Top Law Schools

I get that the stimulus says
trying to hide ignorance --> students can sense

And that E clearly links sense that trying to hide ignorance --> lose respect for teachers
Therefore: teacher who doesn't know an answer should not pretend to know.

But can someone explain why C is wrong exactly?
is it basically a could be true but nott the assumption that is needed to draw the conclusion
because their respect for teacher could be dependent on hiding ignorance but that doesn't mean it's necessarily INdependent of the knowledge they attribute to that teacher.

EX: student might respect teacher A more than teacher B, this might be because A is a better teacher or because they attribute more knowledge to A. (we don't know)..

bump

The fact that students' respect for a teacher is independent of the knowledge they attribute to that teacher is irrelevant to the conclusion. The general rule is that teachers shouldn't cause their students to lose respect for them. The conclusion basically says that, if you're a teacher, you shouldn't pretend to know the answer because students can tell if you're pretending. The assumption is that if they can tell you're pretending, they'll lose respect for you.

So let's say we assume (C) - does that do anything to justify the conclusion? Not really. In fact, if anything, it hurts the conclusion. If students' level of respect for you is not affected by how knowledgeable they think you are, then it may be possible that you can get away with pretending to know an answer because they won't respect you any less even if they think you don't know anything.