Reading comp PrepTest 131 · Section 4 · Question 14

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

The information in the Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

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

Question Type

Legal

Strategy Overview

Review the main point, and use notes or highlighted/underlined text in the passage to recall the author’s attitude, and find the answer that best reflects your understanding of the main point/author’s attitude

Answer Anticipation

This question asks us about the author's view but doesn't provide any insight into the topic of the correct answer or where the supporting information might show up in the passage. This means the correct answer is likely to relate back to the author's main point. 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 rereading our answer to the main point question). We can also review any notes about the author's attitude or any text we highlighted because it expresses the author's opinion. After doing that, we can head to the answer choices, tabling those that don't line up with the main point. For those answer choices that conform to the author’s main point, we'll use our notes and the passage to see if they’re correct.

Answer choices

  1. A
    While nationally oriented law Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Is this consistent with the author's main point or reflected in our notes on the author's opinions?

    No. The author's main point is that law schools focus on case law at the expense of statutory law, so the notion that regionally oriented law schools don't spend enough time teaching case law cuts against the author's main point. For this reason, we can eliminate — or at least table — (A) without checking the passage.

    But if we had to check the passage to eliminate (A), we wouldn't find any support. The only mention of regionally oriented law schools is when the author discusses the potential objection. There, it says these schools teach statutory law to prepare their students for practice in the region (P4, S2), but it doesn't say anything about how their curricula address case law, so we can't infer that the author would agree with this answer.

  2. B
    Training in statutory law Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem

    (B) Is this consistent with the author's main point or reflected in our notes on the author's opinions?

    Yes! This expresses a benefit of statutory law training, so it's consistent with the author's main point. And our note for the second paragraph says "legal practice involves consulting laws with not-obvious meanings/applications," so this seems to accurately convey one of statutory law training's specific benefits. So, we can review the passage to confirm that there's evidence that the author would agree with this statement.

    Looking to the second paragraph, where the author discussed the skill of analyzing and interpreting statutes, the author says that "statutes' meanings and their applicability to relevant situations are not always so obvious" (P2, S4). Training in the law would give students "the ability to interpret them accurately" (P2, S4). This answer reflects that argument, so this is the correct answer. We can justifiably select it and advance straight to the following question.

  3. C
    Lawyers who are trained Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Is this consistent with the author's main point or reflected in our notes on the author's opinions?

    Nope. Neither the main point nor our notes bring up lawyers "manipulating details of past cases." That also sounds a bit shady — not like something the author would highlight as a benefit of statutory law training. For these reasons, we can eliminate — or at least table — (C) without checking the passage.

    But if we had to check the passage to eliminate (C), we wouldn't find any support. The author brings up that the study of case law involves "analyzing past cases" and making conclusions about their "relevance to a client's situation" (P1, S2). But that's not the same as "manipulating details of past cases." Even ignoring this issue, the author never claims that studying statutory law will help people analyze or manipulate past cases.

  4. D
    Courses in statutory law Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Is this consistent with the author's main point or reflected in our notes on the author's opinions?

    Nope. In fact, our note for the fourth paragraph says that statutory law training can build students' understanding of the law, which "is a skill that transfers" to different regions. This suggests that courses in statutory law are effective, even if they focus on a narrow set of laws. Students will become better at understanding laws, and that skill can be used when they learn about laws in a different region or area of the law. Therefore, we can eliminate — or at least table — (D) without checking the passage.

    But if we had to check the passage to eliminate (D), we wouldn't find any support. In the third paragraph, the author claims that students who learn statutory law in one area would be able to use the skills they developed in other areas of law (P3, S4). The author also notes that the same would happen in being taught statutes from one region — the skills they develop are "transferable to other regions" (P4, S3). Each of these points is individually enough for us to rule out this answer.

  5. E
    Lawyers who do not Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Is this consistent with the author's main point or reflected in our notes on the author's opinions?

    No. The author's main point is that training in statutory law will improve legal education, so the notion that lawyers who do not specialize won't need training in statutory law is inconsistent with the author's main point. For this reason, we can eliminate — or at least table — (E) without checking the passage.

    But if we had to check the passage to eliminate (E), we wouldn't find any support. Even though the author claims that training in statutory law is "especially important" for students who intend to specialize (P3, S5), that doesn't mean it's not important for other students. And, in fact, the author argues that such training provides skills that can be applied to "other areas of statutory law" (P3, S4), so a student who isn't going to specialize and thus will need to be familiar with multiple areas of law would also benefit from these skills.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 4%
  2. B Credited 72%
  3. C 16%
  4. D 5%
  5. E 3%

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