reducing class size (thus) hiring unqualified teachers would improve the achievements of any students completely negates the argument no? i am so lost on how to make sure d is wrong here
Wow. That took me insanely long (8 minutes) but going through in my head and fighting for the stimulus with each question contrpostived really helped.
With the others, the question could still stand but if E was that teachers could be persuaded then the whole argument falls apart because then the author's argument is non-sense from the get go.
YESSSSS. I read the stimulus, thought "Oh for this to be true, you couldn't recruit from other cities/regions" and then looked for that. BANG. No second Guessing, no doubt. 35 seconds to spare.
I honestly felt this was an obvious one. When I read the stim, I immediately sniped the assumption. The clearest assumption is that no qualified teachers would ever relocate to the district. If some DID, that would destroy the argument. I think ya'll are just overthinking it. Believe me, I never get these hard ones right lol
@ConqueringLSAT since it's a NA question, you're looking to find answers that's necessary. Usually ones that don't seem to support or strengthen right away but one the argument couldn't be true without
Yeah.. I don't feel like this is a great question. I feel like there are too many things you could pick on E for.
I latched on to the "significant numbers" part. What does that even mean? How could that possibly be necessary with the information we are given? Am I thinking about this the wrong way?
@NathanielWright If you want to reduce class size, you're going to make more classes and for those to be successful, you need more qualified teachers.
If, say, 50% of the current teachers are "qualified" and you want to halve class sizes, you now have double the classes with a quarter of the necessary teachers. I'd say hiring 75% more qualified teachers is significant.
@M1ckeymina true. the "significant numbers" part doesn't seem necessary, as long as they could relocate, it should work. But it's the best answer choice left.
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
226 comments
I got this level 5 question right and only +36 on timing! I'm so happy!
Haven't we done this question like three or four times now? I've just been getting it right because I remember the answer without thinking about it...
this question is awful :/
Yall... I've only gotten ONE NA question right in this section... am I cooked :(
this is one of the only questions that has made me. be like what the actual f
@VarenyaAlvakonda literally said the same out loud
@VarenyaAlvakonda same
this section is deep frying me
reducing class size (thus) hiring unqualified teachers would improve the achievements of any students completely negates the argument no? i am so lost on how to make sure d is wrong here
@LiviaLSAT from my understanding, d is wrong because it says "any student" when the conclusion is talking about the overall state of the school
explanation for D being wrong made sense. Thank you.
Wow. That took me insanely long (8 minutes) but going through in my head and fighting for the stimulus with each question contrpostived really helped.
With the others, the question could still stand but if E was that teachers could be persuaded then the whole argument falls apart because then the author's argument is non-sense from the get go.
Wow a level 5 and I got it right what the actual f
YESSSSS. I read the stimulus, thought "Oh for this to be true, you couldn't recruit from other cities/regions" and then looked for that. BANG. No second Guessing, no doubt. 35 seconds to spare.
POE is a game changer
I honestly felt this was an obvious one. When I read the stim, I immediately sniped the assumption. The clearest assumption is that no qualified teachers would ever relocate to the district. If some DID, that would destroy the argument. I think ya'll are just overthinking it. Believe me, I never get these hard ones right lol
@TylerJBlanchard Yes I concur.
i thought this answer was too good to be true so i focused on the other ones first and got bogged down lol
I was so confident, got it wrong. Then I was confident in BR, got it wrong. LOL like I hate this question
@Nicoled Did the exact same thing, you are not alone!!
Second-guessed myself yet again RIP
Could someone signpost to the lesson looking at prescriptive / descriptive arguments, and how this is helpful when looking at answer choices...
if you got this right, no you didn't
im baby approach once again wins
so over this section that I didn't even have the energy to crash out.
I don't remember there ever being a prescriptive/descriptive lesson. Why has this become such a huge part of things and it appeared out of nowhere?
@meepmeep I agree
correct answer almost resembles an out of scope answer choice ughughugh but it makes sense if we look at the Educator's conclusion
i don't understand how this is the right answer. How does this support the fact that reducing class size would not improve achievement? super confused
@ConqueringLSAT since it's a NA question, you're looking to find answers that's necessary. Usually ones that don't seem to support or strengthen right away but one the argument couldn't be true without
Yeah.. I don't feel like this is a great question. I feel like there are too many things you could pick on E for.
I latched on to the "significant numbers" part. What does that even mean? How could that possibly be necessary with the information we are given? Am I thinking about this the wrong way?
@NathanielWright If you want to reduce class size, you're going to make more classes and for those to be successful, you need more qualified teachers.
If, say, 50% of the current teachers are "qualified" and you want to halve class sizes, you now have double the classes with a quarter of the necessary teachers. I'd say hiring 75% more qualified teachers is significant.
@M1ckeymina true. the "significant numbers" part doesn't seem necessary, as long as they could relocate, it should work. But it's the best answer choice left.