Although smaller class sizes

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Strong: extremely expensive6% picked this

   Reducing class size is an extremely expensive type of educational

   The author certainly believes that there is some expense involved in reducing class size, because she brings up the cost-benefit consideration of limited finances. But she doesn't need to assume it's extremely expensive. Even moderately expensive would still justify her argument that there might be better ways to spend that precious money.

   6%
2. B

   Correct91% picked this

   Dollar for dollar, efforts to recruit and retain good teachers yield larger improvements in student performance than do

   Why this is right

   This is just affirming that "the option the author is endorsing is better than the option the author is rejecting". It says "dollar for dollar" because the whole argument is couched in terms of how to make the best use of limited finances. Our author is assuming, for a given amount of money, we'd get more benefit by recruiting/retaining good teachers than by reducing class size. If we negated this, it would surely weaken (as must every correct answer on Necessary Assumption), for it would be saying that "dollar for dollar, you get larger improvements from reducing class size than from getting and keeping good teachers".

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

   91%
3. C

   Trap0% picked this

   Because reducing class size is a popular policy, it is much easier to get public approval for that policy than

   Unrelated to Goal Out of Scope: getting public approval Too Strong: much easier / most This has nothing to do with the Conclusion, which is about recruiting/retaining better teachers, so it's definitely not related to our goal. The concept of "getting approval" has never been discussed. The author certainly hasn't committed herself to a strongly worded claim like, "getting public approval to reduce class size is much easier than over 50% of other educational policies".

   0%
4. D

   Too Strong: most effective way2% picked this

   Reducing class size is the most cost effective way to recruit and

   This conclusion is Comparative, not Superlative. It says that public funds would be better spent on Y than on X. The author doesn't need to assume that recruiting/retaining teachers is #1. She just has to assume it beats out reducing class sizes. I can say "Harvey would be better off going to University of Texas than to University of Arizona for law school", and that doesn't mean I believe that University of Texas is the best law school.

   2%
5. E

   Out of Scope0% picked this

   In practice, it is difficult to identify what would be the most productive use

   Out of Scope: difficult to identify Too Strong: most productive The author is never discussing "the most productive" use of education dollars. She is definitely encouraging us to always ask, "Is there a better way to spend our money", but she hasn't encouraged us to ask, "Is this the absolute #1 most productive way to spend our money". She definitely hasn't offered any commentary suggesting her beliefs on how easy / difficult it would be to identify that #1 use of money.

   0%