PrepTest 114, Section 1, Question 21
Some educators claim that it is best that(78 more words not shown)
The educators' reasoning provides grounds(8 more words not shown)
- AIt is easier(17 more words not shown)
- BIt is more(18 more words not shown)
- CIt is easier(15 more words not shown)
- DIt is easier(15 more words not shown)
- EIt is easier(14 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Will the students actually use those tools?
The educators want courses to develop a solid understanding of basic concepts and ways of investigating a subject. At first, “basic subject matter” might sound like a restriction to subjects such as math and writing. But the explanation that follows is about learning the foundations within a subject, so students can then explore more of it on their own.
I can see the benefit. Teaching someone how to investigate is different from giving them a long list of facts to memorize. Still, being able to learn independently doesn't guarantee that someone will bother. A student could have the mathematical tools and spend the entire summer doing no math at all. That's a question about whether the proposed benefit will be used, not a reason to deny the ability itself.
What we’re looking for
We're asked what the educators' reasoning supports. So keep that distinction straight: they claim that understanding the concepts and techniques equips students for further exploration. We should look for an application of that idea without assuming every equipped student will actually pursue it.
Working the answers
- A
Learning how plants and animals are useful isn't necessarily learning the concepts and methods needed to classify them. We would have to supply that connection. The educators don't establish that knowing a practical use provides the foundation for understanding a classification system.
- B
This compares how well we remember two kinds of lecture. The educators' claim concerns having the tools to investigate a subject further, not whether an interesting lecture is more memorable than a dull one. B might sound plausible, but the passage doesn't establish that comparison.
- C
Again, remembering isn't the outcome being compared in the argument. Nor do the educators claim that a teacher's personal explanation is easier to remember than something studied independently. In fact, the point of their preferred approach is to equip students to continue learning after the course.
- DCorrect
Analyzing a few Greek tragedies in detail can develop the concepts and techniques used to understand a Greek tragedy. A student can then bring those tools to a different play. That is the relationship the educators describe: depth in a limited part of a subject prepares someone to explore more of it.
D doesn't promise that the student will go home and read every tragedy, or that every new play will be effortless. It says understanding one will be easier after this detailed practice. That fits the proposed benefit of learning how to investigate.
- E
Basic doesn't automatically mean easy. The educators think a solid grasp of the foundations is valuable for future study. They don't compare the difficulty of learning many simple ideas with that of learning a few complicated ones. E turns a claim about the benefit of an approach into a claim about how easy it is.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.