Researchers gave 100 first-graders

Answer choices

1. A

   No Impact3% picked this

   Among the first-graders who received the after-school lessons in handwriting, those who practiced the most learned to write

   This says practice produced more automatic handwriting. That is unsurprising — but it does not connect handwriting improvement to composition improvement, which is the actual claim being made. The argument is about whether automatic handwriting frees mental resources for composition; this answer says nothing about composition.

   3%
2. B

   No Impact20% picked this

   The first-graders who wrote letters the most automatically before receiving the after-school lessons in handwriting showed the greatest improvement in their composition skills

   This describes kids who already had automatic handwriting going in. The argument is about what improving handwriting automaticity does for composition. Telling us about students who started out automatic — and improved most in composition — does not show that becoming more automatic during the lessons drove composition gains. The direction of the argument is about gains, not pre-existing levels.

   20%
3. C

   Correct57% picked this

   Over the course of the lessons, the first-graders who showed greater improvement in their ability to write letters automatically also generally showed

   Why this is right

   This tightens the link the argument needs. It says: among the lesson-takers, greater improvement in automatic handwriting generally tracked with greater improvement in composition. That covariation is exactly what the argument claims is happening — as handwriting becomes more automatic, mental resources are freed up for composition. The more automatic, the more freed up, the more composition improves. This makes the conclusion much more plausible.

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

   57%
4. D

   No Impact15% picked this

   Before receiving the after-school lessons in handwriting, the 100 first-graders who received the lessons were representative of first-graders more generally, with respect to their

   That the children were representative of first-graders generally tells us the results would generalize, but it does not strengthen the causal claim that automatic handwriting frees mental resources. The argument's logic is internal — we need to confirm the within-group relationship between handwriting and composition gains, not the population the sample comes from.

   15%
5. E

   Opposite5% picked this

   Among the first-graders who received the lessons in handwriting, those who started out with strong composition skills showed substantial improvement in how

   This actually undercuts the argument. If kids who started with strong composition skills were the ones whose handwriting became more automatic, that suggests the causal arrow runs the other way — composition skills enable automatic handwriting, not vice versa. We need an answer that strengthens the argument's direction (handwriting → composition), and this points the wrong way.

   5%