PrepTest 139

Topic: Social Science

Paragraph 1

• Paragraph note
  • New Urbanists' problem with suburbs (eliminates common space, decreases civic life)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Definition of "suburban sprawl": the proliferation of expansive, less densely populated communities at the edges of cities in the U.S. and Canada (first sentence)
  • Cause-and-effect relationship, according to the New Urbanists:
    • The need for traffic to flow in the suburbs causes zoning laws to separate homes, stores, and businesses, which causes a lack of communal space to gather, which causes people to not get to know each other, which causes a decline in civic life/civility (second and third sentences)
  • Comparison, according to the New Urbanists:
    • A town without town square is like a family without home (last sentence)
  • Author's attitude: "proliferated" (first sentence); "prominent" (second sentence)

Paragraph 2

• Paragraph note
  • More on New Urbanists' problem with suburbs (economic segregation, roads lead to antisocial behavior) and solution (walkable, economically diverse urban neighborhoods)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Cause-and-effect relationships, according to the New Urbanists:
    • In the suburbs, the houses are all the same price, which causes economic segregation, which causes children to be poorly prepared for life in a diverse society (first and second sentences)
    • Widely separated suburban homes and businesses cause people to spend a lot of time on heavily trafficked roads, which causes people to act combatively toward each other (third and fourth sentences)
    • Developing walkable, economically diverse urban cities with tree-lined streets, parks, businesses, and small schools would cause people of different backgrounds to interact and develop mutual respect (sixth and last sentences)
  • Comparison, according to the New Urbanists:
    • Unlike pedestrians in a walkable city, suburban residents spend a lot of time in their cars and act combatively toward each other — replacing time to socialize with road rage (fourth and fifth sentences)

Paragraph 3

• Paragraph note
  • Opponents of New Urbanism (people want to live in the suburbs) and New Urbanists' rebuttal (true, but we should question values that harm community life)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • New Urbanism opponents' view:
    • The suburbs represent people's values and what they want (first sentence)
  • New Urbanists' view:
    • People can value what they want, but suburban values (individual mobility, consumption, wealth) harm community life, so maybe we should reevaluate these values (second and last sentences)
  • Author's attitude: "fundamentally concerned" (last sentence); "long-term social costs" (last sentence)

Main Point: The New Urbanists argue that suburban sprawl contributes to the decline of civic life and civility, so we should replace the suburbs with walkable, economically diverse neighborhoods based on early-twentieth-century urban life.

Problem/Solution: This passage best fits the Problem/Solution Meta-Structure.* Early on, the author presents a problem, at least in the minds of the New Urbanists. They have a problem with suburban sprawl, which they argue contributes to the decline of civility. Later, the author presents their solution: walkable, economically diverse urban neighborhoods.

In a Problem/Solution passage, the main point is generally the solution the author endorses or proffers. However, the author doesn't explicitly endorse the New Urbanists' position. The author provides, at most, subtle hints that they agree with the New Urbanists' view. (Giving the New Urbanists the last word against their opponents is the strongest hint the author agrees with the New Urbanists' position. The author also uses tonal phrases, like referring to suburban sprawl's "long-term social costs," that suggest that the author is aligned with the New Urbanists.) So, we'll make the main point the New Urbanists' view on the solution, and we'll need the main point to specify that it is the New Urbanists' beliefs.

*That said, you could certainly call this a Reporting a Viewpoint passage since the author spends nearly the entire passage outlining the New Urbanists' view without explicitly stating that they agree with the New Urbanists. You could also call this an Old Approach/New Approach passage, with suburban sprawl as the "old approach" and the New Urbanists' walkable towns as the "new" one. Remember, a passage's Meta-Structure is rarely definitive — often, more than one Meta-Structure will help you understand the passage's content, organization, and main point.

Causality: The New Urbanists express a lot of cause-and-effect relationships, making causality the most prominent minor Meta-Structure in this passage. Across the passage, the New Urbanists argue that suburban sprawl causes de facto economic segregation and causes zoning laws to separate homes, stores, and businesses by many commuter roads, which causes a lack of communal space to gather and causes people to spend time fuming in their cars instead of walking with their fellow residents, which causes people to not get to know each other, all of which causes a decline in civic life and civility. On the other hand, developing walkable, economically diverse urban cities with tree-lined streets, parks, businesses, and small schools would cause people of different backgrounds to interact and develop mutual respect. Expect several questions about these cause-and-effect relationships, perhaps even a challenging Strengthen or Weaken question.

Two things here.

First, note how the second paragraph is divided. There was a pretty significant shift in the sixth sentence ("Duany and his colleagues ..."). The first half discusses the problem, while the second part discusses the solution. By noting this as we work through the questions, we'll make it a lot easier to find specific information from this paragraph.

Second, the last paragraph is a bit odd and has an element we need to be careful with. It's odd because it features criticism of the central viewpoint, but that criticism is quickly addressed by the New Urbanists. So, this paragraph seems more like a side point than anything related to the main point. Moreover, the New Urbanists agree with the criticism — they agree that the growth of the suburbs reflects people's values and desires, as their opponents say. What they argue, rather, is that these values need to be reconsidered with a more critical eye, as they're resulting in bad things. The rebuttal, therefore, is a bit more subtle than just saying that the criticism is wrong.