Educational Theorist: Recent editorials have called for limits on the

Question

Educational Theorist: Recent editorials have called for limits on the amount of homework assigned to schoolchildren younger than 12. They point out that free-time activities play an important role in childhood development and that homework in large quantities can severely restrict children's free time, hindering their development. But the actual average homework time for children under 12—little more than 30 minutes per night—leaves plenty of free time. In reality, therefore, the editorials' rationale cannot justify the restriction they advocate.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously call into question the educational theorist's conclusion?

A. Some teachers give as homework assignments work of a kind that research suggests is most effective educationally when done in class.

B. For children younger than 12, regularly doing homework in the first years of school has no proven academic value, but many educators believe that it fosters self-discipline and time management.

C. Some homework assignments are related to free-time activities that children engage in, such as reading or hobbies.

D. A substantial proportion of schoolchildren under 12, particularly those in their first few years of school, have less than 10 minutes of homework assigned per night.

E. Some free-time activities teach children skills or information that they later find useful in their schoolwork.

CR44040.02

AndrewN · Accepted Answer

I see a few cries for help on this one, so I will take a stab at providing a useful analysis for the larger community. Full disclosure: this one took me 2:45 to answer (correctly), a little longer than I would prefer to take, but I like to be careful in assessing exactly what the passage and answer choices are stating. As I so often do with CR questions, I took a peek at the question first so that I would know how to interpret the passage.

This is a weakener, and we need to put a dent in the conclusion of the educational theorist in particular. Thus, we have to stick strictly to that conclusion and any premises on which it is built. What does the passage tell us?

Okay, the passage itself is not hard to follow.

Sentence 1 provides the backdrop:  editorials  are calling for limits on homework for schoolchildren under 12.

Sentence 2 tells us why: too much homework = not enough time for  free time , thereby hindering development. ("All work and no play make...")

Sentence 3 provides a counterargument, starting with  but , appealing to an  average  amount of homework time for children under 12. Apparently, since this number is about 30 minutes per night, children should have plenty of free time on their hands.

Sentence 4 is the conclusion, with a nice  therefore  tossed in for good measure. In short, the educational theorist concludes that the people writing the editorials are unjustified in their call  for limits on the amount of homework assigned to schoolchildren under 12 , given that average amount of time such schoolchildren spend doing homework each night. To weaken the conclusion, we need to find justification for those homework restrictions.

The old  some  trap. The majority of the time you see it, it will lead you down a dangerous path. Here,  some  could mean two, and if just a handful of teachers were assigning this kind of homework, then there would be no need to call for restrictions on homework in general. Besides, the argument is based on children under 12 needing more free time at home. The type of homework assigned is not taken into account, just the volume of it.

We are not looking to side with educators here, just to weaken the conclusion of one particular educational theorist. If homework had some  demonstrable  positive developmental effect on children, one that was discussed in the passage, then that would weaken the position of the homework-restriction advocates. We do not care about what many educators  believe , in any case.

I did ponder this one for a time before dropping it over the same sort of unqualified  some  that appeared in (A). This could represent a very small percentage of homework assignments pertaining to the target group, and think about it, if homework assignments were helpful to development, as the notion is presented in the passage, then this new information would weaken the position of the people writing the editorials, in fact the opposite of what we are aiming to do. Get rid of this answer and keep looking.

I know, your knee-jerk reaction is probably to reject this answer because it would seem to weaken the call for restrictions on homework for schoolchildren under 12. If many such children are already getting less than 10 minutes of homework each night, then children under 12 have plenty of free time, right? Almost. We cannot ignore the part of the passage that tells us  the actual average homework time for children under 12   little more than 30 minutes per night . The GMAT™ does this sometimes, going out of its way to point us in the right direction with quantifiers:  a  substantial  proportion  of the target group gets less than 10 minutes of homework per night; therefore, we can conclude that a smaller proportion of the same larger group of schoolchildren, those under 12, must be getting a lot more homework to balance out the  average  to  more than  30 minutes per night. These poor, overburdened schoolchildren. We can now appreciate how the call made in the editorials  is  justifiable. This is our answer.

Same  some , different context. This answer does not even bother to address the issue of homework, focusing instead on why free time may be beneficial, a point that is not being debated.

When approaching a CR question,  make sure you stick to what the passage says . The more you start interpreting information, the further removed your conclusions become. This was a tough question, at least for me, but with a focus on core principles of Verbal reasoning, I was able to use the process of elimination to great effect. I hope my analysis proves useful to others. If there are any doubts about anything, I would be happy to discuss the question further.

Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

prototypevenom · Answer

It can be D! Since average time is 30mins, and a substantial proportion of students get homework less than 10mins so rest might be getting more than 30mins of homework to make average 30mins

shirishgupta77 · Answer

I believe it's C.
other options are not relevant.
A,B,D seem out of scope, E still could be considered but E does not fully justifies.

akankshathareja · Answer

The question asks us to "call into question==weaken" the educational theorist's conclusion, which is "the editorials' rationale cannot justify the restriction they advocate". We need to  weaken  "the editorials'  cannot  justify"part. Since WEAKEN cancels out CANNOT,  we need to think of something that supports the justification.  
Justification == Free time is important for development. Homework in large quantities restricts children's free time, which in turn hinders development.

A. Some teachers give as homework assignments work of a kind that research suggests is most effective educationally when done in class.
 Irrelevant. This does not deal with the issue of free time at home or hindrance in development.

B. For children younger than 12, regularly doing homework in the first years of school has no proven academic value, but many educators believe that it fosters self-discipline and time management.
 Incorrect. This is vague. "many educators" does not represent "all educators". Further, second part is against the justification of lessening the homework.

C. Some homework assignments are related to free-time activities that children engage in, such as reading or hobbies.
 Incorrect. This encourages more homework. Rather, this weakens the justification, which in turn strengthens the theorist's conclusion.

D. A substantial proportion of schoolchildren under 12, particularly those in their first few years of school, have less than 10 minutes of homework assigned per night.
 Correct. The average hw time is 30 mins. If a substantial section of schoolchildren get <10 mins of homework, some students would be getting more than 30 mins of homework. These students would have to be sacrificing more of their free time, hence hindering development. This is what we need to support the justification.

E. Some free-time activities teach children skills or information that they later find useful in their schoolwork.
 Incorrect. This encourages more homework. Rather, this weakens the justification, which in turn strengthens the theorist's conclusion.

shameekv1989 · Answer

Educational Theorist: Recent editorials have called for limits on the amount of homework assigned to schoolchildren younger than 12. They point out that free-time activities play an important role in childhood development and that homework in large quantities can severely restrict children's free time, hindering their development. But the actual average homework time for children under 12—little more than 30 minutes per night—leaves plenty of free time. In reality, therefore, the editorials' rationale cannot justify the restriction they advocate.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously call into question the educational theorist's conclusion?

A. Some teachers give as homework assignments work of a kind that research suggests is most effective educationally when done in class.

B. For children younger than 12, regularly doing homework in the first years of school has no proven academic value, but many educators believe that it fosters self-discipline and time management.

C. Some homework assignments are related to free-time activities that children engage in, such as reading or hobbies.

D. A substantial proportion of schoolchildren under 12, particularly those in their first few years of school, have less than 10 minutes of homework assigned per night.

E. Some free-time activities teach children skills or information that they later find useful in their schoolwork.

Editorial's rationale :-  Amount of homework should be reduced because children need free time for personal development
 Theorist :-  Homework time is already very less - average of 30 hrs per night - Therefore, editorial's theory can not be justified.

To weaken, we need to support editorial's rationale and oppose theorist. Basically, we need an option that shows the amount of homework should indeed be reduced.

Let's consider 2 age groups of 4-8 (in their first few years of school) and 9-11 (later years of school) 
Let total schoolchildren be 600 have an average of 30 mins homework time -> 18000 mins of homework time

Substantial proportion say 500 schoolchildren (let's say all of them in 4-8 group) have an average of 10 mins - 5000 mins of homework 
Remainder of 13000 mins is amongst 100 schoolchildren (in the age group of 9-11) will thus have an average of 130 mins of homework to get a total average = 30 mins.

Thus this group has a lot of homework to do and thus would not help them in their personal development. This supports the editorial's recommendation to limit the homework time.

option C infact strengthens theorist's argument since it would mean that homework time of 30 mins already includes free time activities which would add up to the additional free-time activities that children would get.

Answer - D

Mo2men · Answer

Dear  GMATGuruNY

Can you please shed light on this question?

1- Why b is wrong?
2- In OA 'substantial' means significant number. As I understand, it could be 99 out of 100. Does 1 out of 100 make this choice qualify to be a weakener. It is like using word 'some' and almost all cases 'some' does not qualify to be a weakener as I recall from an early post by you.

Thanks in advance

GMATGuruNY · Answer

Premise:
The average for children under 12 is little more than 30 minutes of homework per night.
Conclusion:
Recent editorials calling for limits on homework are not justified.
In other words:
Homework limits are not needed.

D:  A substantial proportion of schoolchildren under 12, particularly those in their first few years of school, have less than 10 minutes of homework assigned per night. 
Here, many schoolchildren are FAR BELOW the 30-minute average, implying that many others are FAR ABOVE the 30-minute average. 
In other words, many schoolchildren receive much more than 30 minutes of homework each night, WEAKENING the conclusion that homework limits are not needed.

D

B:  Many educators believe that it   fosters self-discipline and time management. 
Here, homework is thought to provide a clear benefit, STRENGTHENING the conclusion that homework limits are unjustified.
The correct answer cannot provide information that strengthens the conclusion.
Eliminate B.

some  =  at least one .
 substantial  =  MANY .
99/100 =  most  or  the vast majority  or  almost all .
I would interpret  substantial  to mean not  some  or  most  but  MUCH  or  MANY .

Jane121393 · Answer

Though I understand the underlying logic of D. I still have a question. Even though there is a limit for the children's homework time (for example: 20 minutes), there will always have some children who can complete the homework in less than 20 minutes, and other children who can't (perhaps they need much more time). It is the case that D set out. Therefore, the limit is no use and D, I think, does not weaken at all. 
 GMATGuruNY  please please please help me explain. Thank you so much.

GMATGuruNY · Answer

To paraphrase the line of reasoning above:
There is no point in limiting the amount of homework assigned, since some students will always require more time to complete the homework than others.
This line of reasoning seems illogical.
Knowing that some students will always require extra time, shouldn't a teacher limit how much homework is assigned?
Note:
The correct answer does not need to show that EVERY STUDENT will be able to complete the homework in a reasonable amount of time.
The correct answer merely has to offer a JUSTIFICATION for homework limits.
According to the OA, the homework time for many students is far below the average, implying that the homework time for many other students is far ABOVE the average -- a clear justification for imposing homework limits.

unraveled · Answer

I faltered on this one even after taking 2:59. Although i could eliminate A, B and E, I marked C as my answer. Till 2:29 minutes, I was going with D but with a little apprehension. The apprehension was that in D already a larger portion of children were getting <10 minutes of homework and that goes against the editorial's rationale + the smaller portion of children even if getting homework that was >30 minutes, may be an hour or two, it wouldn't make much difference. On the other side, i got inclined towards C on the first reading itself since the content was against the editorial's. It basically made me believe that the question is just an open and shut case, needing no discussions ahead. However, i had a hunch that how come this question looked so easy - i now i ignored 'some'

. Here's the fun part, the moment i completed reading D whatever the inclination I had built for C, I lost it. Its 2:30+ minutes now and I re-read them and thought 'some' in C and the 'smaller portion' in D can be same, quantity-wise. Finally, i thought that right answer choices weigh majority part(children who were getting <10 minutes of homework) more than minority part(children who were getting >10 minutes of homework). Also, with that similar thought process i believed that the right answer would weigh C's content more over D's. MentorTutoring GMATNinja GMATGuruNY Request your inputs. I know this might look an overkill but please help.

AndrewN · Answer

Thank you for sharing your approach to this difficult question,  lnm87 . I think many others have followed similar lines of reasoning. The part that stands out to me from your post is the line,  i   sic ]  got inclined towards C on the first reading itself since the content was against the editorial's . That lies at the very heart of the misunderstanding. The question is  not  asking you to undermine the views expressed in the editorials, but to  call into question the  educational theorist's  conclusion . That conclusion, again, is that  the  editorials'  rationale cannot justify the restriction they advocate . Thus, your goal is to find a way to negate the negation. I hate double negatives! And I imagine that others find them just as indirect and difficult to untangle as I. All I can suggest is that you read the question stem very carefully before you pass judgment on any of the answer choices. The passage is there to refer to to ensure that your thinking falls in line with the information presented. Stick to the  exact  premise(s) and conclusion, and you will get more of these nuanced questions correct.

Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

unraveled · Answer

I understand what you said above and i have read all your explanations before my post. I also think that i haven't been able to put my question properly - the highlighted part.

Before i rephrase it, am i right to say that you meant D is attacking the conclusion and C is attacking, if at all, the premise???

If that's correct then i was dumb to drop my guards(without realizing it) to such wordings - double negatives - in those last 30 seconds. One error in understanding is also that i thought choices would always be attacking the majority aspect of the argument, not the minority.

Thank you for giving your time to my query.

AndrewN · Answer

Yes, I would say that (D) is attacking the conclusion and that (C) is focused more on a premise. I wrote the following recently in  another post  on this very matter:

I have come to appreciate that the only information you can take as gospel is that which is presented in the passage. Even if the argument or conclusion is wayward, the information on which that argument may be based should  not  be taken as untruthful or doubtful. In fact, GMAC™ even speaks to this point in the OG in the Critical Reasoning chapter:

4. To test reasoning, try to imagine scenarios where the premises are true and the conclusion false.

Many critical reasoning questions will require you to evaluate the soundness of the reasoning presented in a passage. To evaluate reasoning, you do not need to decide whether premises or conclusions are actually true. Determining actual truth is beyond the scope of the test: no test-taker could determine the truth or falsity of every assertion present in critical reasoning passages. Moreover, many critical reasoning passages refer to fictional scenarios. Normally, in evaluating a piece of reasoning, you should try to  imagine  a situation in which the premises would all be true with the conclusion false. If such a situation would be very unlikely to occur, then the reasoning is strong. On the other hand, if such a situation could likely occur, then the reasoning is poor.

I hope this information may be of use to you as you continue to practice CR questions, especially the tougher ones.

- Andrew

unraveled · Answer

MentorTutoring 
(pardon me for tagging you again)

I gave this question a rethought and tried to get into quants to reach a solution. Let's say we have 10 students whose HW duration are 5, 8, 9, 4, 6, 8, 10, 100, 120, 50, averaging 32 minutes. So, Editorials are concerned about the last three students and suggesting for 'limits' the on the amounts of HW. Whereas ET is looking at average of 32 minutes.

- If i take a cue from the word 'limits' in the passage, Editorials are trying to put an upper limit on highest amount of HW i.e. 120 minutes, right??
- If not, then Editorials are suggesting to put an upper limit on the average of those three students who have the highest of the HW amount i.e. 90 minutes.

Would it be right to go this way??
2nd one seems more likely. Let me know even if this is overdoing.

Thanks

AndrewN · Answer

Hello,  lnm87 . Tag away, by all means. I feel honored to be tagged whenever it occurs. Your approach seems overwrought here. Those writing the editorials are indeed calling for  limits  on the amount of homework, but the passage never delves into the specifics of their proposals. That is, we cannot say that they would agree with a limit on just the  highest amount  from your hypothetical scenario. Perhaps they would feel that the upper limit should be set at 5 minutes, or maybe time has less to do with the proposal than the  number  of times homework is assigned. That is, perhaps these advocates aim to set a limit of one day per week in which any homework could be assigned. We simply do not know from the information in the passage. It is the educational theorist instead who mentions specific time constraints.

- Andrew

Debo1988 · Answer

OG2021 rates this one as 'Easy'. 
Is it just me or are there others who think that's absurd?

AndrewN · Answer

I agree,  Debo1988 . The  earlier version of this question , with its answer choices, seems way more straightforward to me, and that one is listed on the forum at a 25% difficulty, based on several hundred attempts. As for the official rating, there are two scenarios, the second of which I think is more likely:

1) GMAC™ used data from the original question and rated this question similarly.

2) GMAC™ tested this iteration of the question on many different users, perhaps exam-takers who got it as a dummy question, and many of these test-takers happened to have gotten the question correct.

I would not focus too much on the official categorization, even if I disagree with it. (I have also seen at least one question that was rated in two different categories of difficulty, based on an error in the index at the back of the OG.) All you can do is work through the question, take your best shot, and learn how to refine your thinking if you missed it.

Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

altairahmad · Answer

Hello experts,

Doesn't 'substantial' imply 'majority' ? In that case 'D' is not very convincing since author will not make argument for 100% of the cases but for majority.

GMATGuruNY · Answer

a substantial proportion  = a large proportion

Premise:
The average for children under 12 is little more than 30 minutes of homework per night.
Conclusion:
Recent editorials calling for limits on homework are not justified.
In other words:
Homework limits are not needed.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously call into question the educational theorist's conclusion?

D: A substantial proportion have less than 10 minutes of homework assigned per night.

Consider the following case:
100 students are assigned an average of 30 minutes of homework, for a total of 3000 minutes.
Of these 100 students, a substantial portion -- let's say 60 -- are assigned an average of 10 minutes of homework, for a total of 600 minutes.
Resulting average for the remaining 40 students:
2400/40 = 60 minutes
Here, 40 students -- almost half -- receive DOUBLE the average number of minutes, WEAKENING the conclusion that homework limits are not needed.

D

Educational Theorist: Recent editorials have called for limits on the

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Educational Theorist: Recent editorials have called for limits on the

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards