Logical Reasoning

PT127 · S1 · Q3 Teacher: Participating in organized competitive

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

Teacher: Participating in organized competitive athletics may increase a child’s strength and coordination.

Conclusion (should = Opinion)

Funding for children's athletic programs should not be eliminated.

Evidence (since)

Research has shown that adults with feelings of inferiority become more successful than those free of such anxieties.

Participating in organized competitive athletics may increase a child's strength and coordination.

Evaluate

Whenever we read Role or Main Conclusion, we expect that the Conclusion will usually be the First Sentence or some sort of Rebuttal. This is the latter. In the second sentence, we get an attributed opinion, "as critics point out".

The author then pivots away from that (but, yet, however), showing that she will go in a different direction. The word since always indicates a claim is supporting the other half of the sentence (top 4 support indicators are FABS = for, after all, because, since), and so we know the final claim is being supported by the 1st half of the final sentence.

Also, the final sentence expresses the author's opinion using the word "should", making it a promising contender for the author's main conclusion.

Goal

We're being asked about the very first sentence. While not the major premise of the argument, it still is a potential good thing about children's athletic programs, so we can still count it as support for the conclusion.

So let's look for something like .

3.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the teacher's argument by the assertion that participating in organized competitive athletics may increase a child's strength and coordination?

  1. Correct

    It is mentioned as one

    Why this is right

    The conclusion is about adopting a policy, "Continue funding children's athletic programs". Why should we? Well one possible reason is that participating in organized athletics may increase a child's strength and coordination. But this wasn't the only premise. The additional reason offered in the final sentence (the 2nd to last claim) is that, "if childhood athletics imbues you with shame and inferiority, good news! You won't peak in high school. You'll go on to be Bill Gates. Adults who feel inferior usually become more successful than those who got picked first for kickball."

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

    76% picked this

  2. It is a claim that

    Opposite: refute

    We identified the first sentence as part of the Support, so we know the author isn't trying to refute this.

    4% picked this

  3. It is a hypothesis for

    Not a Conclusion

    A claim for which evidence is offered is a conclusion. We were looking for Support / Premise / Evidence, not a conclusion. Does the author support this first sentence? According to the argument, why should we believe that participating in organized sports may increase a child's strength and coordination? [crickets] There was no support offered. We know why playing sports can increase strength and coordination. Sports make you move your bodies a lot and success in sports is based on timing and coordination, so the activity of playing sports helps your body with fitness and coordination. If you're asking yourself whether a claim was supported, and you can hear what supporting ideas would sound like, but none of them are uttered in the argument, then you can tell that the claim was not actually supported.

    10% picked this

  4. It is cited as an

    Opposite: reason for eliminating

    We identified the first sentence as part of the Support, and the author is trying to support the idea of keeping funding for children's athletics. This wasn't a reason for eliminating funding.

    6% picked this

  5. It is cited as an

    Opposite: refute

    We identified the first sentence as part of the Support, so we know the author wouldn't consider one of her two premises an objection to her conclusion.

    4% 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