PT65.S4.Q13 - reducing class sizes

passim2009

http://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-65-section-4-question-13/

I wanted to check my understanding on this question vis. all of yours. I got this question wrong, however, in my blind review, I noted a necessary assumption and wanted to see if it's actually necessary to the argument or if I'm fooling myself.
The n.assumption I identified was that the quality of the teachers are more important to the quality of the education than the size of the class. If this weren't true -- if something was more influential to the quality of the education than the quality of the teachers, e.g. class size -- then I don't see a way for the argument to possibly function, however, this isn't the answer. The answer states that there aren't any available qualified teachers. So I was wondering if the assumption I identified is truly required and just isn't one of the answer choices listed, or if I'm really deluded on this issue. Thanks!

chrijani7

The question begins some background info letting us know that if we want to reduce the class size, then we would need to hire more teachers. The next sentence tell us, however, there is already a shortage of qualified teachers *in* *the* *region*.

So, the scope of that sentence tells us that there is a shortage of qualified teachers in the region that is in question. Is there a shortage of teachers in other regions? We don't know? Even if there were qualified teachers in other regions, would they be willing to come to our region? We don't know. Anyways let's move on.

The middle is letting us know that students receive individualized instruction when classes are smaller, and that education suffers when teachers are underqualified.

Next were hit with the conclusion. Therefore, reducing class sizes in *our* district would probably not improve overall student achievement.

Before we tackle the answer choices, keep in mind that the question stem is telling us that there is absolutely an assumption that is required by this argument. What could that assumption be? We need to try and figure out what assumption is involved between the support and the conclusion.

So, reducing class sizes would not improve student achievement... Why? Because there is a shortage of qualified teachers in *the* region. I mean the middle part is really just more information, not really needed for the answer. But just because there is a shortage of qualified teachers in this area, is that ENOUGH support to say that we shouldn't reduce class sizes? What if we can get qualified teachers from other areas to move to our area to teach? What if we can spread classes out over different days so students go M/W/F or something, who knows. But all we know is (E) is exactly what we need.

(E) Qualified teachers could *not* be persuaded to relocate in significant numbers to the educators region to take teaching jobs. Well yea, the author must be assuming that, because if we negate it then the argument is completely destroyed.

Negation: Qualified teachers *could* be persuaded to relocate in significant numbers to the educators regions to take teaching jobs. Well if this were the case then we can't say that reducing the class size wouldn't aid students.