PrepTest 106, Section 3, Question 11
A rise in the percentage of all 18-year-olds(71 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(7 more words not shown)
- AA larger number(17 more words not shown)
- BMany of the(21 more words not shown)
- CBetween 1980 and(15 more words not shown)
- DPersonnel of the(12 more words not shown)
- EThe proportion of(18 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Are the additional recruits actually the people who dropped out?
The two rates increased together, but that doesn't connect the people in one group with the people in the other. Perhaps a struggling economy pushes some teenagers to leave school for work and pushes a different group of graduates to join the armed services. That is a possible common explanation, not something the passage establishes about this republic.
I might also ask whether recruits need a diploma. If they did, a rising dropout rate couldn't supply the recruits in the way the author suggests. We aren't told that requirement exists, but asking the question exposes the missing information: who is entering the military?
What we’re looking for
For a weakener, my strongest initial prediction would be that the recruits aren't dropouts. We need a reason to doubt the supposed link between the two rising rates.
Working the answers
- A
A larger number of graduates doesn't tell us their share of recruitment. For example, imagine 20 graduate recruits and 20 dropout recruits at first, followed by 30 graduates and 70 dropouts. More graduates were recruited, but dropouts account for most of the increase.
Those numbers are hypothetical. They show why A can be true while the author's account remains plausible. We need more than an increase in the number of graduates to establish that recruitment is moving away from reliance on dropouts.
- B
Some duties require a high school education. That doesn't mean every recruit needs one. The armed services could recruit graduates for the high-technology systems and also recruit many dropouts for other roles. B doesn't establish the broad entrance requirement I considered while reading.
- CCorrect
The share of these 18-year-old recruits who had graduated rose sharply. That is more informative than A's increase in the number of graduates: graduates became a larger part of the recruit group itself.
This isn't the complete exclusion of dropouts I initially imagined. Some dropouts could still be recruited, and their number could even rise as total recruitment grows. But the movement toward a larger graduate share casts doubt on using the rising dropout rate to explain substantial reliance on dropout recruitment. It weakens the inference without proving that dropouts have no role.
- D
Encouraging military personnel to finish school doesn't tell us how many dropouts were recruited or how much recruitment depends on them. In fact, encouragement after entry is compatible with admitting people who haven't finished. We need information about the recruited group, not merely advice given to people already serving.
- E
This concerns recruits generally, while the argument concerns 18-year-olds. A growing college-educated share among all recruits could come from changes among older recruits without telling us what happened within the 18-year-old group. We can't use that broader percentage as if it described the particular group at issue.
More Weaken questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Weaken questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.