Quote:
Reva: Using extraneous incentives to get teenagers to change their attitude toward school and schoolwork won’t work. Take the program in West Virginia, for instance, where they tried to reduce their dropout rate by revoking the driving licenses of kids who left school. The program failed miserably.
Anne: It’s true that the West Virginia program failed, but many schools have devised incentive programs that have been very successful in improving attendance and reducing discipline problems.
According to Anne, the weak point in Reva’s claim is that it
(A) fails to consider the possibility that the majority of potential dropouts in West Virginia do not have driving licenses
(B) doesn’t provide any exact figures for the dropout rate in West Virginia before and during the program
(C) ignores a substantial body of evidence showing that parents and employers have been using extrinsic incentives with positive results for years
(D) assumes that a positive incentive—a prize or a reward—will be no more effective than a negative incentive, like the revoking of a driving license
(E) is based on a single example, the incentive program in West Virginia, which may not be typical
Reva:
Conclusion: When it comes to changing teens’ attitudes towards school, external incentives won’t work.
Supporting Evidence: The licence-revoking program in West Virginia failed miserably.
Anne:
Counterpoint: While that particular program failed, many schools have devised very successful programs with the same goal.
A. Irrelevant. We don’t need to know
why it failed if we know
that it failed.
B. Irrelevant. Again, it’s specified that the WV program failed, so that’s all we need. We don’t have to prove it.
C. Irrelevant. We’re talking about schools, not parents or employers.
D. Irrelevant. Neither speaker differentiates between positive and negative incentives.
E. Reva’s argument is based on a single example. Anne’s counter is that there are many other examples that wouldn’t support Reva’s conclusion. This is correct.
Best answer: E