Reading comp PrepTest 131 · Section 4 · Question 13

Passage

Questions 9-15  .        A proficiency in understanding, applying, and even  . formulating statutes—the actual texts of laws enacted  . Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Legal


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Problem with legal education (too little time spent on understanding and applying statutes)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view
      • Law school's current focus on analyzing case law gives students the impression that lawyers don't really interpret or imply statutes, which is, in fact, a vital skill that law school gives too little attention to (first and last sentences)
    • Author's attitude: "vital aspect" (first sentence); "given too little attention" (first sentence); "can give a law student the impression" (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Why statute interpretation is an essential skill (legal practice involves consulting laws with not-obvious meanings/applications; tax ? example)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view:
      • Much of lawyers' practice involves interpreting and applying statutes, which have meanings and applications that are not always clear or obvious, so law students need to learn how to interpret statutes (first and last sentences)
    • Example of a situation where a lawyer would consult a statute, according to the author:
      • Business asking a tax question (second sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "does not depend" (first sentence); "clear" (third sentence); "transparent" (third sentence); "not always so obvious" (last sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Another skill statutory interpretation builds (synthesis: seeing how laws interrelate; helpful because most students specialize)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Comparisons, according to the author:
      • Law professors do more to help students analyze individual cases than to help students see how laws interrelate and form a coherent system (second sentence)
      • Studying statutes in one area will do more than case analysis to help students see how laws interrelate and form a coherent system (third sentence)
    • Author's view:
      • Seeing how laws interrelate and form a coherent system in one legal area will help students apply this ability to other areas, which is important because most lawyers specialize (fourth and last sentences)
    • Author's attitude: "would improve" (first sentence); "work hard" (first sentence); "favor" (second sentence); "would enable" (third sentence); "would then be able to apply this ability to synthesize in other areas" (fourth sentence); "especially important" (last sentence)

Paragraph 4

  • Paragraph note
    • Counterpoint (laws vary by region) and author's defense (some truth, but understanding is a skill that transfers)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Counterpoint:
      • Statutes vary throughout the country, so statutory analysis is not a good idea for national schools (first and second sentences)
    • Author's view:
      • Knowledge isn't transferable, but skills acquired in mastering one set of laws are (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "possible argument" (first sentence); "some truth" (second sentence); "could seem to be an inappropriate investment" (second sentence); "the skills acquired in mastering a particular set of statutes are" (last sentence); "important undertaking" (last sentence)

Main Point: The current focus on analyzing cases in law school doesn't prepare law students for all aspects of their practice, so focusing on interpreting, synthesizing, and applying states would improve legal education.

Meta-Structure?

Problem/Solution: This passage best fits the Problem/Solution Meta-Structure.* The author kicks this passage off with a problem — the current focus of law schools excludes statutory interpretation, a key skill set that attorneys need. And while the author never explicitly states it, they strongly imply a solution — teach those skills! While the author doesn't make that recommendation explicit, they talk about its benefits and defend it against a possible counterargument, so we should view this as a Problem/Solution passage.

In such a passage, the author's preferred solution is the main point. And since the author goes into some detail on which specific skills related to statutes should be taught, those could be reflected in the main point, as well.

*That said, you could certainly call this an Old Approach/New Approach passage, with the "Old Approach" being law schools' current focus on case law and the "New Approach" including statute analysis. We just need to remember that there's no indication that the author wants to throw out the study of case law — just ensure that students are also learning skills related to statutory law.

Last Thoughts?It's rare to see a central solution to a problem implied instead of directly stated, as we see here, but it does happen. When the author argues that an action has benefits (and defends it from counterarguments), you can generally infer that they want to perform that action, even if they never say that explicitly.

Question prompt

Which one of the Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: E

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Legal

Strategy Overview

Remind ourselves of the main point of the passage, then head to the answers, focusing on those that line up with the main point and then using our notes/the passage to find the correct answer

Answer Anticipation

This is a variation of a Must Be True question. In this question, each answer choice is, Jeopardy-style, in the form of a question. The correct answer will feature a question that the passage answers. The four incorrect answers will present a question that the passage doesn't answer.These questions generally provide no indication as to the topic of the correct answer or where it'll show up in the passage. As such, we'll need to rely on our big-picture understanding of the passage to answer this question. We should start by reminding ourselves of the main point (either by reviewing what we said after reading the passage or by re-reading our answer to the main point question). From there, we can head to the answer choices. If we can't recall the answer to a question in a given answer choice, or if a possible answer isn’t related to the main point or reflected in our notes, we shouldn't comb through the passage, searching for an answer. Instead, we'll table that answer choice and move on to the next one. If we can recall the answer to a question — even vaguely — we'll use our notes/highlights/underlines to find the part of the passage that provides the answer. If we can point to the answer in the passage, we'll select that answer choice and move on to the next question.

Answer choices

  1. A
    What are some ways Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Does the main point or our notes suggest that the passage answers this question?

    Be careful! Our notes indicate that the third paragraph explains how the study of statutory law strengthens synthesis skills, not how the study of cases and judicial decisions does so, as this question asks. In fact, the passage suggests that studying case law doesn't strengthen these skills.

  2. B
    In which areas of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Does the main point or our notes suggest that the passage answers this question?

    Nope. The main point and our notes suggest that the entire passage discusses why statutory law is an important skill for lawyers and that law schools should teach it. So, it's unlikely that the passage would discuss areas where analyzing case law is more important than statutory law, as that would only undermine the main point. Therefore, we can eliminate — or at least table — (B) without checking the passage.

    Besides, we wouldn't find any support for (B) if we re-read the entire passage. The only specific area of law mentioned in the passage is tax law, and the author uses it to show how statutory analysis is important (P2, S2), so this answer choice is incorrect.

  3. C
    What skills are common Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Does the main point or our notes suggest that the passage answers this question?

    No. Neither the main point nor our notes bring up skills common to case law and statutory law. Therefore, we can eliminate — or at least table — (C) without checking the passage.

    Besides, we wouldn't find any support for (C) if we re-read the entire passage. The second and third paragraphs discuss skills that studying statutory law develops but case law doesn't, but it never lists any skills that are shared between the two approaches.

  4. D
    What are some objections Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Does the main point or our notes suggest that the passage answers this question?

    This is a tricky answer, as our note for the fourth paragraph says that one objection to teaching statutory law is that "laws vary by region." However, attentive test-takers would notice that this wouldn't be an issue in a "regionally oriented" school, so they would eliminate — or at least table — (D) without checking the passage.

    But, if we had to check the passage to confirm that (D) is wrong, that would be OK. While the author does bring up a counterpoint arguing against the inclusion of statutory law as a "standard part of law school curricula" (P4, S1), that's not an argument against the inclusion of statutory law in the curriculum of regional law schools. Instead, the counterpoint argues against creating a standard law school curriculum with statutory law that all law schools use. The author even establishes that regional law schools are currently teaching local statutes (P4, S2)! Also, this question asks about objections that "have been raised," while the author says that the objection is just a "possible argument against" the author's proposal (P4, S1). A minor difference, but one that arguably invalidates this answer.

  5. E
    What is the primary Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E matches the stem

    (E) Does the main point or our notes suggest that the passage answers this question?

    Yes. Our anticipated main point says that the "current focus [is] on analyzing cases in law school." So, this answer lines up with the passage's main point.

    However, there are a few words in this answer that we need to back up — "primary" focus and "most law schools." The current approach to legal education is outlined in the first paragraph. There, it says that legal education "focus[es] on judicial decisions and analysis of cases," suggesting that this is a key focus (P1, S2). And this focus leads all students to believe that "the practice of law consists mainly in analyzing" cases (P1, S2). If law students are being led to believe that case analysis is the main element in the practice of law, then that must be the primary focus of what they're learning in most, if not all, law schools. The language in the passage is strong enough to back up this answer, so it's correct.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 5%
  2. B 3%
  3. C 6%
  4. D 33%
  5. E Credited 53%

Deeper help

Ask follow-ups on any step

Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.

Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion