CRM 3.4 Review

How do the authors of each text differ in their interpretation of the value of laws about texting while driving? (RI.3.9)

• “The Science Behind…” does not agree with states choosing to ban different types of cellphone use while “Cellphones and driving...” supports enforcing the laws that currently exist rather than writing new ones.

• “The Science Behind…” supports states use of laws as a way to reduce the number of distracted drivers however “Cellphones and driving...” implies that enforcing laws against texting and driving is impossible.

• “The Science Behind…” supports the use of laws that ban texting while driving however “Cellphones and driving...” does not support restricting cellphone use because of a lack of data showing they fix the problem.

• “The Science Behind…” implies that new laws are unnecessary because there are already bans in most states while “Cellphones and driving...” supports the use of new laws because the old ones are not being enforced enough.

Tags

CCSS.RI.7.7

CCSS.RI.8.7

CCSS.RL.7.7

CCSS.RL.8.5

CCSS.RL.8.7

Part A: In “The Science Behind Distracted Driving,” how does the author use studies to support their argument against texting while driving? (RI.3.9)

• The author uses the results of research to defend why hands-free devices are a safer option.

• The author uses the results of research to address the danger posed by drivers using cellphones or texting.

• The author uses survey results to understand how most people feel about the dangers of texting and driving.

• The author uses survey results to address how many ways drivers are using their cellphones when they are behind the wheel.

Tags

CCSS.RI.7.7

CCSS.RI.8.7

CCSS.RL.7.7

CCSS.RL.8.5

CCSS.RL.8.7

Part B: Select how “The Science Behind…” disagrees with “Cellphones and driving...” about the research of texting and driving. (RI.3.9)

• The Science Behind…” uses the research to prove how much of a distraction texting is and why it increases the crash risk for drivers while “Cellphones and driving...” believes the research on texting and driving is incomplete and inconclusive.

• “The Science Behind…” believes the research is definitive in proving that hands-free devices are just as dangerous as handheld while “Cellphones and driving...” does not feel confident that the research presented is accurate enough to create bans.

• “The Science Behind…” does not see the connection between the results of research and the laws banning cellphone use while “Cellphones and driving...” relies on the results of research to determine the effects of cellphone use on drivers.

• “The Science Behind…” relies on the research as the basis for concluding the dangers posed by drivers using cellphones while “Cellphones and driving...” believes the research on hands-free devices proves that they solve the problem of distracted drivers

Tags

CCSS.RI.8.7

CCSS.RL.7.7

CCSS.RL.8.5

CCSS.RL.8.7

CCSS.RL.9-10.7

In the article, “Family of fatal crash victim: ‘Never, never text and drive’”, select the sentence in this text where the author introduces irrelevant evidence. (RI.3.8)

• “Heit said her son was a good student and well liked in his classes.” (Paragraph 6)

• “A partial response was typed, but never sent. ‘Sounds good my man, seeya soon, ill tw’” (Paragraph 8)

• “In a split second you could ruin your future, injure or kill others, and tear a hole in the heart of everyone who loves you.” (Paragraph 3)

• “As he did, he jerked the steering wheel hard, over-correcting, resulting in his leaving the south side of the roadway, rolling and flipping the vehicle.” (Paragraph 4)

Tags

CCSS.RI.7.1

CCSS.RI.7.8

CCSS.RI.8.1

CCSS.RI.8.8

CCSS.RL.8.1

Part A: Select the main argument of “Cellphones and driving: As dangerous as we think?” (RI.3.8)

• Cellphone use while driving increases the risk of car accidents.

• There is not enough data to determine the impact cellphones have on driving safety.

• There is no data to support the claim that hands-free cellphone use impacts driving safety.

• Crashes and fatalities from drivers using handheld devices have dropped with the use of statewide bans.

Part B: Select a sentence containing relevant and supportive evidence for the argument chosen in Part A. (RI.3.8)

• “The survey saw increases in the number of people who said they rarely or never use their cellphone behind the wheel.” (Paragraph 14)

• “If there is an advantage [to using hands-free devices], it’s only because a person may have two hands on the wheel, but most people drive with one hand anyway.” (Paragraph 16)

• “This month. California’s Office of Traffic Safety released the results of a study showing a sharp decrease in the number of accidents caused by cellphone use that resulted in death or injury.” (Paragraph 12)

• We know it is distracting, we know it increases the likelihood of a crash... It just hasn’t shown up in data in a lot of cases--in other words, it’s hard to prove that a crash was caused because someone was on their cell phone.” (Paragraph 7)

Tags

CCSS.RI.7.1

CCSS.RI.8.1

CCSS.RI.8.8

CCSS.RL.7.1

CCSS.RL.8.1

How does the infographic advance the reader’s understanding of the topic presented in “Cellphones and Driving: As Dangerous as We Think”? (RI.3.7)

• It shows the connection between the states with the most cellphone use by drivers and the number of car accidents that occur there.

• It explains the issue of new drivers being more likely to be distracted drivers and which states have banned new drivers cellphone use.

• It supports the reasons why the Californian study found a decline in the number of deaths caused by drivers who were using hands-free or handheld devices.

• It provides rationale for why some states have a higher number of accidents that result in fatalities due to handheld and hands-free cellphone use compared to other states.

Tags

CCSS.RI.7.7

CCSS.RI.8.7

CCSS.RL.6.7

CCSS.RL.7.7

CCSS.RL.8.7

Select two limitations that occur from using the infographic to present information on texting while driving. (RI.3.7)

• Readers can not use the information to determine what the actual laws are in each specific state.

• Readers may become confused by too much information about the different types of laws on texting while driving.

• Readers may misunderstand the information provided regarding how states address the problem of texting while driving.

• Readers are presented with a limited amount of information and that creates an understanding of how complex the issue of texting while driving is.

• Readers may not realize that there is a connection between how states address texting while driving based on which states have similar bans.

Tags

CCSS.RI.7.7

CCSS.RI.8.7

CCSS.RI.9-10.7

CCSS.RL.7.7

CCSS.RL.8.7

Select an advantage of using this infographic to present information about texting while driving. (RI.3.7)

• It provides a map to show which states are the worst for drivers who engage in inappropriate cellphone use.

• It uses a visual format to provide information on the differences of each state’s efforts to control texting while driving.

• It provides visual comparisons to help the reader understand how bans have affected the amount of accidents by drivers who text in each state.

• It provides a timeline to help understand when each state’s bans were implemented to explain how long texting while driving has been an issue.

Tags

CCSS.RI.7.7

CCSS.RI.8.7

CCSS.RI.9-10.7

CCSS.RL.7.7

CCSS.RL.8.7