PSAT Reading and Writing Quiz: Two Passage Questions

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Two Passage Questions, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for PSAT Reading and Writing.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

Question 1

1. They would argue that calculators can distract from systemic solutions and shift responsibility onto consumers, making reform less likely rather than more. (correct answer)
2. They would agree that personal tracking is more effective than policy change because infrastructure responds quickly to consumer guilt.
3. They would claim that individual choices never affect emissions under any circumstances.
4. They would argue that footprint calculators are accurate enough to replace national emissions inventories.

Explanation: Text 1 suggests that widespread use of personal carbon footprint calculators can build a culture that demands broader reform by giving individuals agency and a starting point for change. Text 2 would likely respond critically, arguing that footprint calculators 'often redirect attention away from the actors with the most leverage' - energy systems, freight networks, and building codes. Text 2 warns that when companies promote calculators, they can shift blame to consumers rather than addressing policy and infrastructure problems. The author argues the most effective agency is collective action through voting and organizing, not individual tracking. Choice A correctly captures this response: calculators can distract from systemic solutions and shift responsibility onto consumers, making reform less likely rather than more. Choice B is wrong because Text 2 doesn't agree personal tracking is more effective. Choices C and D misrepresent Text 2's nuanced position.

Question 2

1. They would agree, arguing that remote work should be promoted only for economic reasons rather than environmental ones.
2. They would challenge it, emphasizing that remote work can reduce emissions by enabling cities to avoid building and maintaining commute-related infrastructure. (correct answer)
3. They would qualify it by arguing that household electricity use never increases when people work from home.
4. They would reject it, claiming that commuting has no meaningful effect on emissions compared with home energy use.

Explanation: Text 1 concludes that treating remote work as a primary emissions strategy is misguided because household energy use often rises enough to offset commuting fuel savings. Text 2 directly challenges this conclusion by introducing a systems-level perspective: commuting requires infrastructure (roads, parking, transit capacity) that must be built and maintained. The author argues that when remote work reduces commuting surges, cities can avoid building new highways and repurpose parking lots, creating emissions reductions that last for decades. This long-term infrastructure savings can outweigh short-term household energy increases. Answer B correctly captures this challenge by emphasizing infrastructure avoidance. Answer A is incorrect because Text 2 doesn't agree with Text 1's conclusion. Answer C misrepresents Text 2, which acknowledges that household electricity use can increase. Answer D incorrectly claims Text 2 rejects the importance of commuting emissions entirely.

Question 3

1. Libraries can justify funding only by adding makerspaces and hosting local organizations.
2. A push toward constant events can reduce space and staff attention for research and quiet study, undermining a core library function. (correct answer)
3. Many patrons visit libraries primarily to borrow novels rather than to use computers or attend classes.
4. Libraries should charge admission for events so that they can maintain larger book collections.

Explanation: Text 1 advocates for libraries becoming full-service community hubs with makerspaces and events to remain relevant. Text 2 directly addresses this by warning that 'Turning every library into a bustling hub can unintentionally weaken the very service that makes libraries distinctive: sustained access to knowledge.' The author explains that study rooms fill with events, collections shrink for equipment, and staff time shifts from research help to crowd management. Text 2 argues that communities need 'sanctuaries for reading and concentration' and that modernization should protect quiet spaces. Choice B correctly identifies this claim: a push toward constant events can reduce space and staff attention for research and quiet study, undermining a core library function. Choice A misrepresents Text 2's position. Choice C mentions patron preferences but doesn't address the hub concept. Choice D introduces charging admission, which Text 2 doesn't mention.

Question 4

1. They would agree that grit has no measurable impact and should be removed from educational research entirely.
2. They would argue that structural barriers do not affect academic outcomes as long as students work hard enough.
3. They would concede the risk but contend that teaching perseverance strategies can still yield benefits alongside material supports. (correct answer)
4. They would claim that grit scores are accurate because they directly measure housing stability and transportation access.

Explanation: Text 1 warns that emphasizing grit risks blaming students for structural barriers like unstable housing or lack of study space. Text 2 concedes this risk exists but contends that teaching perseverance strategies (goal-setting, anticipating setbacks, practicing routines) has shown consistent benefits in improving course completion, even when financial stress remains. The author advocates for both providing material supports AND teaching skills to use those supports effectively. Answer C correctly captures this nuanced response: acknowledging the risk while maintaining that perseverance strategies have value alongside structural supports. Answer A is wrong because Text 2 doesn't agree grit has no impact. Answer B contradicts Text 2's acknowledgment of structural barriers. Answer D misrepresents how grit scores work.

Question 5

1. Agree, because translation apps already handle dialects and tone better than most human learners.
2. Disagree, arguing that language study cultivates interpersonal and cultural skills and reduces high-stakes misunderstandings that apps can cause. (correct answer)
3. Partly agree, arguing that literature in translation provides all the same benefits as speaking a language.
4. Disagree, but only because coding and statistics are less useful than verb conjugation in the labor market.

Explanation: The question asks how Text 2's author would respond to Text 1's claim that foreign-language study is becoming 'obsolete' due to translation apps. Text 1 argues apps make language learning unnecessary. Text 2 strongly disagrees, arguing that 'Convenient translation is not the same as communication.' Text 2 explains that apps 'often flatten tone, miss idioms, and fail in noisy settings or when speakers use dialects.' More importantly, Text 2 argues language learning builds crucial interpersonal and cultural skills: 'ability to negotiate meaning, notice cultural cues, and earn trust—capacities that matter in diplomacy, health care, and community work.' Text 2 also warns about 'subtle errors with legal consequences' in business contexts. Answer B correctly captures this disagreement: Text 2 would disagree, arguing that language study cultivates interpersonal and cultural skills and reduces high-stakes misunderstandings that apps can cause. Choice A is wrong - Text 2 argues apps have significant limitations. Choice C misrepresents Text 2's position. Choice D introduces an irrelevant comparison not in Text 2.

Question 6

1. They would agree, arguing that small-scale upzoning reliably lowers rents regardless of what kinds of units are built.
2. They would disagree, arguing that housing shortages are best solved by expanding highways so people can live farther away.
3. They would complicate it, arguing that modest upzoning alone may be insufficient and could contribute to displacement without additional policies. (correct answer)
4. They would dismiss it, arguing that neighborhood character is fixed and should never change for any reason.

Explanation: Text 1 suggests 'gentle density' via modest upzoning is 'the most realistic path' to affordability without sprawl, downplaying character concerns and highlighting subtle changes. Text 2 complicates this by calling it a 'convenient slogan' that may not 'meaningfully reduce rents' in high-demand areas, especially if targeting higher-income buyers, and noting it can cause 'displacement' through speculation without 'subsidized housing and tenant protections.' This is a qualification and extension, agreeing on more homes but adding insufficiency and risks. Choice C correctly captures this by noting modest upzoning alone may be insufficient and contribute to displacement without policies. Choice A misreads Text 2 to assume agreement on rent-lowering reliability, ignoring its caveats. Choice B uses unsupported inference that Text 2 promotes highways, when it focuses on housing policies. Choice D flips positions, attributing to Text 2 dismissal of change when it advocates enhanced upzoning.

Question 7

1. It extends Text 1 by arguing that EVs should be adopted immediately because battery production has negligible environmental costs.
2. It challenges Text 1 by shifting attention from driving emissions to manufacturing and material impacts that could undermine the benefits of rapid adoption. (correct answer)
3. It agrees with Text 1's focus on grid emissions but argues that coal plants are cleaner than gasoline engines in every region.
4. It contradicts Text 1 by claiming that electric motors are less efficient than gasoline engines.

Explanation: Text 1 argues for rapid EV adoption because electric motors are more efficient than gasoline even on coal grids, with benefits growing as grids clean, focusing on driving emissions and policy prioritization. Text 2 challenges this by shifting to 'largest impacts...before the first mile,' like battery mining pollution and larger vehicles increasing demand, advocating pairing with smaller cars and recycling to avoid offsetting grid improvements. This is a contradiction and extension, undermining rapid adoption's benefits by introducing manufacturing impacts. Choice B correctly describes this by noting the challenge via focus on manufacturing that could undermine rapid adoption. Choice A flips positions, attributing to Text 2 negligible battery costs when it highlights them as significant. Choice C misreads Text 1's claim, as Text 2 does not agree on grid emissions but shifts away from them. Choice D uses unsupported inference that Text 2 claims electric motors are less efficient, when it actually critiques pre-driving impacts.

Question 8

1. Algorithms should be eliminated because viewers are incapable of choosing content without automated guidance.
2. Platforms can design recommendation systems to promote exploration by incorporating measures that reward serendipity rather than only watch time. (correct answer)
3. Cultural variety is best protected by limiting the number of titles any platform is allowed to host.
4. Foreign films and independent releases are unpopular, so reducing their visibility has little effect on viewers' experiences.

Explanation: Text 1's concern is that recommendation algorithms reduce cultural variety by optimizing for watch time and pushing users toward familiar content. Text 2 directly addresses this by explaining that some platforms now incorporate 'serendipity' metrics, deliberately inserting unfamiliar titles and measuring engagement. This shows algorithms can widen rather than narrow choices when designed with different incentives (long-term satisfaction vs. short-term engagement). Answer B correctly identifies this solution: designing systems that reward serendipity rather than only watch time. Answer A goes too far in suggesting elimination of algorithms. Answer C proposes limiting content, which doesn't address the recommendation issue. Answer D contradicts the premise that cultural variety matters.

Question 9

1. Text 2 argues that open-plan offices reduce distractions, whereas Text 1 argues that open-plan offices increase them.
2. Text 2 agrees that open plans reduce face-to-face talk but suggests this does not necessarily reduce collaboration and that solutions extend beyond adding private spaces. (correct answer)
3. Text 2 rejects the study cited in Text 1 as unreliable and proposes that only long‑term surveys can measure collaboration.
4. Text 2 claims that architecture is irrelevant to collaboration, while Text 1 claims that architecture is the only factor that matters.

Explanation: The viewpoint in Text 1 argues that open-plan offices reduce collaboration by decreasing face-to-face interactions, as evidenced by a study showing drops in in-person talk and increases in digital communication, recommending more private spaces for genuine collaboration. Text 2 differs by qualifying this, agreeing that the study showed 'fewer in-person conversations' but extending it to suggest digital channels 'can broaden collaboration' (e.g., more cross-department projects) and proposing solutions beyond privacy, like 'meeting practices and incentives,' treating space as 'one tool among many.' This represents a qualification and extension, acknowledging the issue but adding nuance on digital benefits and broader factors. Choice B correctly represents this by noting agreement on reduced face-to-face talk but differing on collaboration impacts and solutions. Choice A flips authors' positions, attributing reduced distractions to Text 2 when Text 1 focuses on increased distractions. Choice C misreads Text 2's claim, as it accepts the study but interprets results differently, not rejecting it as unreliable. Choice D uses unsupported inference that Text 2 deems architecture irrelevant, when it actually integrates space with other tools.

Question 10

1. They would oppose it, arguing that teams should ignore collaboration norms and focus only on technical skills.
2. They would support it unconditionally, arguing that any difference automatically improves innovation.
3. They would qualify it, arguing that assessing contribution is valuable but only if a company first defines culture as specific, healthy workplace practices and evaluates them consistently. (correct answer)
4. They would interpret it as a call to hire based on shared hobbies, which they argue strengthens cohesion.

Explanation: Text 1 proposes replacing 'culture fit' (which can disguise bias) with 'culture add' (bringing new perspectives). Text 2 qualifies this proposal by arguing that some cultural assessment is necessary - teams need members who can handle disagreement productively and follow collaboration norms. The key insight is that 'culture add' is only useful when the existing culture is 'clearly articulated and healthy.' This means first defining culture as specific workplace practices and evaluating them consistently. Answer C correctly captures this qualified support. Answer A is wrong because Text 2 values collaboration norms. Answer B oversimplifies by suggesting unconditional support. Answer D misinterprets the proposal as being about shared hobbies.

Question 11

1. Text 2 emphasizes environmental control through restricting devices, while Text 1 emphasizes teaching better note-taking habits over banning tools. (correct answer)
2. Text 2 argues that students should type notes verbatim, while Text 1 argues that summarizing is harmful.
3. Text 2 claims laptop bans are unnecessary because students can self-regulate, while Text 1 claims bans are essential for learning.
4. Text 2 focuses on accessibility needs, while Text 1 focuses on instructor workload.

Explanation: Text 1 argues that the real issue with laptops isn't the device but the habits it enables, advocating for teaching better note-taking skills rather than banning laptops. Text 2 takes a different approach, arguing that laptops inherently invite distraction regardless of intentions, and that instructors cannot coach metacognition for many students simultaneously. Text 2 views laptop bans as a practical environmental control to reduce temptations. Choice A correctly identifies this difference: Text 2 emphasizes environmental control through restricting devices, while Text 1 emphasizes teaching better habits over banning tools. Choice B is incorrect because Text 2 doesn't argue students should type verbatim. Choice C reverses the positions - Text 1 doesn't claim bans are essential. Choice D is wrong because while Text 1 mentions accessibility, Text 2 doesn't focus on instructor workload.

Question 12

1. Text 2 supports Text 1 by providing additional evidence that bias training consistently improves promotion outcomes across industries.
2. Text 2 challenges Text 1's emphasis on refining training by arguing that structural changes to assignment and evaluation systems are more reliable than workshops. (correct answer)
3. Text 2 restates Text 1's argument in different words, focusing on the same solution and the same evidence.
4. Text 2 argues that promotion inequality is unavoidable, whereas Text 1 argues it can be eliminated entirely through training.

Explanation: Text 1 argues for refining bias training, citing evidence of modest promotion improvements when linked to practices, viewing it as changeable behavior rather than performative. Text 2 challenges this by stating evidence for lasting changes is 'mixed,' arguing inequality stems more from 'informal networks' and systems, recommending redesign like rotating projects over workshops, which can 'backfire.' This represents a contradiction, prioritizing structural changes over training refinement. Choice B correctly describes this relationship by noting the challenge to training emphasis via structural alternatives. Choice A misreads Text 2's viewpoint, assuming support for training when it questions its reliability. Choice C uses unsupported inference that texts restate the same argument, ignoring Text 2's differing solution. Choice D flips positions, attributing to Text 2 inevitability when it proposes systemic fixes.

Question 13

1. They would agree and argue that personal phones should be required in all classes to ensure equal access to learning tools.
2. They would disagree, arguing that accessibility tools are ineffective for reading comprehension.
3. They would partially agree but propose alternatives that preserve accessibility without allowing personal phones in class. (correct answer)
4. They would dismiss the concern, claiming that vocabulary questions decrease because students become more independent.

Explanation: Text 1 claims that blanket smartphone prohibitions ignore phones' role as accessibility tools (dictionaries, translation, text-to-speech). Text 2 acknowledges this concern but offers a nuanced response: the problem isn't technology itself but personal phones designed to compete for attention. The author proposes preserving accessibility through alternatives like dedicated devices or permitting specific apps while still removing personal phones. This represents partial agreement (yes, accessibility matters) with a proposed solution (use alternatives to personal phones). Answer C correctly captures this qualified response. Answer A is wrong because Text 2 doesn't advocate for personal phones in class. Answer B misrepresents Text 2, which acknowledges accessibility tools are valuable. Answer D incorrectly suggests Text 2 dismisses the accessibility concern entirely.

Question 14

1. Paper offers spatial and physical cues that can aid memory even when distractions are minimized on screens. (correct answer)
2. Books are cheaper than tablets for most schools to purchase and maintain.
3. Some students prefer screens because they can adjust font size and brightness.
4. Notifications are the primary reason students fail to finish assigned reading.

Explanation: Text 1 attributes comprehension differences mainly to 'surrounding temptations' like notifications, claiming scores equalize when distractions are disabled, treating medium as secondary to environment. Text 2 addresses this by arguing paper provides 'cognitive cues' like spatial memory (e.g., 'near the top of a left-hand page') that aid recall even in 'quiet settings,' which screens reduce, making it 'unrealistic to treat paper's physical structure as merely a distraction-free container.' This offers an alternative explanation, emphasizing inherent physical advantages beyond distractions. Choice A correctly identifies this claim as directly countering Text 1's distraction focus with spatial cues aiding memory despite minimized distractions. Choice B matches topic (books vs. screens) but not viewpoint, shifting to cost when Text 2 focuses on cognition. Choice C uses unsupported inference from Text 2, which discusses spatial issues, not preferences like font adjustment. Choice D misreads Text 1's claim, exaggerating notifications as primary when Text 1 sees them as logistical.

Question 15

1. Both texts argue that tree planting is the primary climate strategy cities should pursue before addressing transportation and buildings.
2. Text 2 agrees with Text 1 that trees have no meaningful benefits and should be planted only for aesthetics.
3. Text 2 acknowledges Text 1's concern about limited direct carbon storage but argues trees can indirectly reduce emissions through cooling and mobility effects when maintained strategically. (correct answer)
4. Text 2 contradicts Text 1 by claiming that most urban trees reach maturity quickly and reliably store large amounts of carbon within a few years.

Explanation: The question asks about the relationship between the two texts' perspectives on urban tree planting. Text 1 argues tree planting has modest carbon impact compared to buildings/transportation and risks substituting 'feel-good projects for hard choices.' Text 2 acknowledges trees alone won't stabilize climate but argues against dismissing them as merely 'feel-good.' Text 2 explains trees can 'enable deeper emissions cuts' through indirect effects: cooling reduces air conditioning demand during peak grid strain, and improved walkability supports shifts from car trips. Text 2 emphasizes treating trees as infrastructure with strategic maintenance and targeting. This represents Text 2 acknowledging Text 1's limitation (direct carbon storage) while arguing for indirect emission reduction benefits. Answer C correctly identifies this relationship: Text 2 acknowledges Text 1's concern about limited direct carbon storage but argues trees can indirectly reduce emissions through cooling and mobility effects when maintained strategically. Choice A wrongly suggests both prioritize trees. Choice B misrepresents both texts. Choice D incorrectly claims Text 2 contradicts on carbon storage timing.

Question 16

1. Redundant reporting and statistical checks can identify and reduce errors, making large volunteer datasets usable when validated. (correct answer)
2. Citizen science should be limited to education because policy requires only professionally collected data.
3. Volunteer misunderstandings are unavoidable, so projects should focus on a single small region to limit damage.
4. Professional scientists rarely make mistakes, so replacing volunteers with technicians would eliminate most data problems.

Explanation: The question asks which response from Text 2 best addresses Text 1's concern that 'small misunderstandings multiply into large errors' in citizen science. Text 1 worries about volunteer data reliability due to inconsistent training. Text 2 directly addresses this concern by explaining how projects handle potential errors: 'Many projects build accuracy through redundancy: multiple participants report the same observation, and statistical models flag outliers.' This shows how redundant reporting and statistical checks can identify and reduce the multiplication of errors Text 1 fears. Answer A correctly identifies this solution: Redundant reporting and statistical checks can identify and reduce errors, making large volunteer datasets usable when validated. Choice B is too extreme and doesn't reflect Text 2's position. Choice C about limiting to one region doesn't address the error multiplication issue. Choice D's claim about professional scientists is not Text 2's argument.

Question 17

1. They would agree, arguing that training alone ensures firms will retain workers and raise wages.
2. They would challenge it, arguing that AI's ease of substitution can still lead to staff reductions and wage pressure even if training improves. (correct answer)
3. They would refine it by arguing that spreadsheets caused widespread unemployment, proving that all automation is harmful.
4. They would shift the focus to education policy, arguing that only universities, not employers, should provide training.

Explanation: Text 1 claims 'the real threat is not unemployment but underinvestment in training,' using spreadsheets as analogy where tasks shifted to higher-level work, urging support for AI supervision. Text 2 challenges this by arguing AI's 'ease of substitution' differs from spreadsheets, citing pilots with staff reductions and wage stagnation despite training, as benefits may not be shared. This is a contradiction, emphasizing substitution risks over training investment. Choice B correctly represents this by noting Text 2's argument that AI can lead to reductions and pressure even with training. Choice A misreads Text 2 to assume agreement that training ensures retention, ignoring its warnings. Choice C uses unsupported inference that spreadsheets caused unemployment, when Text 2 contrasts them. Choice D matches topic (training) but not viewpoint, shifting to universities when Text 2 discusses employer sharing.

Question 18

1. It argues that libraries should stop lending physical books and provide only digital materials.
2. It suggests that eliminating late fees may introduce different harms and that improving access requires broader policy design, not a single change. (correct answer)
3. It claims that late fees increase borrowing because patrons feel pressured to read faster.
4. It agrees that fines deter patrons and concludes that all library services should be free of any rules or due dates.

Explanation: Text 1 argues libraries should eliminate late fees because they deter low-income patrons, cutting access, and dropping them increases borrowing without harming circulation. Text 2 qualifies this by agreeing fees can be harmful but noting removal may introduce worse harms like aggressive charges or reduced availability from longer overdues, advocating broader policies like generous periods and reminders. This complicates Text 1 by showing elimination is not a simple fix and requires design to avoid new barriers. Choice B accurately describes this, stating Text 2 suggests eliminating fees may introduce harms and needs broader policy, evidenced by examples of replacement charges and overdue impacts. Choice A misreads Text 2 by assuming a shift to only digital materials, but Text 2 focuses on fee policies. Choice C uses an unsupported inference that fees 'increase borrowing' via pressure, flipping Text 2's concern about availability. Choice D flips Text 2's position, exaggerating to no rules at all when Text 2 proposes balanced rules.

Question 19

1. "excitem ent cannot erase the hazards"
2. "Early pilots may have thrilled at the prospect of flight"
3. "dozens of aircraft crashed because of engine failure or structural weakness" (correct answer)
4. "designers must solve fundamental safety problems"

Explanation: When you encounter questions asking how one passage "undermines" another, you're looking for specific evidence that directly contradicts or challenges the main claim. Here, Passage 1 enthusiastically predicts that powered flight "will soon knit distant cities together," suggesting rapid, reliable air travel is imminent. The correct answer is C because "dozens of aircraft crashed because of engine failure or structural weakness" provides concrete evidence that directly contradicts the optimistic timeline in Passage 1. If dozens of planes are crashing due to fundamental mechanical problems, then safe, routine air travel connecting distant cities clearly isn't happening "soon." This specific data about crashes directly undermines the feasibility of the prediction. Choice A is too general—while "excitement cannot erase the hazards" expresses skepticism, it doesn't provide specific evidence against the timeline claim. Choice B actually supports Passage 1 by acknowledging that pilots did indeed feel thrilled, which aligns with the enthusiasm expressed in the letter. Choice D discusses what designers "must" do in the future, but this doesn't directly contradict the prediction—it could even support it if those problems get solved quickly. For questions about how passages relate to each other, focus on finding specific evidence rather than general attitudes or future possibilities. Look for concrete facts, data, or examples that directly challenge the specific claims being made. The strongest "undermining" evidence will be factual details that make the opposing argument's predictions seem unrealistic or premature.

Question 20

1. Passage 1 outlines governmental regulations for rooftop gardens, and Passage 2 supplies detailed funding mechanisms to satisfy those regulations.
2. Both passages present identical environmental benefits of rooftop gardens without offering any critique or reservation.
3. Passage 1 recounts the historical development of rooftop gardening, while Passage 2 provides a personal anecdote illustrating that history.
4. Passage 1 enthusiastically promotes rooftop gardens, whereas Passage 2 questions whether such gardens are practical or cost-effective. (correct answer)

Explanation: When you encounter a question asking about the relationship between two passages, you need to identify each passage's main stance and how they interact with each other. Passage 1 takes an enthusiastic, promotional tone toward rooftop gardens. It emphasizes benefits like cooling cities, reducing runoff, growing fresh produce, and trapping carbon dioxide. The author concludes that implementation is simply "a matter of collective will," suggesting the solution is straightforward and achievable. Passage 2 adopts a cautionary perspective. While the author acknowledges sharing "the dream of greener skylines," they immediately pivot to practical concerns: harsh rooftop conditions, shallow soil requirements, costly building codes, high failure rates, and demanding maintenance. The passage questions whether the "modest ecological gains" justify the "significant financial and logistical burdens." Choice D correctly captures this dynamic: Passage 1 enthusiastically promotes rooftop gardens while Passage 2 questions their practicality and cost-effectiveness. Choice A is incorrect because neither passage discusses governmental regulations or funding mechanisms. Choice B misses the fundamental disagreement between the passages—they don't present identical views, and Passage 2 is entirely critique and reservation. Choice C wrongly characterizes Passage 1 as historical (it's actually forward-looking advocacy) and Passage 2 as personal anecdote (it's data-driven analysis of practical challenges). For paired passage questions, always identify whether the passages agree, disagree, or complement each other. Look for signal words that reveal each author's attitude—Passage 1 uses optimistic language like "transform" and "service," while Passage 2 uses cautionary phrases like "harsher," "fail," and "burdens."