Parent: Pushing very young children into rigorous study in an effort to make our nation more competitive does more harm than good.
Causation Comparison
Pro Con
Primary School Rigorous Work
Secondary School Rigorous Work
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
Pro Con
Primary School Rigorous Work
Secondary School Rigorous Work
Which one of the following can be inferred from the parent's statements?
For our nation to be
While rigorous work makes sense for secondary school students, that doesn’t imply that more rigorous study than now exists is necessary.
1% picked this
The developmental needs of secondary
The statements do not address whether the developmental needs of secondary school students are currently being addressed.
1% picked this
Our country can be competitive
While economic competitiveness is an aim of some who push rigorous study on primary school students, no prerequisites for achieving that aim is offered.
5% picked this
A curriculum of rigorous study
Why this is right
Pro Con Primary School Rigorous Work Secondary School Rigorous Work Since rigorous work is a drawback for primary school students, it does not meet the developmental needs of primary school students.
Skill tested: Must be True · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
92% picked this
Unless our nation encourages more
Rigorous work for primary school students is a drawback, not an advantage as this answer would have it.
1% picked this
Continue the review in LSAT Lab
Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.
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.