Critical-thinking instruction is predicated on two assumptions: that

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning of the crucial part of this sentence is that if students recognize and apply the relevant thinking skills, they will become more effective thinkers.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Modifiers + Pronouns + Parallelism

• In a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun; this is one of the most frequently tested concepts on GMAT sentence correction.
• Any elements linked by a conjunction ("and" in this sentence) must be parallel.
• A pronoun and its derivatives can only refer to one noun in a sentence.

A: This answer choice incorrectly uses "if recognized and applied" to modify "students", illogically implying that the students are recognized and applied; the intended meaning is that the relevant thinking skills are recognized and applied by the students; remember, in a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun. Further, Option A fails to maintain parallelism between "that there are clearly identifiable thinking skills that students can be taught to recognize and apply appropriately" and "if recognized and applied, students will become more effective thinkers"; remember, any elements linked by a conjunction ("and" in this sentence) must be parallel.

B: This answer choice fails to maintain parallelism between "that there are clearly identifiable thinking skills that students can be taught to recognize and apply appropriately" and "if these skills are recognized and applied, that students will become more effective thinkers"; remember, any elements linked by a conjunction ("and" in this sentence) must be parallel.

C: This answer choice incorrectly uses "them" to refer to "skills" and "they" to refer to "students"; remember, a pronoun and its derivatives can only refer to one noun in a sentence. Further, Option C fails to maintain parallelism between "that there are clearly identifiable thinking skills that students can be taught to recognize and apply appropriately" and "if students recognize and apply them, that they will become more effective thinkers"; remember, any elements linked by a conjunction ("and" in this sentence) must be parallel.

D: This answer choice incorrectly uses "if recognized and applied" to modify "students", illogically implying that the students are recognized and applied; the intended meaning is that the relevant thinking skills are recognized and applied by the students; remember, in a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun.

E: Correct. This answer choice correctly uses the pronoun "they" to refer to only the noun "students". Further, Option E uses the phrase "if students recognize and apply these skills", conveying the intended meaning - that the relevant thinking skills are recognized and applied by the students. Additionally, Option E maintains parallelism between "that there are clearly identifiable thinking skills that students can be taught to recognize and apply appropriately" and "that if students recognize and apply these skills, they will become more effective thinkers".

Hence, E is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Phrase Comma Subject" and "Subject Comma Phrase" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team

Is there a typo. "and" should be excluded from the underlined part.


IMO: E
To maintain parallelism:
Two assumptions: that X and that Y.
E is more elegant between D and E since it clearly shows that if skills are applied then outcome.
Also, construction: If <present>, then <future> is correct in E

Statement: that .......... and that .......

only E follows this construction

X and Y need to be parallel

in Option D

if students recognised?
recognised what? , there is a slight ambiguity and E fixes the ambiguity


E

E. that if students recognize and apply these skills, they

how do we rule out that 'they' after comma doesn't refer to skills? we may say due to meaning. However, I always find it difficult to make such decisions when it comes to pick between meaning of a sentence and a rule. Could any expert please help how do we approach such scenarios with examples.Please!

Hi ManSab, you are right. Technically speaking, they is an ambiguous pronoun, since it has two eligible antecedents: students and skills.

In such cases, the pronoun subject (in this case they) can be presumed to refer to noun subject (in this case students) of another clause.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses the usage of ambiguous pronouns, its application and examples in significant detail. Have attached the corresponding section of the book, for your reference.

D. that if recognized and applied, students

D's main problem arises from a dangling modification. As such in D, the modifier, if recognized and applied, modifies the students, which is absurd. The genuine modified noun 'skills' is totally absent in the complex sentence. We have to bring the truly modified noun from outside. Therefore, D is defective in grammar.

Coming to E's supposed ambiguity, there is a simple rule of replacement to ascertain the true pronoun reference whether skills or students.

E. that if students recognize and apply these skills, they will become better thinkers


1. that if students recognize and apply these skills, (they) skills will become better thinkers.
2. that if students recognize and apply these skills, (they) students will become better thinkers.
Now it might be clear which the genuine referent of 'they' is. In matters of pronoun reference, logic is the Supreme Court.

In this sentence I got confused that the "that" AFTER COLON would distribute to both the assumptions as "and" is an open parallel marker. Can someone please help me to decide on this so that I dont make such future errors.

singh

If you do not put a 'that' after and, then E will turn unparallel.

1. That there are clearly identifiable thinking skills those students can be taught to recognize and apply appropriately --- this relative clause due to the introduction of 'that' in the beginning.

2. That if students recognize and apply these skills, they -- This is also a relative clause due to the word' 'that'. If you drop the word 'that', then the remaining sentence will become an independent complex sentence.

Can you cite the origin of the rule in which 'that' can be dropped after an 'and' in the second part

SIr, I cant cite a specific rule pertaining to the dropping of that. What I was referring to was a generic rule stated in Manhattan SC guide that if a open parallelism marker is used, the element before the parallel elements distributes to both the parallel elements. For eg
The railroad can lose more money or solve its problems. Here, can is distributed to both lose money and solve problems and is not required to be repeated.(example from Manhattan SC guide)

Drawing Analogy from the example, Shouldnt we avoid repeating that in this question?

AjiteshArun
Why that is necessary after and ?
Can't it be an ellipse ?

Down to D & E since 'that' is missing in A,B,C

One more reason to choose E.

(D) that if recognized and applied, students
if + past --> students will (future) -- INCORRECT

(E) that if students recognize and apply these skills, they
if + present --> students will (future) - CORRECT

In option E, I thought "they" is ambiguous because it could refer to skills or students. How did you avoid this confusion?

Thanks

It is not always possible to remove ambiguity, and many correct options use ambiguous pronouns.

We should try to check for the more "sure" concepts before taking a decision on the basis of pronoun ambiguity.

GMATNinja

Out of curiosity, is it possible to move "that" after the modifier in the second part of parallel list (like in Choice B)

Choice B sounds to me like the modifier is the on-going situation from assumption 1, and "that students..." introduce assumption 2.

Or I am thinking too much right now?

Thank you very much!

Critical-thinking instruction is predicated on two assumptions: that there are clearly identifiable thinking skills that students can be taught to recognize and apply appropriately, and if recognized and applied, students will become more effective thinkers.

1st split is between if and that.
Clearly to maintain parallelism that should be used. so eliminate a,b,c.
option d is wrong because eventhough it is maintaining parallalism, recognized and applied is modifying students whereas it should refer to skills.
E rectifies all these mistakes and there is no ambiguity in regard to they because there are two possibilities of antecedents for they. They are - students, skills. Only students makes sense in this case.

(A) if recognized and applied, students

(B) if these skills are recognized and applied, that students

(C) if students recognize and apply them, that they

(D) that if recognized and applied, students

(E) that if students recognize and apply these skills, they

parallelism is being tested here with 'and ' in the beginning and then 'that+clause' .So eliminate A,B and C. Between D and E, D has a meaning error and E is the only statement that has sense. hence E

Hi daagh GMATNinja egmat

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

In option D, incorrect usage of modifier didn't immediately struck me, however, I was able to eliminate it on the basis of Conditional If.

If recognized and applied (in the past), students would
That if students recognize and apply these skills, they will

Though, I know the modifier split is better.

Thanks