LSAT Explanation PT 30, S4, Q11: High school students who feel that

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following, if true about the last year, most seriously weakens the argument? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Weaken question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is A. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

The question type for this problem is Weaken, and we are asked to find the answer choice that most seriously weakens the argument presented in the passage.

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage. The passage has the following structure:

Premise 1: High school students who feel they are not succeeding often drop out before graduating and go to work.

Premise 2: Last year, the city's high school dropout rate was significantly lower than the previous year's rate.

Conclusion: The program instituted two years ago to improve the morale of high school students has begun to take effect to reduce dropouts.

The argument is based on the causal relationship between the program and the reduction in dropout rates. Our goal is to weaken this relationship.

To better understand the argument, let's use a simple example. Imagine a city where a large number of people used to catch colds every winter. After the city started a program to provide free flu shots, the number of people catching colds decreased significantly. The argument claims that the free flu shots program caused the decrease in cold cases.

Now, let's consider an "Evaluate" question for this argument: "Were there any other factors that could have contributed to the decrease in cold cases?"

Let's examine each answer choice:

a) There was a recession that caused a high level of unemployment in the city.

This answer choice introduces an alternative cause for the reduction in dropout rates. If there was a recession and high unemployment, students might have been less likely to drop out because there were fewer job opportunities available. This weakens the causal relationship between the program and the reduction in dropout rates, making it the correct answer.

b) The morale of students who dropped out of high school had been low even before they reached high school.

This answer choice is irrelevant to the argument. It does not affect the causal relationship between the program and the reduction in dropout rates.

c) As in the preceding year, more high school students remained in school than dropped out.

This answer choice does not weaken the argument because it does not affect the causal relationship between the program and the reduction in dropout rates. It simply states a fact that was true both before and after the program was instituted.

d) High schools in the city established placement offices to assist their graduates in obtaining employment.

This answer choice is a Shell Game answer. It refers to high school graduates, not high school dropouts, and does not affect the causal relationship between the program and the reduction in dropout rates.

e) The antidropout program was primarily aimed at improving students' morale in those high schools with the highest dropout rates.

This answer choice does not weaken the argument. It simply provides information about the target high schools of the antidropout program, which is irrelevant to the overall causal relationship between the program and the reduction in dropout rates.

In conclusion, the correct answer is (a), as it introduces an alternative cause for the reduction in dropout rates, weakening the causal relationship between the program and the reduction in dropout rates.