Editorial from Local Art Instructor: Studies indicate that art lessons

Question

Editorial from Local Art Instructor: Studies indicate that art lessons can be of particular benefit to elementary school children, because art allows children to explore creative skills in ways that other programs do not. Art allows children to pursue creativity without fear of restriction, but more importantly, art encourages the development of different areas of the brain, thus providing the student with a well-rounded mind. This development will provide the further benefit of improving the performance of students in other subjects. Elementary schools in Japan have recently begun adding a daily art program for students, and the student test scores in math and science have improved considerably.

Which of the following undermines the statements that the art instructor makes in favor of the local elementary schools adopting art programs?

(A) The local elementary schools focus more on math and science programs, because they receive exclusive government funding for good test scores.

(B) The art instructor is closely connected to a non-profit organization that focuses on bringing art programs into the school system.

(C) Many other elementary school subjects allow for the development of creative skills.

(D) Elementary schools in Japan have recently adopted a new math and science curriculum, and the students in all of the schools have responded well to it.

(E) All of the local elementary schools have had extensive art programs in the past, but the students did not enjoy the programs, so they were dropped.

ash124 · Answer

First understand the argument.

(Conclusion):  Art lessons can be of particular benefit to elementary school children and it can help in increasing scores in other subjects.
Because
 (Premise) :  Art encourages the development of different areas of the brain.
for ex: Elementary schools in Japan have recently begun adding a daily art program for students, and the student test scores in math and science have improved considerably.

Assumption :  No other reason for improvement!
 Art is alone responsible.

Question type  :Weakens

Option Analysis:

(A) The local elementary schools focus more on math and science programs, because they receive exclusive government funding for good test scores.
 Out of scope

(B) The art instructor is closely connected to a non-profit organization that focuses on bringing art programs into the school system.
 It doesn't undermine the effort because than we need to make additional assumption.

(C) Many other elementary school subjects allow for the development of creative skills.
 Still It doesn't undermine the conclusion as OC talks about other subjects.

(D) Elementary schools in Japan have recently adopted a new math and science curriculum, and the students in all of the schools have responded well to it.
 This can be reason for the improvement in test scores.

(E) All of the local elementary schools have had extensive art programs in the past, but the students did not enjoy the programs, so they were dropped.
 Out of scope as It talks about students' enjoyment.

Answer: OD

AKSHARAAS · Answer

Hi  Bunuel  please give us the correct answer for this question

Bunuel · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Overview:

Question presents the student with an editorial from a local art instructor, claiming that all local elementary schools should incorporate art lessons. The local art instructor argues that art encourages students to “pursue creativity without fear of restriction” while also boosting a student’s performance in other subject areas. The local art instructor then cites studies from Japan, in which the student performance in math and science improved after the school added an art program for the students. The question asks the student to identify the statement that most clearly undermines the local art instructor’s claims about the need for art lessons in local elementary schools. The student should review each answer choice quickly and carefully—and compare each to the statements made in the passage—to determine the one that suggests a weak point in the local art instructor’s reasoning.

The Correct Answer:

D Answer choice (D) provides information that strongly questions the validity of the Japanese study that the local art instructor cites: the art instructor claims that the art lessons recently added to Japanese elementary schools were followed by an improvement of student performance in math and science. But if the Japanese schools also added a new math and science curriculum, the local art instructor’s argument that art lessons boost student performance in other subjects becomes far less valid. Answer choice (D), therefore, most clearly undermines the local art instructor’s claims.

The Incorrect Answers:

A Answer choice (A) is primarily a red herring. It redirects the student focus to government funding for math and science programs—thus explaining why local elementary schools would focus on them more than on art programs—but it does not necessarily undermine the local art instructor’s claims about the need for added art lessons in the classroom. Answer choice (A) may be eliminated as irrelevant.

B The local art instructor’s association with a non-profit organization that is committed to encouraging art programs in schools is interesting, but it does nothing to undermine her arguments about the need for art lessons in local elementary schools. Answer choice (B) cannot be correct.

C Answer choice (C) has the potential for undermining the local art instructor’s claims, except for the fact that it is too vague to do so. The local art instructor does claim that art lessons encourage student creativity and develop their creative skills. But the answer choice provides no clear evidence about the other unnamed subjects that allow for the development of creative skills, nor does it claim that the local elementary schools are currently teaching these subjects in particular or using programs that allow for creativity in these subjects. Answer choice (C) may be eliminated.

E The fact that local elementary schools once had art programs that were unpopular among students might explain why they have been hesitant to adopt them at present. But this in itself does not necessarily undermine the local art instructor’s direct claims about art lessons encouraging creativity, benefiting the development of creative skills, and boosting student performance in other subjects. It may be argued that students who dislike an art program are unlikely to benefit from it, but the local art instructor does not argue that the schools should adopt the same program that they used in the past, and there is nothing in the answer choice to indicate that the schools would be required to adopt that program. Answer choice (E) is incorrect.

unraveled · Answer

D is the clear winner here as it directly touches the crux of the argument. As per the argument art lessons help students improve in other subjects such as math and science for students in Japanese elementary schools. D says since there is recent development in math and science program, the scores have improved.

A ----> B but its actually C ----> B, thus weakening the argument.

B stands some chance until one reaches D and reads it. B requires more assumptions for it to stand some ground when compared to D.

Answer D.

Rickooreo · Answer

unraveled

Isn't option D attacking the premise? I eliminated the other options as follows :

(Conclusion): Art lessons can be of particular benefit to elementary school children and it can help in increasing scores in other subjects.

A - Could not eliminate. As it gives alternate reason why score in math and science increased. Arts subject is there in the school but school have special focus on math and science, this special focus is the reason and not arts.

B - Instructor and NGO - no impact 
C - What are the alternate source to improve creativity is not relevant 
D- Attacks premise
E - Mentions reason for dropping art in past, not relevant

Rickooreo · Answer

Isn't option D attacking the premise? I eliminated the other options as follows :

(Conclusion): Art lessons can be of particular benefit to elementary school children and it can help in increasing scores in other subjects.

A - Could not eliminate. As it gives alternate reason why score in math and science increased. Arts subject is there in the school but school have special focus on math and science, this special focus is the reason and not arts.

B - Instructor and NGO - no impact
C - What are the alternate source to improve creativity is not relevant
D- Attacks premise
E - Mentions reason for dropping art in past, not relevant

unraveled · Answer

Could not understand what your question is.
However, you are right about D that it attacks the premise. 
As far A is concerned, it looks a decent choice unless one realises that it just revolves around the periphery of the core of the argument. How does funding helps develop mind of the children? Here this choice falls apart even though schools FOCUS MORE on math and science. Funding just helps schools focus more but how does it help develop brain of the children. 
You see in A an additional layer of assumption is required.

HTHs.

Editorial from Local Art Instructor: Studies indicate that art lessons

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

Editorial from Local Art Instructor: Studies indicate that art lessons

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