PT157.S2.Q9 > Question

SECTION 1 · 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 Question 12

PASSAGE 3

Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19

PASSAGE 4

Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 2 · 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

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7

PASSAGE 2

Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14

PASSAGE 3

Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22

PASSAGE 4

Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

A twelve-month school schedule is better than a nine-month, because children forget much of their schooling over summer, and (supposedly) this means that children won’t forget schooling during shorter breaks.

The flaw lies in the “supposedly” part of the summary. The sub-conclusion (”...this schedule will insure...”) does not follow from the support. The psychologists have reported that there is a memory loss effect during summer break, but that doesn’t mean that this same effect is absent during shorter breaks.

There’s no comparison of academic and nonacademic. The author states that her conclusion is confined only “insofar as academic learning is concerned.”

The author draws a distinction between nine-month schedules and twelve-month schedules. However:

That isn’t arbitrary. It’s relevant to her argument.
Those aren’t groups.

The author is assuming that a certain undesirable result (forgetting education) is only correlated with one situation (nine-month schedule), and not the other (twelve-month schedule).

This isn’t a flaw within the author’s reasoning. When choosing an answer for a Flaw question, we need to have some evidence that their reasoning involved a particular assumption/lack of credibility/etc. There’s no evidence that the psychologists’ data was unrepresentative.

This is descriptively inaccurate. There is no view that the author claims to accept, and then reverses their position on.

The author accepts the psychologists’ reporting, and builds an argument around so that she can recommend option B (twelve-month) over option A (nine-month).

PrepTest 157 - Section 2 - Question 9

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action