Question 13·Easy·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
Monarch butterflies have experienced a dramatic decline, losing more than 80% of their North American population in the last twenty years. Conservation biologist Dana Morales blames widespread pesticide use and the disappearance of milkweed—the monarch caterpillar’s only food source. Morales warns that without immediate, large-scale habitat restoration, monarchs could face extinction within decades.
Text 2
Entomologist Raj Patel analyzed monarch counts dating back to 1900 and found that their numbers have always risen and fallen in long cycles. Patel argues that the recent drop fits within these historical swings and says there is “no convincing evidence” that monarchs are on the brink of extinction. While Patel supports reasonable limits on pesticides, he contends that the species is likely to rebound naturally over the coming years.
Which choice best describes how the authors of Text 1 and Text 2 differ in their interpretations of monarch butterfly population data?
For cross-text questions, first read each text with one goal: summarize in your own words what the author believes about the central issue (here, what the population data mean). Jot a 3–5 word note for each (e.g., “near extinction, urgent” vs. “normal cycle, rebounds”). Then go to the choices and eliminate any that (1) mention ideas not in either text, (2) reverse who believes what, or (3) focus on causes or solutions when the question asks about interpretation or attitude. Finally, select the choice that matches both mini-summaries at the same time, not just one of them.
Hints
Focus on each author’s overall attitude about the decline
Ask yourself: Does each author sound alarmed and urgent, or calm and reassuring about the monarch butterfly numbers? This attitude will tell you how each one interprets the data.
Look for words that show time scale and seriousness
In each text, look for phrases that suggest whether the decline is seen as long-lasting or short-term, and whether it is considered dangerous (like possibly leading to extinction) or part of a normal pattern.
Compare causes and solutions, but stay centered on interpretation
Notice what each author blames or suggests doing, but remember the question: it is asking how they interpret the population data, not just what causes or solutions they mention.
Step-by-step Explanation
Determine how the author of Text 1 interprets the data
Focus on what Text 1 says about the monarch decline:
- "have experienced a dramatic decline, losing more than 80%..."
- Morales "blames" pesticides and milkweed loss.
- She "warns that without immediate, large-scale habitat restoration, monarchs could face extinction within decades."
From this, Text 1 treats the recent data as evidence of a serious, ongoing trend that could lead to extinction and requires urgent action. It is not described as a minor or temporary change.
Determine how the author of Text 2 interprets the data
Now look at how Text 2 talks about the same type of information:
- Patel "analyzed monarch counts dating back to 1900" and found their numbers "have always risen and fallen in long cycles."
- He argues the recent drop "fits within these historical swings."
- He says there is "no convincing evidence" that monarchs are near extinction.
- He thinks the species is "likely to rebound naturally over the coming years."
So Text 2 treats the recent numbers as part of normal historical cycles and expects the population to recover without implying that extinction is near.
Identify the key difference in interpretation
Compare the two views:
- Text 1: The decline is dramatic, tied to human causes, and could lead to extinction within decades if we do not act quickly.
- Text 2: The decline fits long cycles, there is no convincing evidence of impending extinction, and the species will probably rebound naturally.
The key contrast is about whether the decline shows a long-term, potentially irreversible problem or a temporary, historically typical fluctuation.
Match that difference to the answer choices
Check each option against this contrast:
- The correct choice must say that Text 1 sees the decline as a serious, possibly lasting trend that could lead to extinction, and that Text 2 sees it as part of normal cycles that will likely reverse.
Only Choice A accurately describes this: it states that the author of Text 1 views the decline as a long-term, potentially irreversible trend, while the author of Text 2 views it as a temporary, typical fluctuation.