PrepTest 32 Section 4 No. 20 Forum

[mz253]

Happy April Fool's Day! This is a legitimate post...I'm asking for help!

First, I have difficulty understanding Dana's argument.

What's the conclusion? Is it "It is wrong to think that the same educational methods should be used with all children." Or "A child's accustomed style of learning should always dictate what method is used." ??

In general, if there are two "seemingly" conclusions in an argument, how to identify the main conclusion?

Second, for Pat's answer... when she says "No, not always." It's just a partial denial, right? It's kind of like "NOT ALL"?

Third, for the right answer B,

I know that Dana definitely says "NO," but how about Pat though? She said NOT ALWAYS, so it's a Partial Yes?

[yoni45]

Happy April Fool's Day! This is a legitimate post...I'm asking for help!

First, I have difficulty understanding Dana's argument.

What's the conclusion? Is it "It is wrong to think that the same educational methods should be used with all children." Or "A child's accustomed style of learning should always dictate what method is used." ??

In general, if there are two "seemingly" conclusions in an argument, how to identify the main conclusion?

Second, for Pat's answer... when she says "No, not always." It's just a partial denial, right? It's kind of like "NOT ALL"?

Third, for the right answer B,

I know that Dana definitely says "NO," but how about Pat though? She said NOT ALWAYS, so it's a Partial Yes?

The main conclusion is identified as the one that doesn't lead to anything else.

In this case, either could arguably be supporting the other, but fortunately, you don't actually need to establish which is more-so the conclusion. If they're this close, you can probably take them in tandem.

As far as Pat's denial, yes and no -- it's a complete denial of Dana's claim that it should always be done this way. Ie, Dana says it should always be done this way, Pat says not necessarily -- in some cases that might not be ideal (although in others it might be).

In terms of the answer, a 'partial no' is not necessarily a 'partial yes' -- that is, saying "not always" could mean never. What pushes answer choice (B) however is likely the rest of her statement which states that the flexibility of having both skills is "invaluable" in a world in which both are demanded (granted, she doesn't note that this is such a world, but it's not an unfair leap).

[seaghost527]

I know this question was originally posted a year ago, but I just stumbled across it in my prep and can not quite understand why (B) is correct over (E).

Unless I'm wrong, I understood Dana's point to be that a child's accustomed style of learning should always dictate what method is used (the last sentence of her blurb).

However, Pat says that that should "not always" be the case - that the way a child is accustomed to learning should not be the means of determining the method that is used; rather, flexibility is preferable.

So my problem w/ (B) - "all children should learn to adapt to various educational methods" - is that I didn't think that either Dana OR Pat would agree with this statement. Obviously Dana does not agree, b/c she says that children should the method used should ALWAYS correspond with the child's accustomed style, but how is it that Pat does agree with this statement? Isn't he only saying that Dana's idea that the accustomed style of learning be used should "NOT ALWAYS" be true? Why does that mean he agrees with the statement that "ALL children should learn to adapt to various educational methods"? Isn't he just saying that sometimes children should adapt to various methods? But (B) specifies that all children should...

Why can't (E) work?

Thanks to anyone who can help me understand here!

[Kurst]

This question was discussed yesterday in the June study group thread: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 5#p4255031

[soj]

Here's a paraphrase (the arguments have been simplified, but the relevant structure is the same) that might clarify things:

Dana: We should always teach kids the way they want to be taught.

Pat: Not always. We shouldn't always teach kids the way they want to be taught. Sometimes, we should; other times, we shouldn't. We need to expose them to different methods (i.e. alone and in groups) so that they develop flexibility. The world values kids who can do both.

As you can see, Pat doesn't necessarily disagree with (E). In fact, he probably agrees with it ("sometimes we should," "flexibility"), just like Dana certainly does.

As for why (B) is correct, Kurst's link should explain it.