Logical Reasoning

PT144 · S4 · Q24 Professor: Many introductory undergraduate

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

Professor: Many introductory undergraduate science courses are intended to be "proving grounds," that is, they are designed to be so demanding that only those students most committed to being science majors will receive passing grades in these courses.

Conclusion (Hence)

Designing intro science courses to serve as proving grounds hasn't served its intended purpose.

Evidence

The intended purpose was to only give passing grades to the students most committed to being science majors.

But some of the students who get passing grades are those who are least enthusiastic about science.

Evaluate

This conclusion talks about whether or not something is fulfilling the "intended purpose", which was defined at the outset with a conditional rule (only those most committed to being sci majors will get passing grades).

That sort of setup suggests that this will be testing a LINKING idea or will be focused on the Idea Math of triggers and outcomes.

We have failed our intended purpose if some people who get passing grades are "not most committed to being science majors".

We know the premise is about people who get passing grades, despite being "least enthusiastic about science".

Does being least enthusiastic about science mean you're not the most committed to being a science major? No, it doesn't. You might be hugely committed to being a science major because your parents are totally forcing you to and don't plan to stand up to them. But that's compatible with being among the "least enthusiastic".

Goal

The author is assuming that, .

24.

Which one of the following is an assumption that the professor's argument requires?

  1. If some of the students

    Opposite Logic

    Our author wasn't assuming that every person who is most enthusiastic would get a passing grade, or else the courses were unsuccessful. The intended "proving grounds" would be unsuccessful if someone who wasn't most committed to being a science major got a passing grade. only those most committed will receive passing grade: If ... you're not Then ... you won't most committed receive passing grade This answer choice is acting like the intended rule was written in this opposite logic form (it's also swapping 'most enthusiastic' for 'most committed') If ... you are Then ... you will most committed receive passing grade

    7% picked this

  2. Science departments need a way

    Too Strong: need a way

    This is saying that the author has to assume that we need something to serve this intended purpose. But the author is merely concluding that designing courses a certain way has not served its intended purpose. Making that argument doesn't reveal whether the author agreed with the intended purpose, disagreed with it, thought it was needed, thought it was optional but nice, etc. The author is only commenting on whether a plan was achieving its purpose. There's no judgment from the author about whether the purpose was worthy or necessary.

    5% picked this

  3. Some of the students in

    Out of Scope

    Out of Scope: don't get passing grade The author is trying to prove that these intro courses aren't serving their intended purpose. The intended purpose was that that "only the most committed get passing grades", so the author only needs to show a case a where someone who got a passing grade wasn't among the most committed. People who didn't get a passing grade are completely irrelevant to proving that the intro courses didn't serve their intended purpose, so the author doesn't need to assume anything about anyone not getting a passing grade.

    8% picked this

  4. Correct

    None of the students in

    Why this is right

    We anticipated that the author had assumed this move: If ... you are among the least enthusiastic about science, Then ... you are not one of the most committed to being a science major. That's exactly what this answer provides. When we see "No A's are B", it's the same as "All A's are ~B", so it translates into "A ? ~B". Hence, this answer choice says, you're in one of these hard intro sci courses not the most and ? committed to you're least enthusiastic being sci majors about science One might worry that this answer is phrased too strongly. After all, the author just has to assume that the students who were least enthusiastic and got passing grades are not among the most committed. Meanwhile, this answer is about all the students who were least enthusiastic. But modern Necessary Assumption correct answers are tolerant of using conditional logic to express a move from one thought to another. The author looked at these "some students" who got a passing grade and immediately assumed that, because they are least enthusiastic, they are not among the most committed.

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

    74% picked this

  5. Introductory science courses should not

    Out of Scope: should

    There isn't any opinion from the author in this argument. She's just explaining the intended purpose and citing putative examples of the purpose being violated. She was never saying this intended purpose should have been connected to intro science courses, nor is she saying it shouldn't be the intended purpose any more.

    6% 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