Research indicates that college

Answer choices

1. A

   Not Inappropriate37% picked this

   inappropriately assumes a correlation between household income and

   Our author does seem to be jumping from Evidence about "household income" to a Conclusion about "economic advantage". She seems to assume a relationship; I'm not in love with calling it a correlation but correlations are a type of relationship. I think the bigger problem with this answer is that LSAC wouldn't expect us to chastise an author for assuming that "more income" is an "economic advantage". Of course it is! That's a very legitimate assumption. LSAC wants us to be objecting, "Just because they grew up in rich neighborhoods doesn't mean THEY were rich", not objecting "Just because you have more money doesn't mean you have an economic advantage".

   37%
2. B

   Not an Objection2% picked this

   fails to note there are some communities with high average household incomes in which no

   We couldn't possibly weaken this argument by saying, "Oh, author --- there is at least one affluent neighborhood where no college professors grew up". That would only weaken the author if she had been thinking that "every single affluent neighborhood has a future-professor growing up there". She was just saying "overall, (on average ... but obviously with some exceptions), college professors grew up in more affluent neighborhoods". This isn't a conditional claim, but if it were, it would be saying College prof ? grew up in $$ neighborhood This answer choice is acting like the argument was saying $$ neighborhood ? College prof grew up there

   2%
3. C

   Correct58% picked this

   presumes without justification that college professors generally were raised in households with incomes that are average or above

   Why this is right

   The author is assuming that the households in which the professors grew up were economically advantaged in the way that their neighborhoods were. In other words, the author assumes that "if you grew up in an affluent neighborhood, then you grew up in an affluent household". If we negated this assumption, it would weaken: college professors generally were raised in households with incomes that were lower than average for their communities. That negation gives us our original objection: you can grow up in a rich neighborhood but be relatively poor. You can have the 2-bedroom home in a community full of mansions. The professors's households might have been atypically poor for their neighborhoods, but our author is assuming those households were representative of the average income for that neighborhood (or even richer than the average for that neighborhood).

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

   58%
4. D

   Not an Objection0% picked this

   does not take into account the fact that college professors generally have lower salaries than their counterparts

   Can we weaken this argument by saying "college professors generally have lower salaries than their private sector counterparts"? Who are the private sector counterparts of a college professor? We're talking about professors at public universities making less than professors at private universities? That doesn't seem like an Objection. It's somewhat tempting, since "lower salaries" goes in our Anti-Conclusion direction of "not economically advantaged households". But the conclusion is talking about whether or not professors grew up in an economically advantaged household, not whether they currently live in an economically advantaged household. The argument isn't claiming that professors themselves are currently economically advantaged, so it doesn't weaken to say that their salaries are "lower". Also, saying "this professor makes less than that professor" doesn't show that either professor makes little money. A military doctor might make less than a private sector doctor, but both types of doctors make enough money that relative to the general population we would think of them as economically advantaged.

   0%
5. E

   Not an Objection3% picked this

   fails to take into account the fact that many college professors live in rural communities, which generally have

   The author's evidence is about where college professors grew up, not where they currently live. The argument isn't claiming or assuming anything about whether professors are currently economically advantaged or currently live in affluent communities. Beyond that, it wouldn't be an objection even if this answer dealt with the professors' upbringing, because the author was never guaranteeing that every single professor grew up in an affluent community, just that overall professors grew up in more affluent than average communities. A generalization like that allows for "many" exceptions.

   3%