Logical reasoning PrepTest 121 · Section 1 · Question 7

Incorrect. This answer provides a reason to believe that using a calculator to learn math can still result in a solid understanding of the underlying principles. That cuts against the argument. Additionally, it only applies to "[s]ome" students, so this answer is also a bit too weak to affect the argument.

Incorrect. This answer doesn't establish whether using slide rules to teach math had a positive, negative, or neutral impact on the ability of students to learn, so it doesn't affect the conclusion of this argument.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen

Stimulus Summary:
Calculator pro - Frees up students to think about general principles
Calculator con - Principles stick better if learned alongside tedious application
Calculators stop that tedious application, so it's reasonable to restrict their use by students and any enthusiasm for using them in learning is misplaced.

Answer Anticipation:
This argument falls into a common method of reasoning—weighing the pros and cons of a certain action. When an argument uses this method to conclude a recommendation for or against the action, it's invalid unless it establishes the relevant criteria for balancing the pros and cons as well as an exhaustive comparison of these criteria.

Here, the argument brings up a pro (easier) and a con (doesn't get remembered) of learning math with a calculator. However, it never states whether ease of learning is more or less important than the materials "sticking." The correct answer, therefore, should establish that the latter is more important than the former, since the argument concludes that the cons outweigh the pros.

Answer Explanation:
The stimulus recommends a harder learning path in order to teach a subject matter in a deeper manner. This answer choice says that weighing depth over ease of learning is the right call. Since it provides a principle that connects the premises to the conclusion, this is the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Arguments that weigh a pros/cons list need to establish the criteria by which a decision on a certain action is going to be made. Without knowing whether the pros outweigh the cons or vice versa, it's impossible to conclude whether the action is a good one or bad one.

Incorrect. Learning math without a calculator falls into the first category here, suggesting that these habits are less valuable than others, which cuts against the argument. Even then, the argument never specifically talks about value, so this answer is also arguably out of scope.

Incorrect. "[I]s often not"? That's way too weak to strengthen this argument. Without guaranteeing that this answer applies to the situation in the stimulus, we can rule it out.