Text 2: Everyone was aware of the pothole on Main Street, but nonetheless it remained a steadfast resident of our town for three years. Its presence gave us so many choices. Should we drivers take a different route or run over the hole and hope for the best? Was it wiser to trust the city to handle it, or should some brave citizen have jumped in to save us all? Should that brave citizen have used gravel, cement, or something vastly more entertaining—such as rubber cement? At least then we could have had a town trampoline, if not safe and smooth roads for all.
Question
Use the two texts to answer the question.
Which inference does the connection between the two texts support?
(1 point)
Responses
The pothole was a big enough problem that many people in the town thought and talked about it.
The pothole was a big enough problem that many people in the town thought and talked about it.
The pothole was a big enough problem that people across the country were interested in learning what happened.
The pothole was a big enough problem that people across the country were interested in learning what happened.
The solution to the pothole problem was controversial among the citizens of the town.
The solution to the pothole problem was controversial among the citizens of the town.
The solution to the pothole problem came about as the result of citizens writing thoughtful texts on the topic.
1 answer
The inference that is supported by the connection between the two texts is:
The pothole was a big enough problem that many people in the town thought and talked about it.
Both texts highlight the sustained presence of the pothole and its impact on local residents, indicating it was a topic of ongoing discussion and concern within the community.
