Updated to the 12th Edition

There is a document titled “What Will Be Tested” giving RONR 12th ed. references for the rules to be tested for each of the 8 quizzes (Parts) of Step One. The Commission strongly recommends that the candidate carefully study all of the rules for a Part before starting the quiz for that Part online.

To help the candidate know what to expect on these tests, the Commission has written Practice Quizzes for each Part of Step One. Each consists of questions based on the rules that will be tested for a Part (the actual online quizzes are composed of 40 questions for Parts 1-7 and 25 for Part 8). The practice questions are not identical to those on the actual quizzes, but they are similar in form.

Remember that you are expected to be familiar with all the content in Chapters 1-11 of RONRIB in addition to the rules identified in “What Will Be Tested” for each Part.

Example questions Part Three-

1. At the last meeting of the Wine Lovers Association, Livia Homes gave notice that she would move to Amend Something Previously Adopted to change the date of the annual wine tasting. At this month’s meeting, who is permitted to make this motion?

  1. Any member can make the motion.
  2. Only Homes can make the motion since she gave the notice.
  3. Homes has preference in making the motion, but the member who seconded it can also make it at this time if Homes has changed her mind about offering the amendment.
  4. Only the secretary can make the motion after she reads the minutes where the notice is given.


2. Jeremiah Quincy is very talkative. Members are upset that meetings run on forever because he doesn’t have the sense to know when to stop debating. Alexandra Taquita moves, “To suspend the rules and prevent Mr. Quincy from speaking more than three times in any meeting.” Quincy raises a point of order against the motion. How should the chair rule?

  1. The point of order is well taken, because the rules may not be suspended to deny any particular member the right to speak in debate.
  2. The point of order is not well taken, because suspending the rules would require a two-thirds vote, which may overcome the rights of a minority.
  3. The point of order is well taken, because Quincy was not previously warned that he was violating decorum.
  4. The point of order is not well taken, because Quincy has abused his right to speak in debate.


3. Alexandra Zeeland has raised a point of order since she believes that the current speaker has exceeded his time for debate. The chair rules that the point of order was well taken. Should the secretary record this in the minutes?

  1. No, rulings on points of order are not included in the minutes.
  2. Yes. The reasons for a ruling on a point of order should be in the minutes.
  3. No, it is a procedural matter that is not important enough for the minutes.
  4. Maybe; if there is an Appeal, it would need to be included, but otherwise it is not necessary.


4. The Chess Club has adopted a special rule of order about how nominations will be made. Chester Diaz moves to Suspend the Rules to allow additional nominations that the rule would not allow. The motion is seconded. When the chair takes the vote, he asks for all in favor to say, “Aye” and then all opposed to say, “No.” The chair then announces that the Ayes have it, and the additional nominations can be made. Which of the following is an error that the chair made?

  1. He should not have taken a voice vote because the motion needed 2/3 to adopt.
  2. He should have taken a ballot vote since it is a suspension of a special rule of order.
  3. A special rule of order cannot be suspended. The chair should have said the motion is not in order.
  4. The chair should have just asked for unanimous consent since it is a good practice to have additional nominations.


5. At the July monthly meeting of the Chinese-American Merchants’ Society of San Francisco, a motion was adopted to allocate $250,000 to the Wildfire Restoration Emergency Fund. After a motion to adjourn was adopted, but just before the chair declared it, Chen Lu, who had voted in its favor, moved to reconsider the motion. After the motion to reconsider was seconded, the chair stated it and directed the secretary to make a note of it, then declared the meeting adjourned.
At the next monthly meeting in August, Chen Lu announced that he wished to withdraw his motion to reconsider. How should the chair have responded?

  1. The maker of the motion is entitled to withdraw it.
  2. Because the motion to reconsider was already stated, a majority vote will be required to grant its maker permission to withdraw it.
  3. Because the time limits for making that motion to reconsider have expired, it can be withdrawn only with unanimous consent.
  4. It is too late to withdraw the motion to reconsider.


Answer Key


Return to the Index Page for the New Credentialing System
SITEMAP: Webpages for New Credentialing System