Question 98·Medium·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
Urban ecologist Lena Ortiz argues that green roofs—layers of soil and vegetation installed atop buildings—are an indispensable part of climate-resilient cities. She concedes that quantifying their cooling power is difficult: temperature benefits often emerge only after plants mature and irrigation practices stabilize. Moreover, she warns that studies concentrating solely on midday roof-surface temperature can miss the vegetation’s full influence on surrounding air, storm-water retention, and biodiversity.
Text 2
In a 2023 field study of twenty newly constructed buildings, researchers recorded that roofs covered with sedum plants were on average just 0.5 °C cooler than adjacent conventional roofs during summer afternoons. Concluding that "the modest heat benefit does not justify the higher installation costs," the team recommended that municipalities prioritize inexpensive white, reflective coatings instead of vegetation-based solutions.
Question
Based on the passages, how would the author of Text 1 most likely respond to the recommendation made at the end of Text 2?
For cross-text questions asking how one author would respond to another, first summarize each text’s main claim and attitude in a short phrase (for example, “strongly pro–green roofs, warns about narrow metrics” vs. “small cooling effect, choose cheaper coatings”). Then identify the specific point in Text 2 you are asked about (usually a recommendation or conclusion) and ask whether Text 1 would agree, disagree, or modify it, using exact lines that show support or criticism. Finally, eliminate answer choices that introduce ideas not mentioned in either text or that contradict the clear stance of one author; the remaining choice should closely match the relationship you inferred.
Hints
Locate the key recommendation in Text 2
Reread the last sentence of Text 2. What do the researchers advise cities to do, and what measurement did they use to justify that advice?
Recall Text 1’s warning about certain studies
In Text 1, look closely at the sentence starting with “Moreover, she warns…” What kind of study does she criticize, and what does she say such a study fails to capture?
Decide if Text 1 agrees or disagrees
Ask yourself: given that Text 1 calls green roofs indispensable and says narrow temperature studies miss other benefits, would that author support or push back against Text 2’s recommendation to favor reflective coatings over green roofs?
Eliminate choices that contradict Text 1
Cross out any answer that suggests Text 1’s author thinks green roofs should be abandoned, that reflective coatings and green roofs are identical, or that building age is the main issue—none of those ideas appear in Text 1.
Step-by-step Explanation
Clarify the main view in Text 1
Focus on how the author of Text 1 feels about green roofs.
- They call green roofs “an indispensable part of climate-resilient cities,” which means they see them as very important and necessary.
- They admit cooling is hard to measure because benefits may appear only after plants mature and irrigation stabilizes.
- They warn that studies looking only at midday roof-surface temperature can miss other effects: on surrounding air, storm-water retention, and biodiversity.
So, Text 1 strongly supports green roofs and criticizes narrow, temperature-only evaluations.
Clarify the recommendation in Text 2
Now look at what the researchers in Text 2 did and concluded.
- They studied newly constructed buildings with sedum-planted roofs.
- They found these green roofs were only 0.5 °C cooler than regular roofs during summer afternoons.
- Because the cooling effect was small, they concluded that the heat benefit does not justify the higher installation costs of green roofs.
- They recommend that cities prioritize inexpensive white, reflective coatings instead of vegetation-based solutions.
So, Text 2 uses a limited temperature difference (on summer afternoons) to argue against investing in green roofs.
Infer how Text 1’s author would react to Text 2
Combine the two perspectives.
- Text 1 supports green roofs and says studies that focus only on midday roof-surface temperature miss other benefits (air cooling, storm-water retention, biodiversity).
- Text 2 focuses only on summer afternoon roof temperatures and then argues that the modest heat benefit is not worth the cost.
This is exactly the kind of study Text 1 warned about: it uses a narrow temperature metric and ignores other ecological services.
So, Text 1’s author would likely disagree with Text 2’s recommendation and argue that the study is incomplete because it leaves out important advantages of green roofs.
Match the inference to the answer choices
Now compare your inference to the options:
- One choice should say that Text 1’s author thinks the study is too narrow (overly focused on simple temperature readings) and that there are additional ecological benefits that still justify investing in green roofs.
- That is exactly what Choice A: “They would argue that the study's narrow temperature metric overlooks additional ecological advantages that warrant continued investment in green roofs.” says.
Therefore, the correct answer is A.