Logical reasoning PrepTest 158 · Section 3 · Question 2

It's unclear whether interdisciplinary or single-subject courses would be better at helping students acquire the common sense to solve problems. Perhaps neither would. This answer choice doesn't address the educator's central comparison between interdisciplinary and single-subject courses, and therefore doesn't strengthen the argument.

This answer choice describes a downside to interdisciplinary courses that this author overlooks: they're more challenging to teach than single-subject courses. We're looking for an answer choice that strengthens the argument by fixing a problem; this answer choice weakens the argument by stating a problem.

Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen

Stimulus Summary:
You can't solve many problems in daily life with knowledge from one single academic subject. So schools shouldn't require students to take single-subject courses. Instead, schools should require students to take interdisciplinary courses.

Strategy Overview:

1. Argument or facts? Always argument, so identify premises and conclusions of argument
2. Anticipate why the premises are not enough to show that the conclusion is true
   1. Causal argument? Look for answer choice that:
      1. Rules out possible alternate cause
      2. Shows same cause, same effect
      3. Shows no cause, no effect
      4. Shows the cause and effect are not reversed
3. If not causal argument, anticipate ways to fix problem with argument
4. Use anticipations to select the answer choice that, if true, would strengthen argument

Answer Anticipation:
On Strengthen questions, the correct answer usually helps fix a flaw in the argument. This is why we should try to identify a problem with the argument first. Once we identify the problem, we can look for an answer choice that fixes that problem.

This educator makes a conclusion about what schools "should" do. These prescriptive conclusions are inherently comparative. Asserting that we "should" do something implies that the pros of doing that thing outweigh the cons. Asserting that we "should" do A instead of B implies that A's benefits outweigh B's; it also implies that B's drawbacks outweigh A's.

In making the claim that schools "should" require interdisciplinary courses and not single-subject courses, the educator assumes that interdisciplinary courses' benefits outweigh single-subject courses' benefits in helping students solve life problems. However, the educator is potentially overlooking many benefits of single-subject courses (and many drawbacks of interdisciplinary courses). For instance, students might be better at learning to solve problems by combining knowledge from several single-subject courses than they are at learning the already-combined material in interdisciplinary courses. We should look for an answer choice fixes this potential problem by showing that single-subject courses do not have these benefits relative to interdisciplinary courses.

Answer Choice Explanation:
This answer choice eliminates a potential benefit of single-subject courses: that students could be better at learning to solve problems by combining knowledge from several single-subject courses. This answer choice shows this is not the case — students usually cannot combine knowledge from several single-subject courses. In that case, interdisciplinary courses are probably a better way to provide students with the knowledge required to solve life's problems. In other words, this answer choice strengthens the argument by patching up a potential weakness in the educator's reasoning.

Key Takeaway:
"Should," or prescriptive, conclusions are inherently comparative. The author assumes that the benefits of the prescribed course of action outweigh the alternative's benefits. On Strengthen questions with a prescriptive conclusion, expect the correct answer to present a benefit to the prescribed course of action, or a detriment of the alternative.

This presents an arguable drawback of interdisciplinary courses (arguable because a class that's not designed to teach students how to solve life's problems could still equip students with the knowledge required to solve those problems). So, if this answer choice has any effect on the educator's argument at all, it only weakens it.