Q22 - Educator: Environmental factors clearly

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type:
Weakens

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: Environmental factors don't have much effect on whether a teen plays sports.

Evidence: Family doesn't seem to be influencing it, since within many families some kids do/ some don't play sports. Also, school programs don't seem to be effective at getting non-sports kids into sports.

Answer Anticipation:
Given this evidence, how could we argue that environmental factors DO have a significant effect on whether teens play sports? The author has shot down school programs (but maybe they're ineffective for other reasons, and the "right" kind of program WOULD have a lot of environmental influence). The author shot down family (but maybe the family IS an influence, but it still results in a mix of which kids play sports). And maybe the author failed to consider some other environmental factor (like a person's peer group / their friends).

Correct Answer:
D

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) Maybe, but ultimately no. This felt tempting, because it seemed like we could say, "Hey, author. Family IS a big environmental influence on sports. The only reason you see some kids in a family play while others don't is that there can be a wide variety of demonstrable athletic ability from sibling to sibling." The problem is, this is actually a physiological factor, not an environmental one. We might be tempted to imagine that parents act as an environmental factor, encouraging the kids who DO have ability to play and discouraging the ones who DON'T. But we're adding that. The answer doesn't provide that. And even real world common sense tells you that parents who DO encourage their kids to play sports tend to encourage all of them, whether or not the kid has demonstrable athletic talent. On the face of it, this sounds like a physiological, not environmental, explanation of why some kids do / some kids don't.

(B) Super weak. The second I see "some" I would be highly doubtful this will be the answer. At least one teen is more enthusiastic about sports than her parents are. Cool, (B). Real cool.

(C) This argument does not care about whether adults are enthusiastic about sports. It's trying to assess whether environmental factors have a big effect in whether a teen plays sports.

(D) YES, insanely, this is the answer. To its credit, it has some oomph: the proportion varies GREATLY from society to society and decade to decade. Could physiological factors vary greatly from society to society? Maybe. From decade to decade? No. So what could explain this great variance in teen sports from decade to decade. It seems like it would have to be some sort of (or group of) environmental factors. It helps to remember the nature vs. nurture binary here. We're either explaining something in terms of environmental factors or non-environmental (i.e. "innate") factors. It doesn't seem like innate factors could explain the great variance from decade to decade, whereas environmental factors are much more likely to vary greatly by culture and by time period.

(E) Can we say that since a few of them are highly successful, school programs ARE a big environmental factor? Not really. We already new that they were GENERALLY ineffective. That's what makes them seem to the author like a weak environmental factor. The author's language acknowledges that some of these programs are effective, so (E) isn't changing anything about the conversation.

Takeaway/Pattern: This is one of those annoying correct answers that has nothing to do with the argument core, so it catches us by surprise. I would rank this in my "stinker" category with a Caligula strengthen question from a few tests ago. As always, with "stinkers", you end up telling yourself that you're looking for the best available answer, even if it's lame and not very compelling.

#officialexplanation

[ChukwuemekaO466]

Thanks for the explanation. However, I still am not clear on how we eliminate "A". Couldn't it be the case that the family motivates all kids - those with athletic ability and those who don't - to participate in sports. Ultimately, those who have athletic ability end up being those who participate. The family (an environmental factor) may not have a little effect here, because it is possible that kids with athletic ability may not have participated in the first place if their family did not motivate them.