Question 2978 Federally mandated standardized testing

[vincent.m]

Hi guys,

I just had a question and wanted to make sure I understand the answer.
Federally mandated standardized testing in primary schools has spurred the growth of a huge industry, generating millions of dollars of profit for companies specializing in content-writing and assessment.
(A): (Prior to the legislation mandating testing, many content-writing and assessment specialists were out of work.)
C: Actions mandated by the federal government have created work for some workers who used to be unemployed.
C: An industry in which some workers were unemployed has benefited financially from the legislation.
The first answer choice is wrong because we do not know that they were unemployed. For all we know they were working at a burger place, but not using their expertise. Is this correct? Thank you!

[tommywallach]

Hey Vincent,

Does the question say that the first answer is correct? As far as I can see, the second one should be.

If it says "out of work," that's the same as unemployed. You can't be "out of work" if you're working at a burger place.

The second one doesn't make sense to me. How can you be "in an industry but unemployed"? You're not in the industry if you're unemployed...you're unemployed! Perhaps I'm thinking of something wrong; does the question definitively state that the second conclusion is the correct one?

-t

[andrew.b.gerst]

Just saw this question too... the program definitely does say answer 2 (involving "an industry") is correct, and that answer 1 is wrong. I also find this a bit confusing.

[tommywallach]

I'll run it by some other folks to be sure. For now, let's just pretend this question never happened! : )

-t

[NichP73]

Tricky! It never says that the unemployed specialists got work!


Why Conclusion 1 is correct:
Argument structure:
X industry benefits from legislation.
X industry had unemployed workers.
Therefore, X industry that had unemployed workers benefits.

Ingenious deduction, I know.

The premise says that Federally mandated standardized testing... has spurred the growth of a huge industry.
The assumption says that many content/assessment specialists were out of work.
Conclusion 1 is therefore correct, the INDUSTRY benefited-- it never says that the specific unemployed workers got jobs!




Why conclusion 2 is incorrect:
1. There is no guarantee that ANY unemployed workers were given jobs as a result of the legislation. This is an EXTRA assumption that we have to had to make conclusion 2 work.
2. If they were unemployed, and they are still unemployed, then the statement: 'Many workers were unemployed' is still true.
3. It is possible for an industry to benefit without all its workers, unemployed or not, benefiting. The whole does not equal the parts. Maybe they hired fresh out of college grads, or recruited current teachers which means that we still have many unemployed workers in that industry. Maybe they didn't need a lot of specialists to write the books, and could just keep the ones they already had on staff.



Hope this helps.