PrepTest 126, Section 3, Question 25
Dean: The mathematics department at our university has(81 more words not shown)
The dean's argument is most(8 more words not shown)
- Apresumes, without providing(15 more words not shown)
- Bpurports to refute(13 more words not shown)
- Cpresumes, without providing(14 more words not shown)
- Dfails to establish(14 more words not shown)
- Epresumes, without providing(17 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
A class can contain math without requiring a mathematics professor. I can follow that much. A social science professor might understand the relevant statistics perfectly well, just as a course can use a historical perspective without needing to be taught by the history department.
But what if nobody outside the mathematics department at this university is qualified to teach this particular course?
That would be another reason for giving the department responsibility, even if the mere presence of mathematics wasn't enough. The dean argues against a possible general rule—anything involving math must be taught by a math professor—and then treats the department's specific request as unjustified. We haven't been told that this general rule was its only reason, or even its actual reason.
What we’re looking for
For the flaw question, I'd look for that incomplete response. Defeating one possible justification doesn't defeat every justification the department might have. We need to know whether there are other grounds for assigning this course to these professors.
Working the answers
- A
The dean doesn't claim that expertise prevents someone from teaching well or fails to help them teach. The point is that a mathematics professor isn't automatically required just because mathematics appears in the course. Other people might also be capable. That's different from dismissing the value of expertise.
- BCorrect
The view is that the mathematics department should have sole responsibility for this course. The possible reason the dean attacks is that a course containing mathematics must be taught by a mathematics professor. Showing that this reason is insufficient doesn't establish that the view lacks any justification.
Our staffing example makes the gap concrete: perhaps, at this university, the math professors are the only available people qualified to teach the material. The dean's general point could be true while that separate reason still supported the department's request.
- C
The argument never compares students' knowledge of mathematics with their knowledge of history. The history example concerns who needs to teach a course, not what students already know. C assigns the comparison to the wrong people and the wrong question.
- D
The dean doesn't have to prove that mathematics professors would teach badly to question their claim to exclusive responsibility. They might teach very well while other professors could also teach well. The flaw is failing to consider other reasons for exclusivity, not failing to establish incompetence.
- E
Using a historical example to illustrate one point doesn't commit the dean to transferring every policy about history courses to mathematics courses. The comparison is specific: including a subject or perspective doesn't automatically determine which department must teach it. E turns that limited analogy into an unrestricted policy rule.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.