PrepTest 117, Section 3, Question 1
Editorial: The structure of the present school calendar(81 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- ADuring long breaks(10 more words not shown)
- BChildren of farmers(17 more words not shown)
- CLong breaks in(16 more words not shown)
- DA change in(14 more words not shown)
- EA school calendar(23 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Most families no longer need the breaks for harvesting. Does that mean children would be better off without them? Those are two different questions. The editorial gives a reason the calendar originally had long breaks, then explains why that reason matters to fewer people now. Fine. That gives us room to reconsider the calendar. It doesn't tell us what the best replacement would be.
Maybe long breaks hurt learning because children forget material. Maybe more regular time at school would help them socially. Either possibility could give us a reason to shorten the breaks. But neither has been established here. It could instead turn out that a long break benefits children enough to justify keeping it, even when they aren't helping with a harvest.
What we’re looking for
The author wants to serve children's interests and concludes that we should remove long breaks. For that recommendation to work, removing the breaks needs to serve those interests better than keeping them. That's the missing connection we're looking for in this assumption question. We don't need to commit to a particular explanation of why the new calendar would be better.
Working the answers
- A
Forgetting material could be a reason to shorten the breaks, but the argument doesn't depend on that particular reason. Suppose children remember everything perfectly, yet shorter breaks would benefit them socially. The author could still favor the change. A offers one possible way to support the recommendation, not something the recommendation requires.
- B
This gives a reason some children might still need long breaks. The editorial acknowledges that farming no longer occupies most citizens, which leaves room for some farming families. But needing to preserve their calendar isn't an assumption supporting the recommendation to remove long breaks.
- C
Why should workers' vacations set the limit? The author hasn't compared adults' needs with children's needs or proposed an exact replacement schedule. Shorter breaks could serve children without matching the average worker's vacation. C adds a specific policy the argument doesn't require.
- D
The proposed goal is to serve children. Whether shorter breaks would serve agricultural life doesn't establish that. In fact, the author introduces the decline in farming to explain why the calendar can now be reconsidered with children's interests in mind.
- ECorrect
This connects the proposed change to its stated purpose. A calendar without long breaks would serve children better than the current arrangement. If that were not true, the disappearance of the old farming rationale would still let us reconsider the calendar, but it wouldn't justify this particular change on the grounds the author gives.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.