LR Bible p. 208-209 question

User avatar
BigA
Posts: 448
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:22 am

LR Bible p. 208-209 question

Postby BigA » Mon Aug 02, 2010 9:27 pm

I'm wondering if someone could expand on Powerscore's explanation of why "D" is wrong. It says this is a shell game answer, but I never confused dropouts with graduates. To me "D" seems like a good alternative explanation: With these new placement offices, graduates have better job prospects and there is more incentive for kids to finish school. Hence the lower dropout rate. I wish the book explained why this is incorrect.

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: LR Bible p. 208-209 question

Postby Knock » Mon Aug 02, 2010 9:29 pm

What's the question? I don't have my LR Bible handy.

User avatar
BigA
Posts: 448
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:22 am

Re: LR Bible p. 208-209 question

Postby BigA » Mon Aug 02, 2010 9:40 pm

Dec. 1999, section 2 #11

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: LR Bible p. 208-209 question

Postby Knock » Mon Aug 02, 2010 9:54 pm

BigA wrote:Dec. 1999, section 2 #11


Post it here or PM to me, I don't have any of my LSAT material with me but I can try and help you out.

Skyhook
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 11:30 am

Re: LR Bible p. 208-209 question

Postby Skyhook » Mon Aug 02, 2010 10:22 pm

D) says high schools have established placement offices to assist graduates.
So, it does move the goalposts and take about graduates.
But also, it doesn't say the offices are so successful that significantly more graduates are getting jobs, thereby accounting for the significant decrease in drop-out rate as those students stick around to get the help.

I think it's a combination of both factors: D doesn't focus on the drop-outs and it isn't compelling anyway.

User avatar
3|ink
Posts: 7331
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:23 pm

Re: LR Bible p. 208-209 question

Postby 3|ink » Mon Aug 02, 2010 10:57 pm

Skyhook wrote:D) says high schools have established placement offices to assist graduates.
So, it does move the goalposts and take about graduates.
But also, it doesn't say the offices are so successful that significantly more graduates are getting jobs, thereby accounting for the significant decrease in drop-out rate as those students stick around to get the help.

I think it's a combination of both factors: D doesn't focus on the drop-outs and it isn't compelling anyway.


D may appear to offer an alternate cause, but it does not. As the book, says, D talks about graduates while the stimulus talks about dropouts. Moreover, we're looking for a reason as to why the dropout rate has reduced. Focus on the first sentence of the stimulus. How would D affect that? Dropouts leave to find employment. As far as we know (based on the stimulus), there is no trouble finding employment. Thus, staying in school to take advantage of a post-graduate placement offer wouldn't do much to weaken the force of the argument.

User avatar
BigA
Posts: 448
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:22 am

Re: LR Bible p. 208-209 question

Postby BigA » Tue Aug 03, 2010 1:20 am

Skyhook wrote:D) says high schools have established placement offices to assist graduates.
So, it does move the goalposts and take about graduates.
But also, it doesn't say the offices are so successful that significantly more graduates are getting jobs, thereby accounting for the significant decrease in drop-out rate as those students stick around to get the help.

I think it's a combination of both factors: D doesn't focus on the drop-outs and it isn't compelling anyway.


I kinda thought of this as I was typing. You have to make a bit of an assumption, but I don't think it's much of a leap to say that assisting graduates in obtaining employment will improve their job prospects and create more incentive to graduate. So at the very least I think it's kinda dirty

I still don't see how it's a shell game. The info about the graduates affects the would-be dropouts.

User avatar
3|ink
Posts: 7331
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:23 pm

Re: LR Bible p. 208-209 question

Postby 3|ink » Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:22 am

BigA wrote:
Skyhook wrote:D) says high schools have established placement offices to assist graduates.
So, it does move the goalposts and take about graduates.
But also, it doesn't say the offices are so successful that significantly more graduates are getting jobs, thereby accounting for the significant decrease in drop-out rate as those students stick around to get the help.

I think it's a combination of both factors: D doesn't focus on the drop-outs and it isn't compelling anyway.


I kinda thought of this as I was typing. You have to make a bit of an assumption, but I don't think it's much of a leap to say that assisting graduates in obtaining employment will improve their job prospects and create more incentive to graduate. So at the very least I think it's kinda dirty

I still don't see how it's a shell game. The info about the graduates affects the would-be dropouts.


Logically speaking, do we have any reason to believe that increasing job prospects would deter people who feel they are doing poorly in school from dropping out? Based on the stimulus, we don't. Based on the stimulus, we have no reason to believe that these drop-outs have a hard time finding work. Therefore, we have no reason to believe that they want, or even need the placement program to help them find jobs.

Skyhook
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 11:30 am

Re: LR Bible p. 208-209 question

Postby Skyhook » Tue Aug 03, 2010 10:02 am

Logically speaking, do we have any reason to believe that increasing job prospects would deter people who feel they are doing poorly in school from dropping out? Based on the stimulus, we don't. Based on the stimulus, we have no reason to believe that these drop-outs have a hard time finding work. Therefore, we have no reason to believe that they want, or even need the placement program to help them find jobs.


Totally agree. The drop-outs do so and get a job. The best reason for them to stay is that is harder to get a job.
Powerscore is basically saying you can discount D because it doesn't address drop-outs, only graduates.
If we are going to attack the argument we need to look specifically at drop-outs.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: #gobroncos, bigv, gaandrsn, Google [Bot], GurleyGurleyGone, jonny27, Majestic-12 [Bot], mrgstephe, ngogirl12 and 14 guests