PrepTest 157

[lcid:3725] Prep Test 157 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S2 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Psychologists report that children Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

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

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Strategy Overview

Argument or facts? Always argument, so identify premises and conclusions of argument Anticipate why the premises are not enough to prove that the conclusion is true. Checking to see if a common logical fallacy is committed is very helpful.

Answer Anticipation

On an Errors in Reasoning question, we should take the time to articulate why the premise or premises aren't enough to prove that the conclusion is true. To help organize our thought process, we can think about the common flaws that arguments commit over and over again. Experienced test-takers will notice that the conclusion makes a selection between two options — the twelve-month schedule with shorter breaks is "preferred" to the nine-month schedule with a long summer break, at least as far as "academic learning" is concerned. When a conclusion makes a definitive selection, the premises usually don't consider all the factors necessary to make such a selection. That's definitely true of this argument. The author doesn't consider any of the downsides of a twelve-month schedule that might negatively impact how well kids can learn in that system. Maybe kids experience burnout, fatigue, or stress that prevents them from learning as much as they can in a nine-month schedule — even when you factor in what they forget during the break. The correct answer could bring up a downside of the twelve-month schedule that the author overlooks. There's another related but sneaky flaw going on in this argument. Notice how the last sentence starts with "on the basis of the psychologists' research." That means the author thinks the following claims are supported by the psychologists' research. One claim is that the twelve-month schedule will "ensure that students will not forget their schooling during their breaks." In other words, the author thinks the psychologists' report from the first sentence proves that kids won't forget what they learned during shorter breaks (that makes the last clause a premise/conclusion, even if it starts with "since"). But the psychologists' report doesn't prove that at all. The psychologists report that children forget much of what they learned during a three-month break. They don't say children won't forget much during a shorter break. It's possible that children will forget what they learned on the shorter, month-long breaks meted out in a twelve-month schedule. The correct answer could also bring up this issue. The correct answer choice will almost certainly describe one of these flaws, so let's keep them in mind as we assess the answer choices.

Answer choices

  1. A
    relies on an unsubstantiated Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    The author doesn't rely on any assumptions about "nonacademic learning experiences" because the author doesn't make any claims about "nonacademic learning experiences." Notice how the conclusion is only about "academic learning"? That shows that the author's argument only cares about academic learning experiences and doesn't rely on any assumptions that compare academic and nonacademic learning.

  2. B
    draws on an arbitrary Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    The author doesn't draw an "arbitrary distinction between two groups." What would those two groups even be? Students on a nine-month school schedule and students on a twelve-month school schedule? Well, the distinction between those two groups is hardly arbitrary! The students are on different schedules that could plausibly affect their ability to learn and retain information! It's also worth pointing out that the twelve-month schedule is entirely hypothetical as far as this argument is concerned. The author doesn't cite any students about schools that use such a schedule. So, it's a stretch to refer to students on a twelve-month schedule as an actual "group."

  3. C
    takes for granted, in Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem

    When we see "takes for granted" on an Errors in Reasoning answer choice, the question we should ask ourselves is, "Does the author believe this, and would this strengthen the argument?"

    In this case, the author definitely believes that "a certain undesirable result" is only associated with one of two situations. The author thinks that students forgetting what they learned (the undesirable result) is only associated with the nine-month school schedule, not the twelve-month school schedule (so, only one of two situations). The author reveals this belief when they assert the premise/conclusion that the twelve-month schedule will "ensure that students will not forget their schooling during their breaks."

    As we discussed in the Answer Anticipation section, this assumption isn't necessarily warranted. The psychological research the author relies on only shows that students forget what they learned during three-month breaks. It doesn't assert students don't forget what they learned during month-long breaks.

    Additionally, this unwarranted assumption strengthens the author's argument. If students only forget what they learn in the nine-month school schedule — and not in the twelve-month school schedule — then we have a compelling reason to believe that the twelve-month schedule is better at promoting academic learning.

    Since the author definitely relies on this unwarranted assumption to make their conclusion, this is a flaw in the author's argument. We can select (C) and advance to the following question.

  4. D
    fails to show that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    This certainly sounds like it could be a flaw in an argument, which is probably why many test-takers select this answer choice. However, the psychologists' report doesn't make a conclusion about "children in the population as a whole." The psychologists' report only concludes that children in nine-month schools forget much of what they learn during summer breaks. So, the psychologists' conclusion only addresses children in nine-month schools — not all students. Therefore, the psychologists' data need only to represent all children in nine-month schools, not all children in the population.

  5. E
    claims to accept a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    The author doesn't reject any views in this argument. The author agrees with the psychologists' view that children in nine-month schools forget a lot of what they learn during summer breaks. The author also agrees with the educators who propose a twelve-month schedule.

Discussion

No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.

View all discussions Start a discussion