Cross-Text Connections
Craft and Structure is about 28% of the Reading and Writing section (13–15 of 54 questions), and Cross-Text Connections is one of its three skills. You read Text 1 and Text 2, then answer a question about the relationship between them, most often how the author of Text 2 would respond to Text 1.
What the question asks
Two short texts are about the same topic. Text 1 gives one view; Text 2 gives a second view, often from a different writer. The question asks you to connect them. In the most common type, you imagine that the author of Text 2 has read Text 1 and decide how that author would react. In the second type, you look for a statement that both authors would accept.
| Question | What to find |
|---|---|
| How would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to Text 1? | Text 2’s position on Text 1’s claim |
| Both authors would most likely agree that… | an idea that is supported by both texts |
| Which choice describes the relationship? | support, challenge, or a limit placed on the claim |
A reliable routine
Do not read the choices first. Read Text 1 and say its main claim in a few words. Then read Text 2 and say its main point in a few words. Next, name the relationship in plain words. Only then read the four choices and pick the one that matches your prediction. Because the correct choice is built from what the texts say, you should be able to point to a sentence in each text.
The four common relationships
Text 2 can support Text 1 and add evidence. It can accept the claim but limit it (a concession followed by “but”). It can challenge the claim and offer a different explanation. Or it can look at another side of the same topic, so that the two authors share common ground. Signal words help: “however”, “although” and “yet” point to a limit or a challenge; “also” and “indeed” point to support.
| Relationship | Text 2 says… | Example signal |
|---|---|---|
| Support | yes, and here is more evidence | also, indeed, in fact |
| Qualify | yes, but only partly | but, although, yet |
| Challenge | no, a different explanation fits better | however, instead, rather |
| Common ground | a different focus, same basic idea | both texts mention it |
How would the author of Text 2 respond?
Use only what Text 2 says. The right choice describes a reaction that fits Text 2’s own point of view. Wrong choices copy Text 1’s view, go further than Text 2 does (“completely wrong”, “always”), or describe something neither author said. A good choice often uses careful words such as “suggest”, “may” or “would add that”.
What would both authors accept?
For this type, the answer must be true for both texts. Check each choice against Text 1 and then against Text 2. A statement that only one text supports is a trap, even if it is true in that text. The right answer is often more general than either text: it names the idea that the two examples have in common.
Historian Kamila Rakhimova argues that the cities of the ancient Silk Road grew wealthy mainly by selling silk. In her view, demand for silk cloth in distant markets was so strong that it shaped the whole economy of the oasis towns along the route.
Archaeologist Timur Sadikov has studied the market quarters of several oasis towns. His team found workshops for glass, metalwork and pottery, as well as storehouses for grain and inns for travelers. He concludes that the towns earned their living from many goods and services, not from one product.
- By agreeing that silk was the most important product because distant markets wanted it
- By arguing that the evidence from the market quarters points to several sources of wealth
- By claiming that the oasis towns were not wealthy at all
- By suggesting that silk was sold only in towns that also had glass workshops
- Text 1: the towns became rich mainly through silk.
- Text 2: workshops, storehouses and inns show many goods and services; one product is not the cause.
- Relationship: challenge. Text 2 disagrees with “mainly silk” and offers a different explanation.
- Choice B matches. A repeats Text 1’s view, C goes too far (Text 2 says the towns earned a living), and D mixes two details that are not connected.
Neuroscientist Laylo Ergasheva suggests that during sleep the brain replays the events of the day, which strengthens new memories. She notes that students who sleep after studying often recall more of the material than students who study and then stay awake.
Psychologist Anvar Qodirov asked volunteers to learn a list of words. The next day, volunteers who had gone to sleep soon after learning remembered more words than volunteers who had spent the same time awake. He adds that the size of the effect varied from person to person.
- sleeping soon after learning can help people remember what they learned
- students should study only at night
- the brain replays events only while a person is awake
- the effect of sleep on memory is the same for everyone
- Text 1: sleep after studying strengthens memories; students who sleep recall more.
- Text 2: volunteers who slept soon after learning remembered more words.
- Common ground: sleeping after learning goes with better memory.
- Choices B and C are not stated by either text (C is the opposite of Text 1), and D contradicts Text 2, which says the effect varied.
Urban planner Gulnora Abdullaeva claims that replacing diesel buses with electric buses will cut air pollution in the city center. Electric buses produce no exhaust, she writes, so the streets where people walk and shop will have cleaner air.
Energy analyst Botir Haydarov agrees that electric buses will clean the air at street level. However, he points out that the electricity must come from somewhere. If it comes from plants that burn coal, he writes, the pollution moves to another place, so cities should also look at how their electricity is made.
- By rejecting the claim, because electric buses cannot work in a city center
- By accepting that the claim is true for the streets but adding a condition about how the electricity is produced
- By saying that diesel buses should be kept because they are cheaper
- By repeating the claim without adding anything to it
- Text 1: electric buses give cleaner air in the city center.
- Text 2: agrees about street level (“agrees that…”), then “However” adds that the electricity source matters.
- Relationship: qualify. Text 2 accepts part of the claim and limits it.
- Choice B is the only one that has both parts. A rejects the claim completely, and C and D describe things Text 2 does not say.
- Choosing Text 1’s view for a Text 2 questionThe question asks about the author of Text 2. If a choice only repeats Text 1, it is almost always wrong.
- Choosing an extreme reactionWords like “completely”, “always”, “never” or “proves” are rarely right. Most authors in these pairs limit, add to, or gently challenge a claim.
- Missing a concessionWhen Text 2 begins with “agrees that…” or “although…”, it accepts part of Text 1. Look for the word that turns the sentence (“but”, “however”).
- Picking a statement from only one textFor “both authors agree”, check every choice against Text 1 and Text 2. If one text does not support it, cross it out.
- Using what you know instead of what the texts sayA choice can be true in real life and still be wrong, because the texts never say it. Stay inside the texts.
- Mixing up the two authorsLabel each idea with 1 or 2 as you read. Many wrong choices swap who said what.