LSAT 126 – Section 3 – Question 25

LSAT 126 - Section 3 - Question 25

October 2008

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:23

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
PT126 S3 Q25
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Lack of Support v. False Conclusion +LSvFC
Analogy +An
A
6%
156
B
64%
165
C
3%
157
D
13%
158
E
14%
160
148
157
167
 +Harder 144.364 +SubsectionEasier

Dean: The mathematics department at our university has said that it should be given sole responsibility for teaching the course Statistics for the Social Sciences. But this course has no more mathematics in it than high school algebra does. The fact that a course has mathematics in it does not mean that it needs to be taught by a mathematics professor, any more than a course approaching its subject from a historical perspective must be taught by a history professor. Such demands by the mathematics department are therefore unjustified.

A
presumes, without providing justification, that expertise in a subject does not enable one to teach that subject well
The argument doesn’t involve the quality of teaching. Whether one teaches a subject well or not isn’t related to the premise or the conclusion.
B
purports to refute a view by showing that one possible reason for that view is insufficient
The author tries to refute the math department’s view that it should teach the class by showing that one possible reason for that view — the fact that the class has math — is inadequate. This is flawed beacuse there could be other reasons supporting the math department’s view.
C
presumes, without providing justification, that most students are as knowledgeable about mathematics as they are about history
History is referenced to show that the fact a class has math doesn’t mean it needs to be taught by a math prof. We wouldn’t think a history prof. needs to teach a class just because it has history. What students know about math/history is unrelated to this line of reasoning.
D
fails to establish that mathematics professors are not capable of teaching Statistics for the Social Sciences effectively
The author doesn’t need to show that math profs can’t teach the class effectively. The author’s position is that they don’t need to have sole responsibility for teaching it. Maybe they can be effective, and others can be effective as well, and others should also teach the class.
E
presumes, without providing justification, that any policies that apply to history courses must be justified with respect to mathematics courses
The author doesn’t cite to any history “policy.” The reference to history is merely to illustrate the principle that the fact a class involves a particular subject doesn’t mean only profs from that subject’s department must teach the class. There’s no history “policy” referenced.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 126 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply