule. but these positions were not posted, as others were, for bidding; peurala couldnt apply.
2 in 1967—after the passage of the 1964 civil rights act, which outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin—a male colleague whom peurala had trained was moved up to be a product tester despite being far more junior than peurala. just before he started, she called
which of the following would be most relevant to add to the seventh paragraph?
how close peurala was to her new female colleague
the difference in wages between the metallurgical observer job and the product tester job
why peurala was qualified for the product tester job
what happened when peuralas lawyer went before judge will

Explanation:

The passage is about Peurala's situation regarding job discrimination and her pursuit of a product tester job. To be relevant to the seventh paragraph (though the seventh isn't shown, from the context of her job situation), adding why she was qualified for the product tester job would help explain her case for deserving the job, especially in the context of discrimination (since a junior male got the job). The other options: colleague closeness is irrelevant, wage difference isn't central to her job eligibility/discrimination case, and the lawyer before Judge Will is likely a later legal step, while her qualification is more about her job application context.

Answer:

C. why Peurala was qualified for the product tester job