The Official December 2015 Study Group Forum

[velvet-lou]

Post removed...

[Mint-Berry_Crunch]

Post removed...

[Mint-Berry_Crunch]

Post removed...

[McJimJam]

Post removed.

[Mint-Berry_Crunch]

Post removed...

[appind]

[+] Spoiler

Is there a clear reason about why B doesn't weaken for 76.lr2.21? it can weaken by suggesting that those who completed the program were better to begin with but perhaps i am missing something. the credited choice only refers to "many" may not necessarily undermine the argument which uses most children as evidence.

[+] Spoiler

well, if B is true it actually strengthens. If there are two groups, and we're arguing that what these groups are doing is the cause of their achievement, then it strengthens to say that the group had more did better. Does that make sense?

Think about it this way, if you're arguing with the arguer, and you retort with B, what you they say? "Of course the group that dropped out did worse! The group that stayed had more time to study chess, and improve their special reasoning.

Note that B DOES NOT compare the dropout group to the school average. They could have been worse than the group that stayed, but overall better that average, which could mean that they gained some skills from the program.

C does weaken because it at least sheds doubt on the study group. If these kids sought high GPA membership, that probably means at least some of them are above average, and thus makes it more likely that they're just better. Also, since the group that they were trying to enter is a chess group, maybe these kids in the survey were disproportionately affected by the program. Remember the conclusion for the argument implies that "since it worked for these kids it'll work for others." The conclusion is for kids in general. Also the q says "at a large school a small group of children..." That sounds like it might not be representational. Is it a group of 5? 10? 30?

Not putting this in spoilers cuz it's general. Oftentimes a "many" won't NECESSARILY weaken. However, for some of the harder weaken questions we don't need to. Notice the wording of some of the stems. "Most calls into question" and "casts most doubt" and "tends to undermine". This does not mean disprove.

The burden for weaken questions can actually be quite low. You don't need to do much else but say "well hold on." You really want to introduce evidence or a consideration that would maybe make the arguer have to re-evaluate the argument.

For these, I sometimes like to role play (and on my Friday nights, hehe). It's a good way to test answer choices. Just ask "if I responded to the arguer with this, what would they say next". If I can easily picture a retort, then it's not right.

Hope that helps a bit.

thanks for writing this, it helped me look at the argument more closely..

[+] Spoiler

B strengthening would be true if the choice B actually argued that what these groups are doing is the cause of their achievement. but it instead says those who didn't complete had lower "pre-program" achievement, which is that they were lower achievement to and the successful group was higher achievement from the beginning. so in that respect, it argues against what they are doing being the cause of their achievement, much in line with what C does by suggesting that the successful group were already high achievers.

i thought C weakens because if the children had high GPAs then they had high level of achievement from the beginning and so chess experimental program isn't necessarily the cause of their increase in achievement. so yeah, the group is not representational. my only issue with C is with the phrasing of "many children".

yep, the burden on weaken is pretty low. that is the reason i figured B affected the argument by a little bit.

i haven't seen a weaken question in the last 30+ PTs where if the stim talks about "for most people X and Y correlate. Therefore X likely causes Y" a choice that says "for some/many people X doesn't cause Y" weakens. it's because those "some/many people" were never part of the support in the argument which was only based on "most people" and these two are usually compatible. i mean this is not a perfect analogy for this question, but i guess that is an issue that's puzzling to me.

[slizerd]

wow, slizered and mint-berry crunch really dominate this thread

#dedication

We try!!

[slizerd]

I mean I'm down to enter full shitpoasting mode.
If I haven't already

This thread has been relatively shitpoast free, everybody is just so on track all the time. These gunners man!

Also I've gotten a lot lazier with my TLSing.

Gunning for TTT is what we're doing. Let go, team!

Barry university, here we come!

I'm sure Florida Coastal is still offering free MacBooks.

This was a thing?! Wonder how many people gave up their future for a soon to be outdated apple product

[coolestkidever]

.

[Mint-Berry_Crunch]

Post removed...

[McJimJam]

Post removed.

[slizerd]

Probably a similar number of people who dont retake a 140.

A guy in my Master's program is self reportedly shooting for a 150. Even if you would be happy with a 150, I don't see why you wouldn't still shoot for 180 anyways

[slizerd]

I'm sure Florida Coastal is still offering free MacBooks.

This was a thing?! Wonder how many people gave up their future for a soon to be outdated apple product

Yup, it wasn't even based on any merit info, just if you enrolled for their early start spring semester thing. They also sent out the "full tuition" e-mail like the day after Oct scores haha.

TLS should start emailing cautions to people. Instead of the 'student success story'in each school's email, they should include a cautionary tale

[velvet-lou]

Post removed...

[i_wish_i_was_smart]

Post removed...

[gamerish]

Post removed...

[nerdylsat]

Soooooo.

I've been having a really rough time at work this month and thus have gotten very little studying done.

Last few PTs have been in the mid 160s, yet I want to apply this cycle, and need like atleast a 168/9 for a T-14.

Woke up with a fever today which never happens, and haven't gotten much studying done.

Seems like I am most definitely royally fucked, unless a miracle happens. I am gonna need to fucking quit my job and take a gap year or something FML.

[velvet-lou]

Post removed...

[bnssweeney]

I've asked this about 3 times but the test is Saturday and I have no shame so here I go...

Can the Oct 2015 test LG explanations be found anywhere?

[PatriotP74]

Post removed...

[Mint-Berry_Crunch]

Post removed...

[Mint-Berry_Crunch]

Post removed...

[PatriotP74]

Post removed...

[i_wish_i_was_smart]

Post removed...

[McJimJam]

Post removed.