Logical Reasoning

PT108 · S2 · Q13 Ramona: One of the primary

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

  • 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

Ramona: One of the primary values of a university education is the intellectual growth that results from exposure to a wide range of ideas.

Ramona's Explicit Claims

1. One of the primary values of college is mental growth from being exposed to wide range of ideas.

2. Too many students miss out on this growth because they pick a technical major that will make them more employable later.

3. Recent pressures to graduate as quickly as possible are worsening this trend.

Martin's Position on R's Claims

1. He doesn't indicate what he considers a primary value of college, although in a much milder way he seems to agree it is good for students to be exposed to different stuff. He brings up in a way that suggests, .

2. He somewhat disagrees with this claim by telling us that tech majors are required to take some liberal arts classes. It suggests .

3. He makes no comment on whether recent pressures are doing anything to change anything.

Evaluate

As is typical on Agree questions, the 2nd speaker doesn't seem to explicitly agree with any of the 1st speakers claims. So we start looking for background assumptions or beliefs they both seem to share.

In this case, they both seem to recognize some students pick technical majors in order to improve their chances on the job market. Nontechnical majors (such as English major) might have a harder time getting a good job after graduation.

And they both seem to think it would be good for technical majors to be exposed to a wider range of ideas, since Martin defends the status quo by saying,

Goal

I would have a hard time predicting a specific idea here. We just need to find an answer that feels like it can be supported by each paragraph, even if the support is somewhat gist-y, invisible, or innuendo.

13.

The conversation most strongly supports the claim that Ramona and Martin agree with each other that

  1. students are stimulated to grow

    Too Strong: only

    Neither speaker said anything like "only English classes stimulate the intellect".

    1% picked this

  2. only graduates with degrees in

    Too Strong: only

    Neither speaker said anything like "only degrees in technical subjects get good jobs". They both probably believe that a degree in a technical subject can make it easier to get a good job, but this language is way too harsh.

    15% picked this

  3. Correct

    not every university class exposes

    Why this is right

    This is very soft language ... "at least some university classes do not expose students to a wide range of ideas". They both would accept this, since they both seem to get that technical majors are taking technical classes that are very specific to that technical undertaking. Ramona is agreeing with this answer in her 2nd sentence, because she's saying that students in technical majors (taking classes in that major) miss out on a wide range of ideas. Martin is more diffusely agreeing with this by being like, "Yeah ... it's true. Technical majors do miss out on the breadth that other university students might get, but we have to be realistic. Do you want wide range of ideas + a job as a waiter, or do you want more limited track of ideas + good job after college." The main indication of agreement is that Martin is defending technical majors by saying, "Look, it's not as bad as you think. (Sure, their technical classes are very limited in scope, but ...) even students in technical majors are required to take some liberal arts classes (where they will be exposed to a wide range of ideas)."

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

    69% picked this

  4. intellectual growth is more important

    Disagree

    This seems more like where the two people disagree. Ramona is mad at the status quo because she thinks that students picking technical majors and missing out on intellectual growth are missing one of the primary values of college. Technically, she never compares the relative importance of intellectual growth to financial security, so we have no way to support that either person believes this. But in a gist-y way, Ramona is worried about intellectual growth. Martin seems more worried about financial security. After all, his brother is now going to be paying off student loan debt for his English degree by being a waiter. When he says, "But we have to be realistic", he's almost implying, "Yeah, intellectual growth is great, but it's more important that we get realistic about how this college degree is going to help us have a financially secure future".

    10% picked this

  5. financial security is more important

    Disagree

    This is just the inverse of (D), so the exact same logic applies. In reality, neither of them directly compare the importance of the two, so we'd have a hard time saying that we can derive this position from either of the speakers. But we definitely wouldn't derive it from both speakers, since this trade-off between financial security and intellectual growth is the main area where the two would disagree.

    5% picked this

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