PrepTest 137, Section 2, Question 25
Principle: Only if a professor believes a student(51 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(9 more words not shown)
- AProfessor Serfin does(26 more words not shown)
- BIf Walters had(30 more words not shown)
- CAlthough the main(36 more words not shown)
- DWalters does not(12 more words not shown)
- EProfessor Serfin has(13 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Did Walters knowingly present someone else's ideas without credit—and does Professor Serfin believe that he did?
The rule focuses on Serfin's belief about knowing misconduct. A matching idea in a paper isn't enough by itself. The professor must believe the student knowingly used another person's ideas without attribution before making the official determination described. Even meeting that requirement wouldn't automatically mean the professor should make the determination; it is a requirement, not a command to act in every qualifying case.
What we’re looking for
The application says Serfin should not make the determination about Walters. To justify that using the rule, show that the required belief about knowing misconduct is absent. An accidental omission, as Serfin understands it, would not meet that condition.
Working the answers
- A
The principle doesn't require completely compelling evidence. A professor might believe misconduct was knowing even without evidence that meets that very demanding description. A therefore doesn't establish that Serfin lacks the belief the rule requires. We shouldn't substitute a new standard of proof for the stated condition.
- B
This concerns what Walters would have done about the main thesis. It doesn't tell us what Serfin believes about Walters's conduct. It also leaves other material in the paper unaddressed: Walters might have knowingly borrowed a supporting paragraph without attribution even if the thesis was an innocent overlap. B doesn't rule out the required belief about knowing plagiarism in the paper.
- CCorrect
Serfin is convinced that Walters did not knowingly try to pass off someone else's ideas as his own. That means Serfin lacks the required belief in knowing misconduct. The identical thesis and missing citation don't overcome that missing condition. Under the principle, Serfin should not make the official determination.
The answer focuses on the professor's belief, as the rule does. We don't have to independently prove exactly what happened inside Walters's mind to apply this stated standard.
- D
Walters's opinion about whether Serfin should make the determination isn't the professor's belief about knowing misconduct. A student could oppose a finding even when a professor believes the student knowingly plagiarized. The rule doesn't make the student's agreement a requirement.
- E
What Serfin intends to do is different from what Serfin should do under the principle. Someone could intend to follow or ignore a rule. The absence of an intention to make a finding doesn't establish that the rule's condition is absent, so it doesn't justify the application.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.