PrepTest 154, Section 1, Question 8
Statistics teachers often debate whether to teach the(75 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(5 more words not shown)
- Astudents should not(16 more words not shown)
- Bstatistics should be(9 more words not shown)
- Cstatistics teachers should(15 more words not shown)
- Dusers of statistics(14 more words not shown)
- Estatisticians do not(13 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Do I need to build the car before I can drive it? No. I need to know how to use it.
That's the distinction the author wants us to carry over to statistics. Learning the mathematical theory behind a statistical method corresponds to learning how to build the car. Learning to use that method on a real problem corresponds to learning how to drive.
Which kind of class is better? My first reaction is that it depends on the class's purpose. A class about mathematical theory might reasonably emphasize theory; a class for people applying statistics might emphasize use. Almost all these courses emphasize the theory and give practical use only leftover time. If the students mainly need to use statistics, that can seem backwards. Still, the passage is building a particular comparison, and its final sentence tells us exactly which part to complete.
What we’re looking for
Ordinary drivers don't need construction knowledge to drive. Transfer that relationship across: ordinary users of statistics don't need to understand the underlying theory to solve real problems. We're completing that claim about what knowledge is required for use. Advice about which class to take or how teachers should allocate time may be related, but it won't necessarily finish this sentence.
Working the answers
- A
We wondered about a class's purpose while reading, but the author doesn't argue that teachers should never presume students have a particular goal. The unfinished comparison concerns whether theoretical knowledge is required for practical use. A leaves both sides of that relationship out.
- B
Whether statistics should be classified separately from mathematics is a different question. We could treat statistics as part of mathematics and still distinguish understanding its theory from applying a statistical method. The analogy doesn't establish a boundary between academic disciplines.
- C
This sounds like reasonable teaching advice, and it is closer to the topic than A or B. But it doesn't complete the relationship the author has set up. Which skills do these students need—underlying theory, practical application, or both? C doesn't say.
The final sentence gives us something more specific than “teach useful skills”: knowing how to build the car isn't required for driving it. We need the matching claim that knowing the theory isn't required for using statistics.
- DCorrect
Users of statistics correspond to drivers. Understanding the underlying theory corresponds to knowing how to build the car. Solving real problems corresponds to driving. D keeps all three roles and says the first kind of knowledge isn't required for the practical task, just as in the car example.
- E
This changes the people and the task. The analogy concerns learners using statistics, not statisticians becoming teachers. Knowing students' needs also isn't the counterpart of knowing the underlying theory. E doesn't preserve the relationship we're supposed to complete.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.