Question 39·Hard·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
A 2018 newspaper editorial argues that the promise of telecommuting as a tool for reducing traffic congestion has been overstated. According to the author, employees who work from home two or three days a week often use the saved commuting time for additional errands that still require a car. Pointing to data from several U.S. metropolitan areas, the editorial notes that overall vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) remained flat between 2010 and 2017 despite a steady rise in remote work. The author concludes that only large-scale investments in public transit—not telecommuting—can meaningfully decrease roadway crowding and emissions.
Text 2
A 2023 academic article analyzes anonymized GPS data collected from smartphones in ten North American cities. The researchers find that in places where at least 30 percent of the labor force worked remotely on a typical weekday, morning peak-hour traffic volumes fell by an average of 15 percent relative to pre-pandemic levels. Although they detect a modest uptick in midday leisure trips, total daily VMT dropped nearly 7 percent. The authors argue that these changes rival the impact of multibillion-dollar highway expansion projects and suggest that telecommuting should be treated as a primary, rather than peripheral, strategy in urban climate policy.
Question
Based on the two texts, how would the authors of Text 2 most likely respond to the editorial’s claim in Text 1 that telecommuting does little to ease roadway congestion?
For cross-text questions, identify each text’s claim and evidence, then describe the relationship between them (support, challenge, or qualify). Next, predict how Text 2 would respond to Text 1 in one sentence, and choose the option that matches both the stance (agree/disagree) and the specific evidence (especially any numbers or study findings). Avoid answers that lean on only one detail while contradicting the other text’s overall conclusion.
Hints
Clarify each text’s main point about telecommuting
First, summarize in your own words what Text 1 thinks about telecommuting’s impact on traffic, then do the same for Text 2. Ask: does each text see telecommuting as effective or not?
Pay attention to the evidence in Text 2
Look closely at the specific numbers in Text 2: what happens to morning peak-hour traffic and total daily vehicle-miles traveled in cities with a lot of remote work? Are those changes small or large, positive or negative?
Think about agreement vs. disagreement
Once you know each text’s view, decide whether the authors of Text 2 would support, oppose, or partly modify the editorial’s claim in Text 1. Then look for the answer that best matches that relationship.
Watch out for claims that contradict Text 2’s numbers
If an option says the extra midday trips erase the benefits, check Text 2’s totals: does overall VMT go up, stay flat, or go down?
Step-by-step Explanation
Pinpoint the main claim in Text 1
Focus on what the editorial (Text 1) says about telecommuting and congestion.
- The key line: the promise of telecommuting as a tool for reducing traffic congestion “has been overstated.”
- The author says workers use saved commuting time for other car errands.
- The data cited: vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) stayed flat from 2010 to 2017 even as remote work increased.
- Conclusion: only large-scale public transit investments—not telecommuting—can meaningfully reduce crowding and emissions.
So Text 1 is skeptical that telecommuting helps congestion much.
Identify the key findings and stance in Text 2
Now look at what the academic article (Text 2) finds and argues.
- Data: in cities where at least 30% of workers are remote, morning peak-hour traffic fell by about 15%.
- Even though there is a “modest uptick in midday leisure trips,” total daily VMT still dropped nearly 7%.
- The authors say these changes “rival the impact of multibillion-dollar highway expansion projects.”
- They conclude telecommuting should be a “primary, rather than peripheral, strategy” in climate policy.
So Text 2 argues telecommuting produces a net reduction in traffic and should be treated as a major policy tool.
Determine the relationship between the texts
Compare the positions:
- Text 1: telecommuting’s benefits for congestion are overstated and don’t meaningfully reduce overall driving.
- Text 2: GPS evidence indicates substantial reductions in peak-hour traffic and lower total VMT when remote work is widespread.
So Text 2 would most likely challenge Text 1’s claim by arguing that newer, broader evidence shows measurable congestion relief.
Match that response to the best answer choice
Pick the option that reflects Text 2’s likely rebuttal: the editorial’s conclusion is undermined by newer evidence showing net reductions in traffic when remote work is widespread.
Only one choice clearly does both—says the editorial overlooks recent evidence and that widespread remote work has produced significant net reductions in traffic.
Correct answer: They would argue that the editorial overlooks recent evidence demonstrating that widespread remote work has already produced significant net reductions in commuter traffic.