Logical Reasoning

PT5 · S3 · Q10 The reforms to improve the quality

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

The reforms to improve the quality of public education that have been initiated on the part of suppliers of public education have been insufficient.

Conclusion (therefore / should)

Reforms must be demanded by consumers. Parents should get govt vouchers, which would pay for school at whatever school a parent chooses to send their kid.

Evidence

Reforms made by suppliers of public education have been insufficient. Academically underachieving schools will be forced to improve their academic offerings to attract students.

Evaluate

Although this is described as an argument, we could also think of it as Plan / Goal.

PLAN: the voucher system GOAL: improve the quality of public education

When we analyze plans we ask whether it can feasibly work as the author imagines (do academically underachieving schools even have the capacity to improve their academic offerings). We ask about whether people would cooperate with the plan (would parents really send their kids to the academically superior schools? would schools really improve academics to attract parents?). We ask about whether it could backfire (what if the coveted schools have too many applicants and become overcrowded and education suffers as a result).

Goal

A key assumption that needs examination is that the primary consideration for parents using the vouchers would be the academic quality of the school. If this isn't true, then the argument that the competition will improve academic standards falls apart.

10.

The argument assumes that

  1. Correct

    In selecting schools parents would

    Why this is right

    Negating this assumption implies that parents might prioritize non-academic factors, which would undermine how the author's plan is intended to work. If parents are prioritizing sports opportunities or location, then raising academic quality wouldn't be how a school would try to attract students.

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

    69% picked this

  2. Improvement in the academic offerings

    Out of Scope: job market discipline

    We're only analyzing whether the school voucher plan would result in improved academic quality. This answer addresses what would come after that. Would the improved academic quality be enforced by X? That's beyond the scope of what we're analyzing. If the plan results in improved academic quality, the author wins her case. She doesn't have to assume anything about what happens after that.

    2% picked this

  3. There is a single best

    Too Strong: single best way

    This is an extreme idea that is not even important to whether this voucher plan would work. The author is only assuming that if parents got to choose schools for their kids, schools would figure out ways to academically improve in order to attract parents. But that doesn't require that there is one single best way to educate. If there are multiple best ways to educate, the plan still can make sense.

    2% picked this

  4. Children are able to recognize

    Irrelevant Causality: children influencing

    The argument doesn’t require such a detailed assumption about who influences the voucher decision. If children weren't able to pick the best school for themselves or weren't influencing their parents, the plan could still work (as long as parents were able to correctly pick schools with higher academic quality for their kids).

    7% picked this

  5. Schools would each improve all

    Too Strong: all

    This is another answer that's very strong, so we should be suspicious. Does the plan require that schools improve EVERY SINGLE ONE of their academic offerings? If they only improved 90% of their academic offerings would that derail the plan? Of course not. If 90% of offerings are improved, then would certainly mean the school's overall academic quality had improved, so the goal would still be achieved. The author was only ever talking about academic quality overall, not subdividing into specialties.

    20% 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