LSAT 114 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q21

LR Question 21 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Some educators claim that it is best that school…

QUESTION TYPE: Most Strongly Supported

CONCLUSION: It is best to study only the basics, but to cover them in depth.

REASONING: Deep knowledge of a few subjects will provide the basis for future study. But memorization of many facts without context will not prepare one for understanding anything.

ANALYSIS: There are two opposing education viewpoints. One is that we should study broadly, without depth. The other is that we should have a narrow focus, but learn well each subject that we study.

The stimulus argues that the second method will make us much better at learning on our own once we finish school.

Note that this question is asking about the educators’ reasoning, not the author’s reasoning.

___________

1. Learning how plants and animals are useful is not the same as understanding them in depth.
2. This has nothing to do with the different types of study mentioned in the stimulus. (Detailed vs. Broad.)
3. This doesn’t tell us much. The stimulus was arguing both for learning from a teacher and learning on your own, later.
4. CORRECT. Detailed study of a small part of a subject gives us the tools to understand the rest of the subject later. 
5. The stimulus didn’t say which method was more effective. And it advocated learning only a few basic subjects, but learning them well.