What the exam asks
Each question shows Text 1 and Text 2 (150 words or fewer combined) and one of four stems:
| Stem (typical wording) | What the correct answer does |
|---|---|
| How would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to [a claim, finding or approach] in Text 1? | Applies Text 2’s position to the exact thing named |
| How would the author of Text 1 most likely respond to [something in] Text 2? | Applies Text 1’s reasoning to Text 2, which Text 1 never mentions |
| Both authors would most likely agree with which statement? | States common ground, usually a fact or premise both accept |
| Which choice best describes a difference in how the authors view [a topic]? | States each text’s focus or position accurately |
Stems often name someone discussed in a text (“the researchers in Text 1”) rather than its author, so check who is responding to whom. Pairs come from every subject: scientists interpreting one experiment, a researcher and a critic of the method, two historians, two literary critics. Outside knowledge never helps.
Core ideas
1. Reduce each text to claim + reason
Before reading the choices, summarize each text in about ten words. For example: “T1: plant as many trees as fast as possible, because trees cool cities. T2: planting counts mislead; funding care matters more.” If you can’t, reread the texts rather than the choices.
2. Name the relationship
| Relationship | Typical signal in Text 2 | Typical correct choice |
|---|---|---|
| Qualification (most common on hard items) | “…is right, but”, “Still,”, “Even so,”, “convincing, but” | Accepts part of Text 1 (often the data) and limits another part (often the conclusion or scope) |
| Alternative explanation | “may instead”, “another possibility”, “less… than…” | Offers a different cause for the same observation |
| Method or scope critique | “not a random sample”, “in the laboratory” | Questions whether the results show, or generalize to, what Text 1 claims |
| Disagreement | “In fact,”, “this view overlooks” | Rejects Text 1’s claim, with a reason |
| Extension | “further evidence”, “builds on” | Agrees and adds a point |
3. Respond to the exact target
If the stem asks about “the conclusion in the last sentence of Text 1”, the answer must address that conclusion, not the data before it. Many distractors state something Text 2 really believes about a different part of Text 1.
4. Match the degree
Text 2 authors usually caution, question or qualify. They rarely say never or entirely. A choice that exaggerates the disagreement is wrong even if it points the right way, and so is one that makes partial agreement total.
5. Handle the reverse direction
When Text 1 “responds” to Text 2, find the principle or evidence already in Text 1 that bears on Text 2’s claim, and apply it.
Worked examples
Exam technique
- Compress, then label. Summarize each text, then name the relationship in one word: qualifies, alternative, method, disagrees or extends.
- Parse the stem for direction (who responds) and target (to what exactly).
- Predict before reading A–D. A prediction protects you from choices that echo the texts’ vocabulary.
- Two-test elimination. Does the responding author really hold this view? Does it address the target at the right strength?
- “Both agree”: the key often sits inside a concession in Text 2 (“readily accept”, “is right to”, “Even so”).
- “Difference”: test each half of the choice against its own text.
- Timing: budget about 90 seconds, banking time from faster Words in Context items. If two choices remain, pick the one whose strength matches the author’s wording, flag it and move on.
Common mistakes
Quick recap
- Summarize each text as claim + reason before reading the choices.
- Name the relationship: qualification, alternative, method or scope critique, disagreement or extension.
- Read the stem for direction and target.
- The key matches both the position and the strength of the responding author.
- “Both agree” keys are shared facts or premises, often found in a concession.
- For Text 1 responding to Text 2, apply Text 1’s own principle.