Question 32·Medium·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
Urban ecologist Dana Kuiper analyzed property records from 15 midsize U.S. cities and found that streets with mature trees sold for an average of 7 percent more than comparable streets without such greenery. Citing additional studies linking exposure to urban trees with reduced stress and improved concentration, Kuiper concludes that city governments should require developers to plant and maintain a minimum number of trees on every new residential block.
Text 2
Community sociologist Rafael Molina agrees that trees can benefit city residents but cautions that municipal mandates often fail when they overlook neighborhood differences. In districts where residents face higher housing costs or limited public-works funding, mandatory planting can divert resources from more urgent needs such as sidewalk repair or street lighting. Molina argues that cities should allow individual communities to decide how to balance green space with other priorities.
Based on the texts, how would Molina (Text 2) most likely respond to Kuiper’s policy recommendation in Text 1?
For cross-text connection questions, first summarize each author’s main point in one simple sentence: what policy or idea they support, and why. Then, ask how the second author would react to the first: would they agree, disagree, or agree with conditions? Finally, scan the choices and quickly eliminate any that contradict clear statements from the second text (for example, denying benefits the author explicitly accepts or adding extreme claims like “solely” or “equally” that the author never makes), and select the option that most closely matches the second author’s stated concerns and reasoning.
Hints
Hint 1: Identify Kuiper’s main policy idea
Focus on the last sentence of Text 1. What, exactly, does Kuiper want city governments to require developers to do, and does this rule apply everywhere or only in some places?
Hint 2: Identify Molina’s main concern
Look at what Molina says about municipal mandates. What problem does he see when cities apply the same rule to all neighborhoods?
Hint 3: Agreement vs. disagreement
Molina agrees that trees have benefits, but does he fully support having a strict citywide rule? Think about what he believes neighborhoods should be allowed to decide for themselves.
Hint 4: Eliminate clearly conflicting options
Check each answer against Text 2: Does Molina ever say that research on trees is weak, that all communities benefit equally, or that cities should care only about property values?
Step-by-step Explanation
Understand Kuiper’s recommendation in Text 1
Kuiper looks at property records and finds that streets with mature trees sell for more. Kuiper also cites research saying trees reduce stress and improve concentration. Based on these benefits, Kuiper concludes that city governments should require developers to plant and maintain a minimum number of trees on every new residential block. That means a single citywide rule that applies to all neighborhoods.
Understand Molina’s main concern in Text 2
Molina agrees that trees can benefit residents, so he does not reject trees themselves. His warning is about municipal mandates: he says they often fail when they overlook neighborhood differences. He explains that in areas with higher housing costs or limited public-works funding, mandatory planting can take money away from more urgent needs like sidewalk repair or street lighting. He concludes that cities should let individual communities decide how to balance green space with other priorities.
Infer how Molina would respond to Kuiper’s specific policy
Kuiper wants a uniform city rule forcing tree planting on every new block. Molina says that such mandates often fail because they don’t consider how neighborhoods differ in their budgets and urgent needs. So if Molina responded directly to Kuiper, he would likely say that while trees are good, a blanket requirement for all communities is problematic, especially for neighborhoods with tighter budgets or different priorities.
Match your inference to the answer choices
Now compare that inference to the options:
- One option says Molina would strongly support the idea that all communities benefit equally and so the mandate is justified. That clashes with his emphasis on differences among neighborhoods.
- Another option says he would deny any research link between trees and mental health, but he actually accepts that trees are beneficial.
- A third says he would want the city to focus only on property values, ignoring other factors, which does not match his concern about urgent local needs like lighting and sidewalks.
- The remaining option says Molina would object that the proposed mandate ignores differences in neighborhoods’ budgets and priorities, making a one-size-fits-all policy impractical. This exactly matches his argument in Text 2.
So the correct answer is B) By objecting that the proposed mandate ignores differences in neighborhoods’ budgets and priorities, making a one-size-fits-all policy impractical.