slower students

i feel it should be D

IMO D.. Would be surprised if its not D.


a. The proposal was made primarily with the intent of benefiting the slower students in the class.
Doesnt touchbase on Neha's comments
b. "Slow" students are not necessarily less bright, but are often underutilizing their abilities.
Strengthens Neha's words
c. Teachers should spend extra time and effort with their less able students.
One of the ways.. but doesnt weaken
d. Slower students do not usually learn as much from fast-paced peers as they do from slow-paced lessons.
Looks good
e. Most teachers prefer to split classes into slow and fast groups.
Preference of teachers is irrelvant to the discussion

I somehow like B more than D, since it says "Slow" students are not necessarily less bright.

I'm gonna say I don't think its D. The reason I think its not D is because D says slow students don't learn as much from past paced peers as they do from slow classes. This point is irrelevant. We're not worried about how much they learn from their peers. Were worried about how much they learn in general.

Nina's argument summarized:

This will have the opposite effects because it will cause "slow" students to perceive themselves as "slow", which will in turn make them slow.

What Nina does in her argument is that may not be warranted is she assigned a meaning to slow that Sarah did not give us any evidence of. Nina takes slow to mean lower expectations. We can not say for sure whether Sarah would agree with this. To defeat nina's argument we would need to address this by clarifying what slow means. B does this.

IMO the answer is B.

Could you please confirm the OA?

I was confused b/w B and D and finally choose B and got it wrong. OA : D

OE: Nina does not believe that splitting math classes will ultimately benefit the slower students. As evidence for this point, she asserts that designating a class as slow will result in a self-fulfilling prophecy — the students will think of themselves as poor students and their performance levels will drop. We are looking for an answer that will weaken this position. (D) totally undermines Nina's position that slower students should not be split into a class of their own because their performance will falter. On the contrary, this answer tells us that the students will learn MORE in a slow-paced class. Splitting the class will prove beneficial for them. (A) is irrelevant to the argument because it focuses on the motivation behind splitting the class. It does not matter WHY the proposal is being made. That does not impact Nina's point that the slower students will be disadvantaged by the action. This neither strengthens nor weakens the argument. (B) does not weaken the argument because it does not address what impact splitting the "slow" students into their own class will have on their performance. This answer just tells us why these students are not performing well. (C) has no effect on Nina's argument. What teachers should or should not do is outside the scope of this argument, which is about the effects of LABELING students as slow. (E) is outside the scope of the argument. What teachers PREFER to do is irrelevant to Nina's position about slow students performing less well because they perceive themselves to be slow students.