Incorrect. The stimulus actually says that the objection is correct about the length of time schools were closed in the nineteenth century: three months. The point is that the people making the objection haven't considered the reason for closing the schools, not that they are mistaken about how long schools were closed for.

This is a tricky answer choice. It's true that the author rejects one specific objection that appeals to history. But this isn't the same as questioning the value of historical information in general in debates over current policies. Notice that the author doesn't reject the objection by denying that historical information is relevant, but by providing more historical information. So this is incorrect.

This is correct. The author provides additional information about the reason for the 19th-century practice of closing schools for three months during the summer, and then suggests that the real "tradition" underlying this involves adjusting the length of the school year based on economic demands, not keeping three months as a fixed length for the summer vacation.

Incorrect. The author doesn't make any claims about the motivations of the people making this objection. She suggests they are misguided in their understanding of tradition, but this isn't the same thing as claiming they don't actually care about tradition.

Incorrect. While the author does suggest that an appeal to tradition would, if anything, suggest adjusting the school year based on economic needs, the stimulus never says that the U.S.'s economic needs are the same as those of the "rest of the industrialized world," and that therefore the U.S. should bring its school year in line with other industrialized countries. So this answer choice doesn't accurately describe the argument.