PrepTest 107

[lcid:3527] Prep Test 107 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S4 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Formal performance evaluations in 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.

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Question Type

Errors in Reasoning Questions

Stimulus Summary

Professional performance evals allow people to consult reference books, so students should be allowed to use textbooks for tests.

Answer Anticipation

There’s a word in the conclusion here that should push you in the direction of quickly identifying the flaw in the reasoning here if you didn’t see it from reading the argument - “likewise.” That means the premises are establishing a similar situation in order to justify the conclusion.
Whenever an argument relies on two things being similar, it’s assuming that they don’t have relevant differences that outweigh the similarities. Here, the stimulus uses a professional setting to draw a conclusion about an educational one. Any answer that points out that the professional and educational settings may be different as far as how evaluations should be run will serve as a correct answer here.

Answer choices

  1. A
    cites examples that are Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    While three examples may not be enough to guarantee that the generalization is true, they’re certainly sufficient to support it as potentially true. If this answer were phrased slightly differently, it would be correct. As is, though, it doesn’t point out a gap in the reasoning.
  2. B
    fails to consider the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    There’s no indication that increasing test scores is the goal, so failing to consider the recommended action won’t help achieve that goal isn’t a flaw in the logic.
  3. C
    neglects to take into Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    The argument compares the setting, not the individuals, so even if the professionals were once students, that doesn’t speak to the goals of evaluations in the two settings.
  4. D
    neglects to take into Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    First, there’s no indication that students haven’t dedicated years to study in a single subject (you’re all headed to law school, after all, and will spend 3 years on the law!). Second, there’s no indication that this dedication should change the means by which one is evaluated.
  5. E
    fails to consider the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E matches the stem
    This answer brings up a relevant difference between the professional and educational setting. If the goals behind the evaluations are different, then it’s possible that the methods of evaluating them should be different. This answer, therefore, highlights a flaw in the reasoning.

What this tests

Discussion

  • Explanation 1 reply

    Started by Marissa-Avnaim

View all discussions Start a discussion