A question about two texts tests whether you can use one writer’s view to judge another writer’s claim. Start with the question to find who answers whom, then put each text’s claim and reason in a few words. Ask whether the responding writer rejects the claim, accepts it only in part, or takes it further. Then check the reason, because a response must use that writer’s own evidence without going beyond what it shows.
Hints
- Hint 1
The question has Romero answer Patel. Find Patel’s conclusion and the reason she gives for it.
- Hint 2
Compare Patel’s claim with Romero’s result for a full year. Does Romero’s finding support the yearly gain Patel describes?
Step-by-step
Judge Patel’s claim using Romero’s evidence
Step 1Find the claim Romero must answer
Read the question’s direction: we’re using Romero’s view to judge Patel’s conclusion in Text 1. What does Patel claim, and why? She says higher hourly pay more than makes up for small cuts in hours and raises workers’ annual earnings, their total pay for a year. The yearly total, not the hourly rate alone, is what Romero must judge.
- Step 2
Name Romero’s view
What does Romero find in the same cities? Employers cut hours and shifts, and the typical worker earns about the same—or even less—over the course of a year. Higher hourly pay hasn’t produced the yearly gain Patel claims. Romero would reject that conclusion because lost work time can wipe out the gain from higher pay.
- Step 3
Match the reason and its strength
Which choice gives Romero’s own reason? The choice about reductions in hours follows his point that yearly pay must be judged once these lost hours are accounted for. Its words does not necessarily increase allow earnings to stay the same or fall, which fits Romero’s result. Choice C.