Professor: Many introductory undergraduate

Answer choices

1. A

   Opposite Logic7% picked this

   If some of the students who are most enthusiastic about science do not receive passing grades in introductory science courses, then designing these courses

   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%
2. B

   Too Strong: need a way6% picked this

   Science departments need a way to ensure that only those students most committed to being science majors will receive passing

   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.

   6%
3. C

   Out of Scope9% picked this

   Some of the students in the very demanding introductory science courses who are most enthusiastic about science do not receive

   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.

   9%
4. D

   Correct72% picked this

   None of the students in the very demanding introductory science courses who are least enthusiastic about science are among the students most

   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.

   72%
5. E

   Out of Scope: should6% picked this

   Introductory science courses should not continue to be designed to serve as proving grounds if doing so has

   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%