Q22 - Most students are bored by history

[sanarda]

Can someone explain to me why answer C is correct?

C states: It is possible to recount the lives of historical figures without referring to dates and statistics.

This is an assumption EXCEPT question and it seems like the argument relies on this statement.

If i negate it ....It is not possible to recount the lives of historical figures without referring to dates and statistics... this also seems to hurt the conclusion...

What am I not seeing???

[ohthatpatrick]

First of all, let's thank heavens that we don't see "Assumption: EXCEPT" too often.

You're quite right to be tempted by (C), however, it is more strongly worded than what needs to be assumed.

You correctly negated (C), which then sounds like:
It is not possible to recount the lives of historical figures without referring to dates and statistics.

That doesn't actually go against the argument. The author didn't say we should NEVER refer to dates and statistics, just that we should do very little of that.

So the author's argument is compatible with negating (C). He would just say, "of course we still have to refer to dates and statistics, but we'll do so in the most minimal way possible so as to only spend very little class time on it."

In order for (C) to lock in with the nuanced wording of the conclusion (and be a valid necessary assumption), it would have to say something like:
"It is possible to recount the lives of historical figures without spending considerable class time referring to dates and statistics."

You didn't mention which answer you picked instead (if any), so please let me know if you want me to explain why any of the other answer ARE things that must be assumed.

Hope that helps.

[sanarda]

Thank you for your explanation. I clarified it for me. I chose C then found it difficult to figure out why it was wrong. I had a pretty clear idea of why the other answers were wrong.

[jionggangtu]

why couldn't D be correct?

[timmydoeslsat]

The conclusion is a prescription of the best way to teach history.

We need answer choices B and D to be true in order to draw this conclusion.

What if it were incompatible of the goals of teaching history to spend most class time recounting the lives of people? This would ruin the idea of it being the best way.

As others have stated, C is not necessary due to too strong of force. The author allows for dates and statistics to be used, just not a lot of it.

[wj097]

The conclusion is a prescription of the best way to teach history.

We need answer choices B and D to be true in order to draw this conclusion.

What if it were incompatible of the goals of teaching history to spend most class time recounting the lives of people? This would ruin the idea of it being the best way.

As others have stated, C is not necessary due to too strong of force. The author allows for dates and statistics to be used, just not a lot of it.

Can anyone explain why (A) is necessary. I feel (A), like (E) has too strong of a language. If you negate, then "one should bore students.." which doesn't destroy the conclusion since it allows for some boring thru dates and stats. To be required, shouldn't it say " one should avoid boring considerably..." or is this strong wording is ok because of the recommendation word SHOULD/SHOULD NOT rather than absolutes such as (IN)COMPATIBLE ??

Thx

[bostonphoenix]

The conclusion is a prescription of the best way to teach history.

We need answer choices B and D to be true in order to draw this conclusion.

What if it were incompatible of the goals of teaching history to spend most class time recounting the lives of people? This would ruin the idea of it being the best way.

As others have stated, C is not necessary due to too strong of force. The author allows for dates and statistics to be used, just not a lot of it.

Can anyone explain why (A) is necessary. I feel (A), like (E) has too strong of a language. If you negate, then "one should bore students.." which doesn't destroy the conclusion since it allows for some boring thru dates and stats. To be required, shouldn't it say " one should avoid boring considerably..." or is this strong wording is ok because of the recommendation word SHOULD/SHOULD NOT rather than absolutes such as (IN)COMPATIBLE ??

Thx

Stimulus goes:

students are bored - > explains why they are bored - > details a better way to keep students interested.

A is the assumption the stimulus is based on.

[ohthatpatrick]

I agree w/ the previous poster but a couple nuanced points on the question about (A):

1. Saying "one should bore one's students" DOES weaken the argument. Boredom is the sole reason for why the author suggests a better way of teaching history.

And the author is not necessarily equating "spending very little time on dates and statistics" with "Oh, just bore them a little". He says that students are bored because "a large amount of time is spent teaching dates and statistics". If we're not spending a large amount of time teaching dates/stats, then maybe we're not actually boring them at all.

2. Here is the move the argument makes:
Students are bored by the current teaching method (method X).
Thus, the best way to teach is to do something else (that kinda sounds like the opposite of X).

Why is method X not the best way? Because, it bores the students.

Assumption: If a method bores students, then it's not the best way.

That's all (A) is saying in slightly fuzzier "should" language.

As you mentioned, we might not get the same black and white feel when we negate "should" as we do with words such as (im)possible, (im)compatible, etc.

We're probably better off just asking ourselves if a certain idea was attached to the language of "good/bad/should/ought/justified/must be".

In this argument, "boring students" was definitely attached to the idea of "not best", so we know that "boring students" carries some negative weight in the author's mind.

Hope this helps.

[nehme.solena7]

Not only are choices (B) and (D) necessary assumptions, but they are functionally identical. Therefore, I immediately eliminated both (B) and (D).

Answer choice (A) is an assumption of the argument because the argument states that most students are bored by how history courses are usually taught and therefore the best way to teach history is to change the usual method. The author implies that the current method- spending a large amount of time teaching dates and statistics- bores students and is not the best method. The author then goes on to say that the best method is to spend little time on dates and statistics- the part of the class that bored students. Therefore, the author assumes that one should avoid boring one's students when teaching a history course.

The analysis above also explains why (E) is an assumption of the argument. The author implies that spending the most amount of class time recounting the lives of historical figures would lessen the students' boredom.

This leave answer choice (C)- the correct answer. The author doesn't say that there should be no reference to dates and statistics, only that very little class time should be spent on teaching dates and statistics. If you negate (C): "It is not possible to recount the lives of historical figures without referring to dates and statistics." it doesn't weaken the argument. Even if the negated statement is true, that just means that teachers must refer to dates and statistics when recounting the lives of historical figures. This doesn't undermine the argument that teachers should spend very little class time on dates and statistics and the most class time recounting the lives of historical figures.

[asafezrati]

I didn't like how A uses a normative term (should) when the stimulus speaks about a positive one (best).
Maybe Dr. Evil sees this information and wants to use it to create some damage in history courses. So if the best way to teach is X he should use Y?

ONE BILLION DOLLARS!!!!

[tommywallach]

Ha! I see what you mean, but I think you're going too far when you are turning an LSAT character into Dr. Evil.

-t

[jm.kahn]

I find choice A confusing because it says "one should avoid.." instead of "one should try to avoid..". The stim doesn't assume that spending most class time on the lives of historical figures doesn't at all bore students. That is, students may be bored even when class time is spent on historical figures.

"One should avoid.." (instead of "one should try to avoid..") makes it sound as if the best option involves not boring the students at all, as otherwise it wouldn't be the best option.

Can some guru clarify this?

I didn't like how A uses a normative term (should) when the stimulus speaks about a positive one (best).
Maybe Dr. Evil sees this information and wants to use it to create some damage in history courses. So if the best way to teach is X he should use Y?