#24 - Professor: Many introductory undergraduate science

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below! Thank you!

[isoifer]

Can someone please explain why answer choice C is incorrect? In the heat of the test, it seemed to me like the obvious choice, but looking back now I am starting to see where I might have erred.

[Jonathan Evans]

Hi, Isoifer,

Welcome to the forums! Good question.

This question uses conditional reasoning. It's somewhat difficult to follow, but if you isolate the conditional statement, the additional premise, and the conclusion, it might be easier to grasp:

• P1: Some intro science courses are designed so that only committed students will pass.

We could symbolize this statement like this:

• P1: Successful Intro Course Only Committed Students Pass

Now what else do we know?

• P2: Unenthusiastic students sometimes pass.
  Conclusion: These classes are not successful.

From the contrapositive of P1, we know:

• P1: Not Only Committed Students Pass Not Successful Intro Course

Where is the missing link here? What is the author assuming? The author assumes that unenthusiastic students are not committed students.

• Assumption: Not Enthusiastic Students Not Committed Student

This is the missing link. For this author's argument to make sense, we must assume that the unenthusiastic students are not committed to science majors. This corresponds to Answer Choice (D).

Let's take a look at Answer Choice (C).

Remember that in an Assumption question, we're looking for a statement that is a necessary but unstated belief of the author's, something the author must believe in order for the argument to make sense, so for Answer Choice (C), we should ask ourselves:

• Must the author believe some of the enthusiastic students don't pass?

This statement seems to be in sync with the author's implicit assumption that enthusiasm and commitment are related to each other; however, the author's argument doesn't concern what happens with the enthusiastic students but instead with the unenthusiastic students. The author argues that the classes are unsuccessful because some unenthusiastic students pass. We have no argument here about what happens to the enthusiastic students. It stands to reason that if the author equates enthusiasm to commitment, then he or she would expect some of these enthusiastic/committed students to pass. However, again there is no necessary expectation that every enthusiastic/committed student must pass.

Following the author's logic, the classes could still be successful even if some committed students fail. Therefore, Answer Choice (C) is not an assumption.

Does this make sense?

[deck1134]

How do we arrive at the correct answer for this question?

[Adam Tyson]

Before we answer this one, deck, please tell us two things: 1) how did you go about attempting to solve this question? 2) did you go through Jonathan's explanation above in this thread? We want to know more about your thought process so we can give you more useful answers. We find it's better for our students if they work through it themselves and share that thought process, not only so that our answers are really addressing their particular struggles, but also to make sure that we are doing more than just telling you the right answer, but rather helping you find the way to arrive at it on your own.

Get back to us with your thoughts, and we'll be sure to respond asap!

[lsatprep2345]

Hi,

I'm not sure how negating D (from no overlap to overlap) weakens the argument. By negating it to say that "some of the students in the very demanding introductory science courses who are least enthusiastic about science are the students most committed to being science majors" doesn't that still leave open the possibility that maybe only 1 person overlaps and the other 99 who are either least enthusiastic or most committed? The premise indicates that ONLY those students most committed will receive passing grades which is why the conclusion states that the proving grounds were not met. How would the negation of D weaken the argument? Is just a possibility that it could be all 100 enough to weaken?

Thank you!

[Jeff Wren]

Hi lsatprep2345,

In this argument, the professor is using the fact that "SOME of the students in these very demanding introductory courses who are least enthusiastic about science receive passing grades in these courses" as evidence that these courses have not served their purpose as proving grounds designed to weed out everyone except the students "most committed to being science majors."

In this argument, the professor is equating students who are "least enthusiastic about science" as synonymous with students who are NOT the "most committed to being science majors." That is the missing premise, or assumption of the argument. For the professor, even if one student who was least enthusiastic about science passed the intro course, then that course didn't serve its intended purpose of weeding out everyone except the students most committed to being science majors.

If you negate Answer D, you get "Some of the students in the very demanding introductory science courses who are least enthusiastic about science are among the students most committed to being science majors." This statement shows that one can be both the least enthusiastic about science and also the most committed to being a science major. This would destroy the argument.

Since these terms are not mutually exclusive anymore (based on this negated answer), who cares if some of the students who passed are the least enthusiastic about science. As long as they are the most committed to being science majors, the programs may be working completely fine as far as we know. (Now, we don't know for a fact that they all are the most committed to being science majors, but we also have no reason to assume that they are not the most committed, so there is no reason anymore to think that the programs failed their intended purpose.)

As a final point, while it may seem odd that students who are the least enthusiastic about science could also be among the most committed to being science majors, it is possible that they could have other motivations for majoring in science besides just a love of science itself (perhaps getting a better paying job, etc.).