Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT101 S3 Q19 Explanation

Every student who walks to school

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

TopicsSufficient Assumption

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

Start practicing free

Free to start

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

Every student who walks to school goes home for lunch. It follows that some students who have part-time walk to school.

What this question is testing

Sufficient Assumption

Your task

Find the assumption that, if added, guarantees the conclusion follows.

Common trap

Answers that only partly bridge the gap, leaving the conclusion unproven.

Winning move

Identify the new term in the conclusion and pick the choice that links it to the evidence.

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

The question
19.

The conclusion of the argument follows logically if which one of the

Answer choices

  1. Illegal Opposite11% picked this

    Some students who do not have part-time jobs go home

    We could throw this out immediately, if we see it's not talking about "students with part-time jobs" (it's talking about those without). Because we wanted students with part time jobs do not go home for lunch they're giving us this fake opposie students without part time jobs do go home for lunch

  2. Unrelated to Goal2% picked this

    Every student who goes home for lunch has a

    If it's not talking about "students w/ part time jobs", it's useless to us, since we're trying to prove a claim about those people and we don't have a single fact about them.

  3. Unrelated to Goal12% picked this

    Some students who do not have part-time jobs do not go

    This is very similar to (A). It doesn't write the entire answer as an opposite, just the first half. But that's the half that tells us to stop reading. If we're not talking about "students who do have part time jobs", then the answer is hopeless. We're trying to prove a conclusion about the part time jobs students, but currently have no information about them.

  4. Correct71% picked this

    Some students who do not go home for lunch have

    Why this is right

    The order of Some statements doesn't matter, since Some just means "at least one". Some cats are grey = some grey things are cats We had a conditional rule that said don't go home for lunch → don't walk to school This answer provides a fact that there are some students who don't go home for lunch (and thus don't walk to school) and who have part-time jobs. So we've proven that there are some students with part-time jobs who don't walk to school.

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

  5. Unrelated to Goal5% picked this

    Every student who goes home for lunch walks

    If it's not talking about "students w/ part time jobs", it's useless to us, since we're trying to prove a claim about those people and we don't have a single fact about them.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

Save and practice this skill
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