RC: Many researchers regard Thailand's recent economic

[Khush]

Many researchers regard Thailand's
recent economic growth, as reflected by its
gross domestic product (GDP) growth rates,
as an example of the success of a modern
(5) technological development strategy based
on the market economics of industrialized
countries. Yet by focusing solely on aggre-
gate economic growth data as the measure
of Thailand's development, these research-
(10) ers have overlooked the economic impact of
rural development projects that improve
people's daily lives at the village level-
such as the cooperative raising of water
buffalo, improved sanitation, and the devel-
(15) opment of food crops both for consumption
and for sale at local markets; such projects
are not adequately reflected in the country's
GDP. These researchers, influenced by
Robert Heilbroner's now outdated develop-
(20) ment theory, tend to view nontechnological
development as an obstacle to progress.
Heilbroner's theory has become doctrine in
some economics textbooks: for example,
Monte Palmer disparages nontechnological
(25) rural development projects as inhibiting
constructive change. Yet as Ann Kelleher's
two recent case studies of the Thai villages
Non Muang and Dong Keng illustrate, the
nontechnological-versus-technological
(30) dichotomy can lead researchers not only to
overlook real advances achieved by rural
development projects but also mistakenly to
conclude that because such advances are
initiated by rural leaders and are based on
(35) traditional values and practices, they retard
"real" economic development.


The primary prupose of the passage is to:
A.explain the true reasons for the increase in the Thaildand's GDP
B. argue for the adoption of certain rural development projects
C.question the value of technological development in Thailand
D.criticize certain assumptions about economic development in Thailland
E.compare traditional and modern development strategies in Thalilland

OA: D
I marked B..

Can you please explain the difference between "Argue" and "Criticize" here?
I thought since the author is emphasizing on the advantages of the rural development projects overlooked by many researchers, the author is arguing for the adoption of some rural development projects.

on the other hand since the passage uses the words e.g. "overlooked by.." , "mistakenly" , i could not conclude that these are the ASSUMPTIONS by the researchers. Therefore, rejected D.

[NL]

Thanks Khus for usually posting nice RC questions.
I’d love using Ron’s strategy to tackle this question:

* Main points of the passage:
- 1st to 6th sentence: a researchers’ opinion that the economic growth reflected GDP growth.
- 7th to the rest: author’s reasoning to refuse the researchers’ opinion.


*Answering the question:
This is a main idea question. So the answer must say something about the author disagrees/ refuses the researchers’ opinion.
(although I’m not sure about the word "assumption" in D, but only D is closest to this point)

[RonPurewal]

OA: D
I marked B..

Can you please explain the difference between "Argue" and "Criticize" here?
I thought since the author is emphasizing on the advantages of the rural development projects overlooked by many researchers, the author is arguing for the adoption of some rural development projects.

Nowhere does the passage argue in favor of (or against) adopting rural development projects. The author's point is that the value of such projects is not well reflected in economic analyses based on GDP statistics.
Basically, "These projects exist. Applying this kind of model to them gives screwy results."
There's no advocacy; the author just acknowledges the existence of the programs, and then goes on to discuss how they are ill represented by GDP-based analysis.

[Khush]

makes sense..

Thanks Ron !!

[RonPurewal]

You're welcome.

[rakshaki]

Hi Ron,

I chose A. Can you explain how to eliminate A?

Thanks

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron,

I chose A. Can you explain how to eliminate A?

Thanks

the passage is entirely concerned with the importance of factors that are NOT included in GDP. it mentions exactly zero things that do affect GDP.