Source 1: Requiring school districts to recycle will reduce the emissions of greenhouses gases that damage the environment. School districts have many people in them and dispose of large amounts of waste. Their participation is necessary if recycling is going to have an impact on the environment.
Source 2: Outside recycling programs can be expensive for schools that need to use their district's money for educational programs and resources. While recycling is important for protecting our planet, getting all students to follow a specific program is not easy and can cause programs to be ineffective.
On which fact do the two sources disagree?
(1 point)
Responses
There is a need to protect the environment with recycling.
There is a need to protect the environment with recycling.
There are too many people in a school district to follow one plan.
There are too many people in a school district to follow one plan.
Recycling programs in schools damage the environment.
Recycling programs in schools damage the environment.
Successful recycling programs require the participation of many people.
The two sources do not seem to directly disagree on any of the statements given as response options. Both acknowledge the need to protect the environment with recycling, though Source 1 emphasizes the necessity of school districts' participation while Source 2 brings up concerns about the cost and difficulty.
To analyze further:
1. "There is a need to protect the environment with recycling."
Both sources agree on the fact that recycling is important for protecting the environment, so there is no disagreement here.
2. "There are too many people in a school district to follow one plan."
This is not a statement that either source makes explicitly.
3. "Recycling programs in schools damage the environment."
Neither source suggests that recycling programs in schools damage the environment. Source 1 implies that recycling programs will reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, thus benefiting the environment.
4. "Successful recycling programs require the participation of many people."
Source 1 seems to support this idea, mentioning the importance of school district participation in recycling for the program to have an impact. Source 2 also implies that participation is necessary for effectiveness; however, it notes the difficulty in achieving that participation.
The response most closely connected to a disagreement is the fourth one, as it touches upon the efficacy and logistics of implementing a recycling program — Source 1 assumes that it can be effectively done with school district participation, whereas Source 2 brings up concerns about the difficulty in getting all students to follow a specific program. However, strictly speaking, they do not disagree that "successful recycling programs require the participation of many people"; Source 2 simply questions the feasibility of achieving this in a school context.