PrepTest 158, Section 3, Question 8
Student: My paper was not graded in accordance(43 more words not shown)
The reasoning in the student's(7 more words not shown)
- Adiscusses the professor's(15 more words not shown)
- Battempts to draw(10 more words not shown)
- Ctakes a condition(20 more words not shown)
- Dis based on(9 more words not shown)
- Efails to make(16 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Reliable statistics are required for an A. That doesn't mean they're all you need.
Read the professor's rule carefully: she gives A's only to papers whose conclusions have reliable statistical support. A paper without that support cannot get an A. If the student had received an A without it, we'd have a clear conflict with the stated rule.
But that isn't what happened. The student's paper has the statistical support and received a B. What if the writing is unclear? What if another part of the reasoning is poor? Meeting this one requirement doesn't show that the paper meets every requirement for an A.
What we’re looking for
For the flaw question, look for that shift from something required to something supposedly enough. The student treats “You need this for an A” as if the professor had said “Do this and I'll give you an A.”
Working the answers
- A
We don't know that the student is deliberately trying to distract us from shortcomings. We can take the student's report at face value and still see the mistake: the reported rule doesn't promise an A to every paper with reliable statistical support. We don't need a theory about the student's motives.
- B
An evaluative conclusion is a judgment, such as whether a grade was appropriate. There's nothing inherently wrong with using facts to reach that kind of judgment. Here we also have the professor's stated grading rule. The problem is how the student interprets that rule, not the mere use of facts to evaluate a grade.
- CCorrect
Reliable statistical support is a requirement for an A. The student treats having that support as enough to guarantee an A. But the professor could follow the stated rule perfectly while giving a B to a statistically supported paper that has other weaknesses. C describes the exact confusion.
- D
The student has an interest in the dispute, but bias isn't the problem we need to establish. Even if every reported fact is accurate—the rule, the professor's acknowledgment, and the B—the conclusion still doesn't follow. Focusing on the speaker's interests misses the error in what those facts are taken to prove.
- E
We aren't deciding whether the professor's criteria measure the paper's quality objectively. The student claims the professor failed to follow her own stated criteria. We can address that complaint using those criteria alone. A separate standard of ideal paper quality wouldn't fix the student's mistaken reading of the rule.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.