LR Question 25 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: We are in a new industrial revolution that requires management…
QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption
CONCLUSION: Business school curricula should be developed by business executives and then taught by academics.
REASONING: Business school has been too theoretical and not practical enough.
ANALYSIS: The argument assumes that business executives could add value and it is also assumes that the academic professors could effectively teach the curriculum.
___________
- This is pretty extreme. It’s only necessary that academics don’t have enough practical experience. They could have some.
- As with A, this is also pretty extreme. It’s only necessary that academics don’t deal with enough real situations.
- The stimulus actually assumes that academics are able to teach the curriculum. The conclusion says that academics should teach what business executives design.
- This would support the argument by showing how useless business schools have become. But it isn’t necessary. It’s only necessary that business schools aren’t responsive enough.
- CORRECT. If business executives don’t have any relevant knowledge to add then it’s not clear how they could improve the situation.
More Resources for Necessary Assumption Questions
- Negations Article: Learn about negations on the LSAT.
- Conditional Reasoning Article: Learn about conditional statements.
- Negations Drill: Practice your negation skills.
- LR Diagrams Guide: Learn how to draw LR diagrams.
- Intro to Conditional Reasoning: Learn conditional reasoning basics.
- Intro Course lesson: This intro course lesson covers Necessary Assumption questions.
- Mastery Seminar lesson: This LR Mastery seminar lesson covers necessary assumption questions.
1. How is E correct?? It is not necessary for business executives to have insight that the academics don’t have, being that it’s possible that really the academics have the insight, just that they’re unable to tear away from their roots, like the paragraph said!
2. D should be the correct answer!
E is correct because this argument is assuming that business executives are able to facilitate “action learning”, which the stimulus says that business school academics can’t. This ability of theirs is the “valuable insight” which the business schools don’t have.
D is out of scope. We don’t care about academic training outside of business schools. The last sentence of the stimulus tells us that they want business executives to set curricula for business schools. Not external training.
I now see why it is not D, but I am still confused about why it is E. Who is to say that the academics in business schools don’t have this valuable insight of knowing that “action learning” will really have better results, just they do not want to use them because they want to stick to their roots?
If business executives have no useful knowledge, then why should we let them teach? The argument has to assume that business execs know something that academics don’t.
Note: This is an old comment but I wanted to clarify the point.