By POE, Ans A.
B,C,D,E irrelevant
Tough CR
This topic has expert replies
Source: Beat The GMAT — Critical Reasoning |
-
ashaydesai
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 5:32 am
- Thanked: 1 times
-
mehravikas
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1161
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 2:52 am
- Location: Sydney
- Thanked: 23 times
- Followed by:1 members
-
bignasty666
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:02 am
- Thanked: 1 times
A is the answer, agreed.
Stimulus Premise1: "Even when students are given equal educational treatment, students perform differently."
Stimulus Premise 2: "Based on the premise that students perform differently with equal educational treatment, (and you have to take this as a given and true) different treatment must be given to SOME (at least 1 student) to be able to master the curriculum.
The conclusion you draw from the stimulus information is A: Because of the combination of the premises, different treatment must be given to SOME (at least that one kid) to ensure equality with respect to educational tasks they Master.
That last bolded statement means that they don't have to give equal educational treatment - in fact they need to treat people differently. However, the goal is to achieve equality in the MASTERY OF EDUCATIONAL SUBJECTS. There's a big difference between the two because the stimulus says that even when kids are treated the same, they master educational things differently. To make them master concepts they learn, they have to be treated differently.
Incorrect Answers
B. This answer choice makes a connection between "Rate of learning, and Quality" with "Quantity" of teaching when this is clearly inaccurate according to the stimulus. Quantity is part of the subset of educational treatment, which also includes "rate of learning, quality." This answer is trying to separate out the elements of the argument in a way that shouldn't be separated.
C. "The more the students will learn" has no relationship to what the stimulus is asking. The stimulus is trying to make conclusions about equality of teaching and the resulting mastery of subjects. Besides, the stimulus says that an experienced teacher knows that kids have to be treated differently to get similar results. That's it. You can't make the conclusion that an experienced teacher will make students learn more. You can only make the conclusion that experienced teachers know they have to treat students differently. This is another one of those conclusions that makes sense in our world - sure more experienced teachers will result in kids learning more, but STICK WITH THE STIMULUS!! Nothing in it suggests that.
D. This answer has so many extreme trigger words that you should discard this immediately. "All students" (when we know that some are different than others and can't all be grouped together), "Should" do this, do that, etc... just wrong.
E. I don't even need to explain why this is wrong.
Stimulus Premise1: "Even when students are given equal educational treatment, students perform differently."
Stimulus Premise 2: "Based on the premise that students perform differently with equal educational treatment, (and you have to take this as a given and true) different treatment must be given to SOME (at least 1 student) to be able to master the curriculum.
The conclusion you draw from the stimulus information is A: Because of the combination of the premises, different treatment must be given to SOME (at least that one kid) to ensure equality with respect to educational tasks they Master.
That last bolded statement means that they don't have to give equal educational treatment - in fact they need to treat people differently. However, the goal is to achieve equality in the MASTERY OF EDUCATIONAL SUBJECTS. There's a big difference between the two because the stimulus says that even when kids are treated the same, they master educational things differently. To make them master concepts they learn, they have to be treated differently.
Incorrect Answers
B. This answer choice makes a connection between "Rate of learning, and Quality" with "Quantity" of teaching when this is clearly inaccurate according to the stimulus. Quantity is part of the subset of educational treatment, which also includes "rate of learning, quality." This answer is trying to separate out the elements of the argument in a way that shouldn't be separated.
C. "The more the students will learn" has no relationship to what the stimulus is asking. The stimulus is trying to make conclusions about equality of teaching and the resulting mastery of subjects. Besides, the stimulus says that an experienced teacher knows that kids have to be treated differently to get similar results. That's it. You can't make the conclusion that an experienced teacher will make students learn more. You can only make the conclusion that experienced teachers know they have to treat students differently. This is another one of those conclusions that makes sense in our world - sure more experienced teachers will result in kids learning more, but STICK WITH THE STIMULUS!! Nothing in it suggests that.
D. This answer has so many extreme trigger words that you should discard this immediately. "All students" (when we know that some are different than others and can't all be grouped together), "Should" do this, do that, etc... just wrong.
E. I don't even need to explain why this is wrong.
