A question about two texts tests how one author would answer a claim in the other. Start with the question to identify who answers and which claim is being questioned, especially when part of a text is underlined. Then put that claim and the other author’s reason in a few words. Name the author’s view: does the author reject the claim, add limits to it, or apply it to a new case? Check the reason too, because a response must reflect that author’s own evidence.
Hints
- Hint 1
Start with the underlined sentence in Text 1. Put its claim about public judgment in your own words, and keep track of which author is answering.
- Hint 2
In Text 2, examine the examples about invitations and the material presented to participants. Ask what they show about how an assembly’s conclusions are formed.
- Hint 3
Read Text 2’s final sentence and separate what assemblies may offer from what the author says needs checking. How does that affect the strength of the response to Text 1?
Step-by-step
Match the response to the author’s reasons
Step 1Find the claim and who answers
Text 1 points to varied participants and time to examine evidence to support its claim of a more representative account of public judgment than conventional political debate does. Who is responding to that claim? Text 2’s author is, so we’re checking how well the recommendations reflect the public, not whether assemblies are useful in general.
- Step 2
Find what could limit the claim
What could keep a randomly chosen group from reflecting the public? Text 2 says people with less time or trust may decline invitations, so the people who attend can differ from those selected. Organizers also choose the questions and expert testimony presented, shaping what participants consider. Who joins and what they discuss can both affect the recommendations.
- Step 3
Find the author’s view and how far it goes
The final sentence tells us how far this response goes: assemblies may provide officials with valuable information, but possible influences must be carefully assessed. Does the author reject assemblies altogether? No, the author questions how well the evidence supports the claim, because useful information doesn’t automatically speak for the public.
- Step 4
Match the reason and wording
The response about self-selection and organizer control names the two concerns: invitees decide whether to join, and organizers choose what participants hear. Its wording can limit fits does not ensure, because it describes a possible limit on how representative the conclusions are, not a certain failure in every assembly. Choice A.