A question about one author’s response to another tests whether you can connect their claims and reasons. Start with the question to see who answers whom and which critique the response must address. Put each text’s claim and its reason in a few words. Then name the stance: reject means the claim is wrong or unsupported, qualify means it’s true only in part, and extend means it goes further. Test each response’s reason, because authors can take the same stance for different reasons.
Hints
- Hint 1
Start with Text 1’s example of the 1790s mutinies. Separate what visitors now do from what the author says they no longer learn.
- Hint 2
Find the sentence in Text 2 about when an installation fails. Ask how far its criticism reaches.
- Hint 3
In the mutiny-station example, trace what must happen before a decision is accepted. What does the system show the visitor after that decision?
Step-by-step
Find the stance and its reason
Step 1State the criticism
Text 1 says the main casualty is historical argument, which is the critique Text 2’s author must answer. Why does Text 1 object? The touchscreen replaces context about wages, war, and law with timed guesses, so holding visitors’ attention isn’t the same as teaching history.
- Step 2
Find what Text 2 accepts and changes
What does Text 2 accept, and where does it push back? An installation fails when it reduces complexity to tapping, but visitors at the proposed mutiny station must read a pay ledger, a log entry, and a court record before it accepts a decision. It then shows what that choice predicts and where the documents resist it, making visitors test their ideas against records that may challenge them. The stance is qualify: Text 2 accepts the critique only for poorly designed exhibits.
- Step 3
Test the proposed reasons
Would better measurements alone address the critique? Text 2 wants to pair time-on-task with evidence of reasoning, so measurements can’t replace better teaching; improving these metrics leaves the game-like exhibit unchanged. The response about minimal constraints is turned around because Text 2 says to constrain action, making visitors check documents before deciding.
- Step 4
Match the solution and its limits
Text 2 calls for better scaffolding, not a retreat to placards, so the response favoring longer written labels offers the wrong solution. Scaffolding means support that helps visitors work through evidence. The response with scaffold evidence-based inquiry treats testing choices against documents as an advantage interactivity can offer over static labels, while allowing that poorly designed exhibits fail. Choice D.