Q4 - Editorial: Some primary schools' early eduaction

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type:
Principle-Strengthen

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: Programs that encourage reading by bribing kids with money should be viewed with suspicion.
Evidence: Even if they read more, this might teach them to think of reading as a chore rather a pleasurable activity.

Answer Anticipation:
If we're prephrasing this in "IF premise, THEN conclusion" form, our answer might sound like this:
"If a certain practice would make reading seem like a chore rather than a fun thing, then that practice should be viewed with suspicion".

If the answer is in the form of a Should-Rule-of-Thumb, it might sound like this:
"We should be wary about motivational practices that make the desired action seem like a chore."

Occasionally, Principle-Strengthen answers are written in a style that weighs the trade-offs. Since this situation involves a benefit (they read more) and a detriment (they think of reading as a chore), we could also see an answer that prioritizes the detriment over the benefit:
"It's more important that reading be something kids enjoy, than that it be something we force them to do".

Correct Answer:
D

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) Nothing in the argument is about the distinction between "reading hard books" vs. "reading lots of books".

(B) This feels like something the author might ALSO believe, but it's not providing connective tissue between the premise and the conclusion. Nothing in the argument talks about kids choosing their own books or about whether they are likely to become regular readers.

(C) Parents vs. teachers is a distinction the argument didn't care about.

(D) YES, this addresses the tradeoffs. This program might get kids to read more, but it should be viewed with suspicion since this program might make kids think of reading as work, not pleasure, and the goal of these programs should be to instill a love of reading.

(E) Nothing in the argument about improving facility with reading.

Takeaway/Pattern: It didn't seem like this argument would deliver a conditional answer, since the conclusion is such a fuzzy idea: "___ should be viewed with suspicion". This follows more the pattern of a Should-Rule-of-Thumb, or a Weighing-the-Tradeoffs type of answer. These are the less common of the three types of correct answers for Principle Strengthen.

#officialexplanation