Counterarguments and Alternative Perspectives Practice Test
•15 QuestionsRead the following AP English Language–style argumentative passage, then answer the question.
Employers increasingly use software to monitor remote workers: tracking keystrokes, taking random screenshots, and logging active time. This kind of surveillance should be restricted by law. Work is an exchange of labor for pay, not a surrender of privacy. When companies treat employees like suspects, they create a culture of fear rather than a culture of responsibility.
Supporters of monitoring claim it prevents “time theft.” But the premise is flawed: productivity is not the same as constant motion. A programmer may stare at a wall for ten minutes and then solve a problem. A designer may sketch on paper away from the keyboard. Surveillance tools penalize the very thinking work that modern jobs require.
Monitoring also invites abuse. If a manager can access screenshots of an employee’s home computer, the manager may see personal messages, medical information, or family photos. Even if the company promises not to look, the data exists, and breaches happen.
Some argue employees can simply refuse jobs with monitoring. That is unrealistic in a tight job market. People accept invasive conditions when they need rent money.
For these reasons, lawmakers should limit digital monitoring and require employers to justify any data they collect.
Revision: Which change would most enhance sophistication without weakening the passage’s position?
Read the following AP English Language–style argumentative passage, then answer the question.
Employers increasingly use software to monitor remote workers: tracking keystrokes, taking random screenshots, and logging active time. This kind of surveillance should be restricted by law. Work is an exchange of labor for pay, not a surrender of privacy. When companies treat employees like suspects, they create a culture of fear rather than a culture of responsibility.
Supporters of monitoring claim it prevents “time theft.” But the premise is flawed: productivity is not the same as constant motion. A programmer may stare at a wall for ten minutes and then solve a problem. A designer may sketch on paper away from the keyboard. Surveillance tools penalize the very thinking work that modern jobs require.
Monitoring also invites abuse. If a manager can access screenshots of an employee’s home computer, the manager may see personal messages, medical information, or family photos. Even if the company promises not to look, the data exists, and breaches happen.
Some argue employees can simply refuse jobs with monitoring. That is unrealistic in a tight job market. People accept invasive conditions when they need rent money.
For these reasons, lawmakers should limit digital monitoring and require employers to justify any data they collect.
Revision: Which change would most enhance sophistication without weakening the passage’s position?