LSAT 106 – Section 3 – Question 11

LSAT 106 - Section 3 - Question 11

June 1999

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Request new explanation

Target time: 2:06

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT106 S3 Q11
+LR
Weaken +Weak
Math +Math
A
6%
164
B
12%
163
C
72%
168
D
4%
162
E
5%
164
144
156
168
 +Harder 148.198 +SubsectionMedium

A rise in the percentage of all 18-year-olds who were recruited by the armed services of a small republic between 1980 and 1986 correlates with a rise in the percentage of young people who dropped out of high school in that republic. Since 18-year-olds in the republic are generally either high school graduates or high school dropouts, the correlation leads to the conclusion that the republic’s recruitment rates for 18-year-olds depend substantially on recruitment rates for high school dropouts.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that a small republic’s military recruitment rate for 18-year-olds is largely dependent on the recruitment rate for high school dropouts. This hypothesis is based on an observed correlation over 6 years: as the proportion of high school dropouts increased, so did the recruitment rate for 18-year-olds. Additionally, 18-year-olds in the republic are usually either high school graduates or dropouts.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that just because the proportion of dropouts and the recruitment rate for 18-year-olds increased at the same time, most 18-year-old military recruits are dropouts. In other words, the author assumes that the correlation was caused by the military being able to recruit more dropouts, and that they weren’t instead recruiting more graduates.

A
A larger number of 18-year-old high school graduates were recruited for the republic’s armed services in 1986 than in 1980.
This does not weaken the argument, which is about proportions and rates, not about absolute numbers. The number of 18-year-old graduate recruits increasing implies nothing about their recruitment rate, which could have increased, decreased, or stayed the same.
B
Many of the high-technology systems used by the republic’s armed services can be operated only by individuals who have completed a high school education.
This does not weaken the argument because who is able to operate military technology is unrelated to who the military is able to recruit. We also don’t know how many people are needed to operate the tech: maybe it’s just a few, so they could still mostly recruit dropouts.
C
Between 1980 and 1986 the percentage of high school graduates among 18-year-olds recruited in the republic rose sharply.
This weakens the argument, because it rebuts the author’s assumption that the observed correlation implied a causal link. This instead shows us that the increased recruitment rate was not dependent on recruiting more dropouts, but rather more graduates.
D
Personnel of the republic’s armed services are strongly encouraged to finish their high school education.
This does not weaken the argument, because the domain of the argument is limited to who the republic’s military is recruiting. Whatever education people pursue after they have already been recruited is irrelevant.
E
The proportion of recruits who had completed at least two years of college education was greater in 1986 than in 1980.
This does not weaken the argument, because the argument is purely about 18-year-old recruits, who we already know are usually either high school graduates or high school dropouts. Recruits who join later, after several years of college, are outside the argument’s domain.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 106 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply