Parent P: Children will need computer skills to deal with tomorrow’s

According to C, what if the computers become obsolete , the technology will continue to remain and newer devices will be invented.So i knows computer languages, he knows how to work with technology and if the next day computers become obsolete , one will still be able to work with newer devices because he is already acquainted with technology and so he will be able to adapt

I can't make head or tail of C as written - what does "In the process of learning to language" --> what is learning to language?? it just mentions the key phrase "language" --- but one can't u/stand this as written and one can only guess

(C) In the process of learning to language, children increase their ability to interact with computer technology.

Could you please explain how A is weakening parentP’s statement? I think parentP & option A are taking about regular training. So isn’t this statement supportive?

Posted from my mobile device

NarlankaVijay, please read my full post for context. By weaken, I refer to the idea that we want the viewpoint of parent O. We want to strengthen O and weaken P; option (A) weakens O and strengthens P.

Driving cars is a skill like swimming which does not inherently require a massive upgrade each year, but languages differ drastically from one another, hence D is incorrect as it offers a wrong analogy.

C is the correct option because it states that students gain "exposure" early on hence it will be easier for them to pickup the CS languages in the future.

Hope it helps!

Parent P: Children will need computer skills to deal with tomorrow’s world. Computers should be introduced in kindergarten, and computer languages should be required in high school.

Parent O: That would be pointless. Technology advances so rapidly that the computers used by today’s high schools would become obsolete by the time these children are adults.

Which one of the following, if true, is the strongest logical counter parent P can make to parent Q’s objection?


(C) In the process of learning the language, children increase their ability to interact with computer technology.

(D) Automotive technology is continually advancing too, but that does not result in one’s having to relearn to drive cars as the new advances are incorporated into new automobiles.

I marked the wrong choice but this is why i think C is better than D.

So, O's argument says that the computer would become obsolete.We have to weaken this argument.

Now, in D, we are saying that we dont have to relearn the basic driving of cars if new advances are incorporated. But O is exactly assuming this that with advances in the computer technology, we would have to relearn the computer so D goes against the basic premise of the argument. In CR, we dont go against the premise but against the reasoning. So, the reasoning which Parent P can use in his favor is that what if there is another benefit of engaging with the computer technology at early age. This is what C states and is thus apt weakener.

Hi experts,

So I think the key to this passage is truly understanding what the conclusion is. Is the conclusion:
a) Tech advances so rapidly OR
b) Technology that is currently used by hs students would become obsolete?

Depending on which one you choose as your conclusion, you will get C or D respectively...

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.