Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT101 S2 Q5 Explanation

Altogether, the students in Ms.

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsParallel Flaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Altogether, the students in Ms. Tarnowski’s Milton Elementary School class collected more aluminum cans than did the students in any of the school’s other classes. Therefore, the Milton student cans was in Ms. Tarnowski’s class.

What this question is testing

Parallel Flaw

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
5.

Which one of the following arguments contains flawed reasoning that is most parallel to that in

Answer choices

  1. Bad Conclusion Match Bad Validity Match2% picked this

    Altogether, more trees were planted by the students in Mr. Kelly’s class than were planted by those in Mr. Liang’s class and Ms. Jackson’s

    This conclusion is about a group (Mr. Kelly's students), whereas we want to see a conclusion that is about an individual. Also, this is a valid argument, whereas we want a flawed one.

  2. Bad Conclusion/Evidence Match1% picked this

    More than half of Milton Elementary School’s students play in the band and more than half of the school’s students sing in the choir.

    This conclusion is about every single person in a group (every student at Milton). We want to see a conclusion that is about an individual. And the evidence should be a fact about a group, but it's really two facts about different subgroups. This argument is flawed for mathematical, Venn diagram reasons. The author fails to consider a significant overlap between these two groups. That's not the same as Whole to Part.

  3. Bad Conclusion Match1% picked this

    Mr. Rowe’s Milton Elementary School class raised more money by selling candy bars than Ms. Hunt’s class raised by holding a raffle. Therefore, the

    This conclusion is about a group (Mr. Rowe's class), whereas we want to see a conclusion that is about an individual.

  4. Correct96% picked this

    The total number of tickets to the school fair sold by the students in Ms. Ramirez’s Milton Elementary School class was greater than the

    Why this is right

    This is the only conclusion about an individual, so this problem was a great opportunity to use the Conclusion Match shortcut. This makes a very similar Whole to Part move. Because "#1 ticket seller" is true of Ms. R's whole class, the author assumes that "#1 ticket seller" would be true of one part of Ms. R's class, her top ticket-selling student. We know that Ms. R's class as whole sold more tickets than any other class, but that doesn't mean that the #1 ticket seller in the school was part of Ms. R's class. She may have had a solid group that all did great, but no one who was extraordinary. Meanwhile, Ms. R's class could still beat out a class that had the #1 ticket seller and a bunch of deadbeat other students.

    Skill tested: Parallel Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

  5. Bad Conclusion Match1% picked this

    Ms. Ventura’s Milton Elementary School class assembled more birdhouses than did any of the school’s other classes. Since Ms. Ventura’s class had fewer students

    This conclusion is about a group (Ms. Ventura's students, on average), whereas we want to see a conclusion that is about an individual.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free