A study question asking for a next step tests whether you can apply researchers’ findings to a new decision. Read the lead-in, then name each group and what it showed. Ask what differed between the groups and how the text explains the result. A prediction follows what the study found, so apply it to the new case without making a stronger claim. Answers that rely on a benefit the study didn’t test go past the text.
Hints
- Hint 1
Compare the two kinds of park Lee surveyed. What differed between them, and which outcome did she measure?
- Hint 2
Look for why birds relied on the undergrowth. Use that reason to predict how a change in park care could affect the number of bird species.
Step-by-step
Follow the difference between the parks
Step 1Compare the parks
Lee compared parks with dense, untrimmed understory vegetation with parks where crews routinely cleared away brush. Which result matters for the blank about what managers could do? Parks with thick vegetation supported more kinds of songbirds, so the next step needs to follow that difference in bird variety.
- Step 2
Explain why the cover matters
Why would that vegetation help the birds? They relied on the thick undergrowth to conceal their nests from predators, so the cover gave them a place to hide their nests. Having more bird species adds to the city’s variety of living things, which is what biodiversity means. We can predict that protecting that cover could support more bird species.
- Step 3
Turn the finding into park care
What could managers do based on that prediction? The choice about leaving more ground vegetation untrimmed reduces the clearing that removes nesting cover. It follows Lee’s advice about allowing such vegetation to remain in parks through the managers’ routine work. Choice B.