Logical Reasoning

PT6 · S3 · Q26 Proposals for extending the United

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

Proposals for extending the United States school year to bring it more in line with its European and Japanese counterparts are often met with the objection that curtailing the schools’ three-month summer vacation would violate an established United States tradition dating from the nineteenth century.

The Objection

Extending the U.S. school year would violate the established 19th-century tradition of three-month summer vacations.

Author's Counter

Sure, 19th-century schools closed for three months, but only because rural schools needed children for harvest labor.

The essence of the tradition was .

Evaluate

The three most common moves on Method are Analogies, Faulty Implications, and Alternatives.

The author does seem to be trying to break the analogy between modern times and traditional times. The objectors are acting like, , and the author is trying to introduce a Distinction between then and now, to interrupt this argument by analogy:

back THEN, we need children's labor for successful harvests (implied: NOWADAYS, we don't need their labor)

She then clarifies the real spirit behind the policy was to adjust school to meet economic needs.

Goal

The argument makes two moves, either of which could be tested: - pointing out an implied difference between then and now - showing the underlying principle behind the traditional policy

26.

The argument counters the objection by?

  1. providing evidence to show that

    Bad Description

    The author doesn't challenge the amount of time schools were closed. In fact, she concedes that 19th-century schools closed for three months every summer.

    5% picked this

  2. calling into question the relevance

    Bad Description

    The author isn't saying, "we shouldn't look to the past when it comes to current disputes about this potential social change". She is saying, "The WAY y'all are looking at the past is wrong", but not saying "it's wrong to look at the past". This is most clear in the final sentence, where the author attempts to refine the potential historical lesson you could extract and apply to today's policy. She's saying, "if you want to appeal to tradition to argue something about a proposed social change, just know that the tradition wasn't 3-month vacation, it was determine the length according to economic needs."

    25% picked this

  3. Correct

    arguing for an alternative understanding

    Why this is right

    Does the author argue for a different understanding of the underlying tradition? Yes, she's saying the tradition wasn't about "we should have a 3 month summer", the tradition was, "we should determine the length of the school year based on our economic needs." We prephrased a different member of the Big 3, saying that the author was questioning whether the current time was analogous to the 19th century, in terms of the economic need of having kids off for 3 months to help with the harvest. And this answer surprised us by describing the argument in terms of a different Big 3, providing an Alternative. We should stay flexible. On Method, if the answer is true, then it's correct.

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

    61% picked this

  4. showing that those who oppose

    Bad Description

    The author doesn't accuse the opponents of being insincere about their concern for tradition. Instead, the author tries to clarify for them what the traditional model was all about (meeting economic needs, rather than 3-month vacation).

    2% picked this

  5. demonstrating that tradition justifies bringing

    Too Strong

    The author isn't going so far with her rebuttal that we would reach the stage of, "Therefore, we SHOULD extend the school year!" The objection is just creating doubt about whether we should maintain the 3 month summer. It's suggesting that tradition would justify choosing a school year length that matches our economic needs. But we don't know what the current economic needs are, so we can't say that they point us in the direction of the rest of the industrialized world. In fact the author isn't even saying that tradition should justify any policy choice. She just says, "IF tradition were to justify a policy choice, then it would a policy adapted to our economic needs."

    8% 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