Self-paced
Proposals for extending the United States school year to bring it more in line with its European and Japanese counterparts are often met with the objection that curtailing the schools’ three-month summer vacation would violate an established United States tradition dating from the nineteenth century. ████████ ████ █████████ ██████ ███ █████ █████ ██ ███ ██████████ ███████ ███ ████████ ██ ███████ ██████ ███ █████ ██████ █████ ███████ ███ ████ ███████ ████ ████ ██ █████ █████ █████ ██████████ ████████ ████████ ██ ████████████ ██████ ██ ███ ██████ █████ ██ █████████ ██ █████ ███████ ██ ██████████ ██ █████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ███████████ ███ ██████ ██ ███ ██████ ████ █████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ███ ████████
Counter-Argument
We start with other people's argument: some people object to proposals to extend the school year in the U.S. by saying that the three-month summer vacation is an established U.S. tradition dating from the 19th century. The author then provides a counter-argument: while it's true that most schools in the 19th century closed for three months in the summer, that was because those schools were in rural areas where children needed to work during the summer. So, the author argues, the appeal to 19th-century tradition doesn't support the other people's argument in favor of keeping the three-month vacation — at best, it instead supports the idea that the length of the school year should be adjusted based on economic needs.
25.
Which one of the following ███████████ ██ █████████ █████ ███████ ███ █████████ █████████████ ███ ███ ███████████
a
That a given ██████ ██████ ███ █████████████ ████ ██ █████ █████████ ███████████ ████ ██████ ████ ██ █████ ██ ████ ███ ████████ ████ ████ ████████ ██████ ██████
Incorrect. (A) might work if we knew for sure that there were "more pressing social needs" at the moment that required changing the school year's length and overrode the traditional length of the school year. But the stimulus never says that. Keep in mind that the author isn't necessarily advocating for changing the length of the school year, only saying that one particular objection to changing the length of the school year "misses the mark" in some way. So (A) doesn't adequately bridge the argument's premise → conclusion gap
b
Appeals to its ███ ██████████ ██████ ██████ █ ███████ ████ ███ ██████████ ██ █████ ███ █████████ ██ ████ ████ ███ ██████████ ████████████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ███ ██████
Incorrect. (B) might work if the author were actively saying that the United States should bring its school year in line with those of the rest of the world. But the author never says that, only that one particular objection to doing so "misses the mark." And the stimulus never states that the "rest of the world" has "legitimate expectations" of the United States to adjust the length of its school year.
c
Because appeals to █████████ █████ █████ ██ ████ ███ ████ █████████ ██ ██████ ████ ███████ ██████ ██ ████████████
Incorrect. The author never claims that these appeals to tradition in some way mask "the real interests" at issue, or that appeals to tradition in general should be disregarded.
d
Traditional principles should ██ █████████ ████ ████ ██ ██████ █████ ███ █████ ██ ███ ████████
Incorrect. Notice what (D) maps out to:
no longer serves needs of economy → discard
So (D) might justify an argument whose premises stated that the current three-month summer vacation no longer served the needs of the economy, and whose conclusion stated that the three-month summer vacation should therefore be discarded. But the author or our stimulus doesn't say either of these things. The author states that in the past, the three-month vacation served certain economic needs, but doesn't affirm or deny whether it serves any economic needs at the moment. And the author's conclusion is not that we should definitely discard the three-month vacation, only that one particular objection to discarding it "misses the mark."
e
The actual tradition ████████ ██ █ █████ ████████ ███ ██ ██████████ ██████████ ████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ██████████ ████████ ████ █████████
Correct. This might not seem like it fits the premise → conclusion structure we discussed above, but let's map this out:
identify actual tradition → reference to original reasons
By the contrapositive: /reference to original reasons → /identify actual tradition
Remember that the author's point is that this appeal to tradition doesn't take into consideration the original reasons for the creation of this tradition. The author's premise is that there actually were specific economic reasons for this tradition, which (the author implies) are not taken into consideration by people who appeal to this tradition. And the next thing the author says is that, if any policy could be justified by the appeal to tradition, it would be a policy of adjusting the school year's length based on economic needs. In other words, the "real" tradition here is adjusting based on economic needs, not simply having a three-month summer vacation. So when the author says the original appeal to tradition "misses its mark," he means that the people making this appeal have not identified the actual tradition. Thus, the contrapositive of (E) we mapped above accurately bridges the premise → conclusion gap in this argument.