Question 29·Medium·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
Teachers report that constant notifications fracture students’ attention, and even the silent presence of a phone can reduce focus. Group work suffers when some students scroll instead of participating, and not every student can afford the latest device, which creates inequities. Therefore, smartphones should be banned from classrooms entirely so that all students can learn without distraction or pressure to keep up with technology trends.
Text 2
Smartphones can certainly distract, but they can also be valuable learning tools when used with clear rules. Many schools successfully require students to store phones during lectures while permitting brief, teacher-directed use for polls, research, or translation. Rather than prohibiting all devices, schools should set consistent protocols—such as phone caddies, limited “tech windows,” and consequences for misuse—that teach responsible habits while preserving instructional time.
Based on the texts, how would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to the bolded claim in Text 1?
For cross-text questions, first isolate the specific claim or sentence from Text 1 that the question asks about, and summarize its stance in your own words. Then quickly read or skim the relevant parts of Text 2 looking for agreement, disagreement, or partial agreement signaled by words like “however,” “but,” or “rather than.” Once you know whether Text 2 would fully support, partially support, or oppose the claim—and why—eliminate answer choices that are too extreme or that ignore key details (such as conditions, limits, or exceptions). Finally, choose the option that best captures both the degree of agreement/disagreement and the specific reasoning given in Text 2.
Hints
Pin down Text 1's exact claim
Reread the bolded sentence in Text 1. Is the author suggesting some restrictions on phones or saying they should not be in classrooms at all?
Identify Text 2's overall attitude
Look at the first and last sentences of Text 2. Does the author completely support phones, completely oppose them, or take a mixed/conditional view?
Compare the two positions
Ask yourself: Would the author of Text 2 fully agree with banning smartphones from classrooms, fully disagree, or agree with part of the concern but suggest a different solution?
Watch for extreme wording in the choices
Look for words like “entirely,” “no place anywhere,” or “without restrictions.” Do those extremes match the more balanced, rule-based approach you see in Text 2?
Step-by-step Explanation
Understand the bolded claim in Text 1
Focus on the bolded part of Text 1: “smartphones should be banned from classrooms entirely.”
- Text 1 describes distractions, problems in group work, and inequity.
- Because of these problems, the author concludes that no smartphones should be allowed in classrooms at all (a total ban in that setting).
Summarize the main stance of Text 2
Now look at what Text 2 says about smartphones:
- It starts: “Smartphones can certainly distract,” so the author admits there is a problem.
- But Text 2 also says they “can also be valuable learning tools when used with clear rules” and describes teacher-directed use (polls, research, translation) and protocols (phone caddies, limited “tech windows,” consequences for misuse).
- Text 2 explicitly says, “Rather than prohibiting all devices, schools should set consistent protocols,” which means the author does NOT support a total ban; they prefer limited, rule-based use instead.
Decide how Text 2 would respond to Text 1’s claim
Compare the two positions:
- Text 1 wants smartphones banned from classrooms entirely.
- Text 2 agrees that smartphones can distract, but believes they should still be allowed in classrooms under strict rules and teacher control, not banned outright. So Text 2 would partly agree (phones are distracting) but disagree with the extreme solution (a total classroom ban), suggesting a more moderate, rule-based approach instead.
Match that relationship to the answer choices
Now match this understanding to the options:
- We need a choice where the author recognizes distractions but rejects a total ban, favoring teacher-guided, limited use.
- That is exactly what choice A) By acknowledging that smartphones can distract but advocating for teacher-guided, limited use rather than a total classroom ban describes.
So the correct answer is: A) By acknowledging that smartphones can distract but advocating for teacher-guided, limited use rather than a total classroom ban.