Question 35·Medium·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1 Some ecologists contend that urban "green roofs"—vegetated rooftops designed to provide habitat—offer little practical value to migratory birds. They cite daytime field surveys showing that only a handful of birds are ever observed resting or feeding on these roofs, concluding that the structures are too small and isolated to matter.
Text 2 Biologist Marta Aponte argues that the fate of migratory birds in cities cannot be gauged solely by daytime counts. Using miniature GPS tags that record birds’ positions around the clock, her team found that many songbirds land on green roofs primarily at night to rest before resuming their flights at dawn. According to Aponte, these data indicate that green roofs constitute a critical, if brief, refuge within otherwise inhospitable urban landscapes.
Based on the texts, how would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to the conclusion drawn in Text 1?
For cross-text connection questions, first summarize each text’s main point in your own words, especially any conclusions or claims. Then decide the relationship: Does the second text agree, disagree, or qualify the first? Finally, scan the answer choices for the one that captures both (1) the stance (agreement/disagreement) and (2) the specific evidence or reasoning used in the second text, and eliminate any options that contradict clear statements from either passage.
Hints
Clarify what Text 1 is claiming
Focus on the final sentence of Text 1. What do the ecologists conclude about green roofs based on daytime field surveys?
Clarify what Text 2 is challenging
Look for the phrase in Text 2 that mentions what cannot be used "solely" to gauge the fate of migratory birds. What method is Aponte questioning?
Connect Text 2’s evidence to Text 1’s conclusion
How does the 24-hour GPS tracking in Text 2 change the picture given by daytime-only observations in Text 1? Does Aponte seem to agree with or oppose the idea that green roofs "offer little practical value"?
Match the relationship to an answer choice
Look for the option where the author of Text 2 disagrees with Text 1’s conclusion and uses continuous tracking data to support that disagreement.
Step-by-step Explanation
Identify Text 1’s main conclusion
Look at what the ecologists in Text 1 ultimately decide:
- They use daytime field surveys and see only a handful of birds on green roofs.
- From this, they conclude that green roofs are "too small and isolated to matter" and offer little practical value to migratory birds.
So Text 1’s main conclusion is: green roofs don’t really help migratory birds because daytime counts show very few birds using them.
Identify Text 2’s main claim and evidence
Now see what Marta Aponte in Text 2 says:
- She says the fate of migratory birds "cannot be gauged solely by daytime counts".
- She uses miniature GPS tags that track birds around the clock.
- Her team finds that many songbirds land on green roofs primarily at night to rest.
- She concludes that green roofs are a "critical, if brief, refuge" in cities.
So Text 2 provides new, continuous data and argues that green roofs are important stopover sites, especially at night.
Determine how Text 2 responds to Text 1 and match to an option
Put the two texts together:
- Text 1: Daytime surveys → not many birds on roofs → roofs don’t matter.
- Text 2: Daytime counts alone are misleading → GPS shows birds using roofs at night → roofs are a critical refuge.
Therefore, the author of Text 2 would disagree with Text 1’s conclusion, saying that daytime observations underestimate how much birds use green roofs and that continuous GPS data reveal these roofs are important stopover sites. This matches answer choice D.