Author: GMATGuruNY
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 1:18 pm (GMT -7)
Does the tutoring program CAUSE students to do better?
Note the following:
Causation can NEVER be proved beyond all doubt.
A conclusion about causation can only be SUPPORTED.
Thus, the four incorrect answers here do not need to PROVE that the tutoring program causes students to do better.
Rather, these answer choices need only SUPPORT the conclusion that the tutoring program causes students to do better.
Since B states that students NOT in the tutoring program DO WORSE, the conclusion that the tutoring program causes students to DO BETTER is supported.
This line of reasoning is quite common in medical research.
Just as answer choice B discusses two different groups of students, so do many medical studies discuss two different groups of patients.
Typically, the efficacy of a new drug is tested by giving the drug to ONE GROUP of patients and a placebo to ANOTHER GROUP of patients.
If the patients not given the new drug DO WORSE, the study will conclude that the new drug CAUSES patients to DO BETTER.
Same reasoning as that used in answer choice B.
_________________
Mitch Hunt
GMAT Private Tutor and Instructor
GMATGuruNY@gmail.com
If you find one of my posts helpful, please take a moment to click on the "Thank" icon.
Contact me about long distance tutoring!
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 1:18 pm (GMT -7)
imskpwr wrote:
I thought that there are TWO groups:
One- group of students who have undergone tutoring program.
Second- group of students who have not undergone any tutoring program.
We are concerned with the effect of the Tutoring program on students. Clearly, possible weakners for this argument will try to find an issue either in "the group of students who have undergone tutoring program" or with the "tutoring program"(or anything that has direct bearing on tutoring program or the group of students who have undergone tutoring program).
The effects on the "group of students who have not undergone any tutoring program" will have no bearing on the conclusion that Tutoring program will do more harm than good.
At its core, this argument is about CAUSATION:GMATGuruNY wrote:
The average scores of the students NOT in the tutoring program decline BY 30%.
The average scores of the students IN the tutoring program decline BY ONLY 20%.
Since the tutored students see a smaller score decline, they BENEFIT from the tutoring program, WEAKENING the conclusion that the tutoring program does more harm than good.
Eliminate B.
Mitch, imskpwr wrote:
Consider the following example:The average scores of students who were not in the tutoring program declined by an even greater amount over the tutoring period.This is outside the scope of the argument so it has no effect on the conclusion ie OUT OF SCOPE
The average scores of the students NOT in the tutoring program decline BY 30%.
The average scores of the students IN the tutoring program decline BY ONLY 20%.
Since the tutored students see a smaller score decline, they BENEFIT from the tutoring program, WEAKENING the conclusion that the tutoring program does more harm than good.
Eliminate B.
I thought that there are TWO groups:
One- group of students who have undergone tutoring program.
Second- group of students who have not undergone any tutoring program.
We are concerned with the effect of the Tutoring program on students. Clearly, possible weakners for this argument will try to find an issue either in "the group of students who have undergone tutoring program" or with the "tutoring program"(or anything that has direct bearing on tutoring program or the group of students who have undergone tutoring program).
The effects on the "group of students who have not undergone any tutoring program" will have no bearing on the conclusion that Tutoring program will do more harm than good.
Does the tutoring program CAUSE students to do better?
Note the following:
Causation can NEVER be proved beyond all doubt.
A conclusion about causation can only be SUPPORTED.
Thus, the four incorrect answers here do not need to PROVE that the tutoring program causes students to do better.
Rather, these answer choices need only SUPPORT the conclusion that the tutoring program causes students to do better.
Since B states that students NOT in the tutoring program DO WORSE, the conclusion that the tutoring program causes students to DO BETTER is supported.
This line of reasoning is quite common in medical research.
Just as answer choice B discusses two different groups of students, so do many medical studies discuss two different groups of patients.
Typically, the efficacy of a new drug is tested by giving the drug to ONE GROUP of patients and a placebo to ANOTHER GROUP of patients.
If the patients not given the new drug DO WORSE, the study will conclude that the new drug CAUSES patients to DO BETTER.
Same reasoning as that used in answer choice B.
_________________
Mitch Hunt
GMAT Private Tutor and Instructor
GMATGuruNY@gmail.com
If you find one of my posts helpful, please take a moment to click on the "Thank" icon.
Contact me about long distance tutoring!