Statutory Law

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct90% picked this

   identify and describe one of the benefits that the author says would result from the change that is

   Why this is right

   The purpose of a paragraph is usually revealed in its opening sentence. This 3rd paragraph began, "Another skill that teaching statutory law would improve is synthesis." So the paragraph is building the case that we should make sure law schools do a good job teaching statutory law. That's the change advocated in the passage, because "statutory law is often given too little attention by law schools". In the 2nd paragraph the author provides the first benefit of studying statutory law: sometimes the wording of the statute is ambiguous and you're unsure of its relation to your client's situation. In those nebulous situations, a keen ability to interpret statutes would be super useful. In the 3rd paragraph the author provides the second benefit of studying statutory law: you build your ability to synthesize bodies of laws together, by better understanding the interrelations among laws.

   Skill tested: Local Purpose · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

   90%
2. B

   Out of Scope: explain why1% picked this

   indicate that law schools currently value certain other skills over this skill and explain why

   Nowhere in the 3rd paragraph does the author offer an explanation for why law schools currently value other skills over the skill of synthesis. This paragraph doesn't talk about law schools. We know that law schools currently seem to value studying individual cases and citing precedent, but nowhere in the 3rd paragraph does the author explain why they value that stuff more than synthesis.

   1%
3. C

   Too Strong: greater importance4% picked this

   argue for the greater importance of this skill as compared with certain others that are discussed

   The author wants to make sure statutory law isn't ignored. She isn't necessarily arguing that it's more important than case laws. So we can't say she's arguing that "knowing how a system of laws interrelate (synthesis)" is a more important skill than "analyzing individual cases". Nothing in the 3rd paragraph sounds comparative. At no point is the author saying that synthesis is more important than something else. She frames her discussion of synthesis as simply "a 2nd benefit we could get by making sure we teach statutory law in law schools".

   4%
4. D

   Too Strong: necessary Reverse Causality4% picked this

   explain why this skill is necessary for the study of

   Nothing here would support the extreme claim that "Synthesis is necessary for the study of statutory law". Also, that makes it seem like synthesis comes first, but the author was saying that studying statutory law leads to having more skill with synthesis.

   4%
5. E

   Out of Scope: example / typical problem0% picked this

   provide an example of the type of problem typically encountered in the

   Nothing in the 3rd paragraph gets specific enough to qualify as an example. And the author isn't talking about any typical problem encountered in law. The author is talking about a skill that is acquired when you're taught statutory law in law school.

   0%