#11 - Most universities today offer students a more in-depth

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Strengthen. The correct answer choice is (C)

The conclusion in this argument is that most universities offer a more in-depth and cosmopolitan education than ever before. The reason given for this is that most history courses now use textbooks that address cultures that were hardly mentioned in previous courses’ required reading. Your task in selecting a correct answer is to identify a fact that, if true, makes it more likely that the education provided at these schools is more in-depth and cosmopolitan due to the change in textbooks.

Notice the slight stretch in the argument here. The author illustrates how history courses now address cultures that were previously given little attention. The author then jumps from this to say the education is now more in-depth and cosmopolitan. The conclusion is broader than the premises, and therefore open to attack. This is a common weakness in many arguments on the LSAT. A common way to Strengthen such an argument is to connect the “rogue” element in in the conclusion (i.e. “in-depth and cosmopolitan education”) to the improved cultural inclusion mentioned in the premises. In fact, any answer choice that does not mention the new element in the conclusion will be incorrect. This immediately helps eliminate answer choices (A), (B), and (D).

Answer Choice (A): This answer choice is not helpful. It is irrelevant to this argument what students find interesting. The conclusion in this argument deals with a more “in depth” and “cosmopolitan” education, not necessarily a more “interesting” education.

Answer Choice (B): This answer choice addresses the wrong group of people. While the textbooks in these courses now cover more periods and cultures, these books do not necessarily cover all periods and world cultures. So answer choice (B) addresses a group of students who are not necessarily covered by the stimulus so it does not strengthen the argument.

Answer Choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. This answer could be translated as, “If textbooks are more culturally inclusive, then the students will likely receive a more in-depth and cosmopolitan education.” This answer choice ties the premises more closely to the conclusion by showing how “cultural inclusion” translates to “in depth” and “cosmopolitan”. Since we know from the stimulus that the textbooks in these history classes have become more culturally inclusive by addressing cultures that were only briefly mentioned previously, this answer choice would help establish that these students are getting a more in depth and cosmopolitan education.

Answer Choice (D): This answer choice weakens the argument by offering counterevidence to the history courses. The answer indicates that some universities may not couple their culturally inclusive history courses with other culturally inclusive courses. In other words, these history courses may be the exception rather than the rule making it less likely that these universities are more in-depth or cosmopolitan.

Answer Choice (E): We do not know from the stimulus that students were previously getting exposure to a “single” culture. The facts actually seem to indicate that students received exposure to multiple cultures, just a minimal exposure to certain cultures. This answer choice is too narrow to apply to the facts of the stimulus and does not strengthen the argument.

[srcline@noctrl.edu]

Hello

I am having a hard time understanding why C is the correct answer, I choose A.
My reasoning was that if students are interested rather than being required to read these textbooks then that supports the argument that most universities today offer students a more in-depth and cosmopolitan education than ever before. Also (A) goes onto say that the history courses that the Univ. offers are comprehensive in their coverage of various periods and cultures. Wouldn't this also strengthen that argument?

Thankyou
Sarah

[Adam Tyson]

Thanks for the question, Sarah. This is a great opportunity to talk about how many LR questions are structured, going beyond just strengthen questions.

So many questions on the test involve a logical gap, a missing link. This is a feature in many strengthen, weaken, assumption, justify the conclusion and flaw questions. The authors come to a conclusion that leaves something out, leaving a gap between the premises and the conclusion. Often we don't notice the gap because we make our own assumptions, matching those of the author, and the argument just seems to be fine to us. Working against that - leaving our own assumptions outside and not bringing them to the test with us - is a crucial skill to develop.

The conclusion in this argument is the first sentence, which talks about "in depth and cosmopolitan" education. Nowhere else in the argument does the author bring up those terms. Instead, his premises all talk about how inclusive the textbooks are or are not. There's the missing link - he never bridges the gap from the idea of inclusiveness to the ideas of in depth and cosmopolitan.

If you wanted to weaken this argument, you would drive a wedge in that gap. You'd say something like "inclusive isn't the same as in depth or cosmopolitan" or "just because it is more inclusive doesn't prove it's more in depth or cosmopolitan." Your answer would need to mention both of those things.

The same holds true for a strengthen, or assumption, or justify answer on this same stimulus, but instead of driving a wedge into the gap you need to build a bridge over it. You need to connect those ideas together. You probably already did this in your mind - you simply assumed that more inclusive means more in depth and cosmopolitan. Don't make that assumption, though - instead, pick the answer that makes it explicit. If it's true that more inclusive textbooks indicate more in depth and cosmopolitan education, then the argument is better because the gap is closed.

The problem with A is it never crosses the gap - it never connects us to the concept of in depth and cosmopolitan. Students prefer more comprehensive texts? That's great, but what does that do to tell us what universities are offering us today? Are they offering those courses that students prefer, and if so, does that also mean they are more in depth and cosmopolitan?

Think about looking for those logical gaps, and assume nothing. As you get used to spotting them you will more easily weaken, strengthen, justify, etc. a wide range of LR questions.

Good luck in your continued studies!