Q24

[mgmobrien]

The passage here is about French educational reform for gender equality.

In the second paragraph, they discuss 2 proposals from the early 1800s which made a start at reform.

Question 24: The question asks to choose the most apt analogy to the proposals from the second paragraph.

I can't decide why, between choices A or D, one is better than the other. Both choices share the same description of the second proposal. It's the first proposal that differs.

A: Housing should be made available to all. This is supported on lines 19-22. NB the words "more importantly" on line 19. This si the incorrect answer.
D: The quality of housing should be improved. This is supported on lines 16-19. This is the correct answer.

Why?

[aileenann]

Thank you for your especially thorough question. I think your research and tabulation of the specific line numbers is admirable technique and a lesson to all your fellow Atlas forum posters. Not to make you blush, but I love when students are super thorough on their RC!

But to your question now! I'd say once you got back down to these two you were absolutely right to compare them. Sometimes that can trigger realizations that aren't obvious - maybe an extreme word or subtle inaccuracy hidden in an otherwise tempting answer choice.

I think here there are two reasons to go with (A) rather than (D). One you picked up on by highlighting your "NB" of "more importantly" - those words aren't in there by accident. If the LSAT gives them to you, you should use them!

Secondly, as I understand it, the first proposal was that women should get access to better education - equal education. I think the bit about "improving" education by moving it out of the home is a red herring - this is just a way of pointing out how access was unequal and needed to be reformed. It wasn't only about improving women's education but rather rendering it more equal to that of men. This may seem like a bit of sophistry, but I think if you consider the end goal of the proposal, it makes sense. Improvement was just the means to get to the ultimate end of equality/availability for all.

Does that make sense? Please let me know what you think!

[cyruswhittaker]

Could you also elaborate on support of the second part of choice A, "Real estate practices should be nondiscriminatory?"

The passage indicates that the second proposal was more comprehensive in that it also advocated the same rights, and the "only" (line 35) proposal that called for coeducational schools (line 36).

I can see an analogy here between the second part of choice A, but it's not very clear.

[aileenann]

I would point to the language re: the second proposal that "women and men enjoy the same rights." This points towards non-discrimination, which means not just accessibility (part 1) but also equal accessibility. I think this gives us all the support we need for this second part of (A).

Does that make sense? Any thoughts?

[cyruswhittaker]

Yes, I understand it better now. Basically, this question is testing the reader's ability to synthesize the differences/similairities between the two proposals, and choices A and B explicitly tests the difference.

[soyeonjeon]

Why would C be incorrect? I think the second part of choice C demonstrates a closer analogy to the second proposal. Thanks!

[christine.defenbaugh]

I'm so glad you asked this question soyeonjeon! It brings up a wonderful strategic point about parsing answer choices. But before we get to that, let's break down this question from the top.

This is a slightly less common form of an inference question. Our task is to determine which pair of proposals about housing reform match up best with the two educational reform proposals from the passage. As with all inference questions, we are going to stay very close to the text, and use the information explicit in the passage to guide our answers. Line references, or it didn't happen!

The first proposal is covered in great detail in lines 16-31. The second is similarly explained in lines 31-41. As this is an open book exam, we're going to use these sections of the passage to eliminate or confirm answer choices.

The best match is (A):
First proposal: "available to all" matches up well with "available to everyone" in line 22.
Second proposal: "nondiscriminatory" matches up well with "equal education" in line 33 and "same rights" in line 35.
This answer looks great, and is well supported by the direct references from the passage!


The Incorrect Answers
(B) First proposal: "available to all" matches up well with "available to everyone" in line 22.
Second proposal: "quality...should be improved" is tempting, but the second proposal doesn't focus on improving the quality of education for everyone. The main point is moving toward equality - and that may mean improving the quality for women, specifically, as a byproduct.

(C) First proposal: "for all who can pay" stands in direct opposition to the idea that these schools should be public! (line 26)
Second proposal: "uniform quality" does seem to match up with "equal education" in line 33 and "same rights" in line 35.

(D) First proposal: "quality...should be improved" is tempting, but the first proposal doesn't focus on improving the quality of education for everyone. The main point is moving toward equality - and that may mean improving the quality for women, specifically, as a byproduct.
Second proposal: "nondiscriminatory" matches up well with "equal education" in line 33 and "same rights" in line 35.

(E) First proposal: The first proposal demands that eduction be "public" (line 26), while this merely demands a "low-cost" option. This is not the same!
Second proposal: "uniform quality" does seem to match up with "equal education" in line 33 and "same rights" in line 35.

Now that we've sorted all the answer choices, notice that I agree with you that the second proposal in (C) matches up reasonably well! There's an argument to be had that this doesn't match up quite as perfectly as does the second proposal in (A) - but if you don't have to split those kind of hairs on the LSAT - DON'T! The first proposal in (C) is clearly and explicitly wrong, and that means that we don't have to twist ourselves into knots wrestling with the second proposal.

Don't give yourself a tougher job than necessary! Eliminate answer choices based on their weakest link!

Please let me know if this completely answered your question!

[braintreeprez]

I had a totally different issue with regard to this question. I ended up choosing A but had a momentary freakout because the question prompt did not mention order - i.e. it didn't say something like, "Which one of the following pairs of proposals is, RESPECTIVELY, most closely analogous to the pair of proposals discussed in the second paragraph?" In other words, I was worried that the first proposal title, "Housing should be made available to all," could be analogous to proposal #2 from the passage, while "Real estate practices should be nondiscriminatory" could correspond to proposal #1.

I realize that double take was totally unnecessary on this question... but has it ever been the case on the LSAT that they give you the parts of a potential analogous pair in a different order than how the pair is rolled out in the passage?

[maryadkins]

Nope! Order will match up.