ana.zdrafcovici wrote:
Can you kindly explain why B is the correct answer?
thank you
This argument concludes the figures "indicate how underpaid teachers are today." How do the figures support this idea?
Well, the argument compares two groups -- those who stayed in the teaching profession, and those who left. The argument then notes that twice as many people in the "left-teaching" group compared to the "stayed-in-teaching" group earn more than $35,000. According to the argument, this demonstrates that teachers are underpaid.
So is (B) a required assumption for this argument?
Quote:
The group of persons who left teaching and the group who did not are comparable in terms of factors that determine how much people outside the teaching profession are paid.
Well, the argument is based on the idea that teachers are getting paid less than they would
if they left the profession. In other words, the argument assumes that the teachers who stayed in the profession COULD be making more if they left. But how do we know that's true?
What if the teachers who stayed in the profession would NOT make more money if they left? What if the people who left teaching are getting paid more because they have
different skills? Skills that allow them to make more money outside the teaching profession? If that were the case, the figures wouldn't support the idea that teachers are underpaid.
So as (B) says, to reach its conclusion, this argument assumes that the people who left teaching and those who stayed are incomparable in terms of how much money they'd make outside the teaching profession. Because if they weren't comparable, we couldn't really be sure that the teachers are being underpaid.
I hope that helps!