This means there are no other benifits of the program.
Why not E ? If you negate E - students can't read well to study history and science , then argument fails.. So why E isn't an assumption here ?
Conclusion: Our school district should not spend its money on the new Verbal Advantage reading program
If you negate the assumption then the conclusion must fail. Lets take E , The students can already read well enough to study history and science.
then how we can say that program will not be benificial. Program may tell you some more things apart from regular reading and may still be benificial. But if you say that reading is the only skill that program teaches then we can say that students are already getting the practice for reading by reading science and history.
Sorry, i still think E is better..
Please read through carefully..
Premise - science and history provides reading practice.
conclusion - Don't need reading program.
we need to fit an assumption here between Premise and conclusion.. This assumption is E..
I would think C would make sense when argument is based as below.
Premise: Don't need reading program.
Conclusion: science and history provides reading practice.
Here the assumption - reading program gives only reading practice- makes sense to support the conclusion.. But in given argument conclusion and premises are different.. So I think E makes sense..
Comments are welcome..