Q20 - Michele: In my professional experience, it's usually

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type:
ID the Disagreement

Stimulus Breakdown:
M: Think twice before overhauling your database, since the rewards rarely exceed the problems (in my professional experience).
A: The problems are always due to an avoidable problem (failing to recode the database properly). If you're going to overhaul your database, just make sure you do it right.

Answer Anticipation:
Which of the 1st person's claims is the 2nd person arguing against?

Is Alvaro arguing that "The rewards USUALLY HAVE exceeded the benefits, when companies overhaul their databases?".
No, because Alvaro discusses the problems that have transpired and never says they were outweighed by benefits.

Is Alvaro arguing that "If you're considering an overhaul, DON'T think twice?"
Yes, that seems to be the thrust of his statements. Both M's and A's conclusions are written in a folksy way, but M was essentially saying "you probably shouldn't overhaul your database" and A is saying "overhauling your database is fine as long as you do it right".

Correct Answer:
D

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) No. They might disagree on WHAT companies should consider when mulling over the decision to overhaul. But neither person discusses why a company might want to update their databse.

(B) Tempting, but this is phrased too extremely to be correct. Since this is asking whether "problems EVER outweigh rewards" we would need one of our two speakers to be arguing the incredibly extreme position that "no, problems NEVER outweigh rewards". Neither person could be portrayed as thinking that way.

(C) Neither party gets into discussing specific types of database overhauls. (Alvaro discusses a specific type of problem associated with the database overhaul, but not a type of overhaul)

(D) YES. Michele says "they should think twice" (i.e. not do it). Alvaro says they should "make sure to do the job right" (i.e. do it, but make sure you recode it properly)

(E) Neither person discusses a time when professional experience is REQUIRED for anything.

Takeaway/Pattern: Be very deliberate about asking yourself, "Which of the 1st person's claims is the 2nd person attacking?" It helps to focus your language on the disconnect.

#officialexplanation

[HughM388]

I'm afraid I didn't interpret—and still don't consider—the expression "think twice" to mean "don't do" something. I've always thought of and used it in its more literal sense of "consider very carefully" before doing something. In my experience—and though that sample size may be small—that's how I've seen others use it.

I therefore discerned no disagreement between Alvaro and Michele on that account. Alvaro seemed to be reinforcing that part of Michele's statement: consider cautiously and proceed deliberately, to make sure you do the job right.

The only sense I could see in any of the answers (and there is little sense to be found, typical of later LR-section questions) was in (C). I inferred that perhaps Michele was claiming that virtually any and all overhauls go poorly, which Alvaro directly contradicted by saying that only a particular kind of overhaul goes poorly—specifically those which suffer from recoding problems.

I think I'd stand by (C) on that basis, and I'd probably carry the debate.