PT120.S1.Q20 > Question

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 2 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5

PASSAGE 2

Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11

PASSAGE 3

Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18

PASSAGE 4

Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

The author concludes that governments should subsidize high-quality day care. Why? Because governments should do everything possible to improve children’s well-being, and some families won’t get this day care without subsidies.

The author relies on the premise that governments should do everything possible to improve children’s well-being. But the conclusion that they should subsidize day care doesn’t necessarily follow from that. Do we know that day care is the best option for children? What if other activities, like reading with a parent or playing outdoors, are better for their well-being?

Therefore, the author must assume, at least, that high-quality day care can benefit children.

The negation is: some governments that don’t subsidize day care are interested in children’s well-being. This doesn’t contradict the argument. The author might agree that those governments care about children’s welfare, but believe they’re not using the best means to promote it.

The argument is about benefits to children, not to adults, so this is irrelevant.

The professor’s point is that families of all income levels should have access to high-quality day care, so limiting the subsidies is clearly not essential to his argument.

The negation is: no children would benefit from high-quality day care. If that were the case, the professor’s argument would provide no grounds for subsidizing day care. Therefore, this assumption is necessary to the argument.

The professor’s argument is for the government to finance day care, not necessarily to administer it. For example, he could suggest that the government provide families with vouchers to receive day care from private businesses.

PrepTest 120 - Section 1 - Question 20

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action