Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

It appears that you are browsing the GMAT Club forum unregistered!

Signing up is free, quick, and confidential.
Join other 500,000 members and get the full benefits of GMAT Club

Registration gives you:

Tests

Take 11 tests and quizzes from GMAT Club and leading GMAT prep companies such as Manhattan GMAT,
Knewton, and others. All are free for GMAT Club members.

Applicant Stats

View detailed applicant stats such as GPA, GMAT score, work experience, location, application
status, and more

Books/Downloads

Download thousands of study notes,
question collections, GMAT Club’s
Grammar and Math books.
All are free!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

When school administrators translate educational research [#permalink]

Show Tags

29 Jan 2005, 14:35

00:00

A

B

C

D

E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct
0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

When school administrators translate educational research into a standardized teaching program and mandate its use by teachers, students learn less and learn less well than they did before, even though the teachers are the same. The translation by the administrators of theory into prescribed practice must therefore be flawed.
The argument above is based on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Teachers differ in their ability to teach in accordance with standardized programs.
(B) The educational research on which the standardized teaching programs are based is sound.
(C) Researchers should be the ones to translate their own research into teaching programs.
(D) The ways in which teachers choose to implement the programs are ineffective.
(E) The level of student learning will vary from state to state.

I can use POE and get to the correct answer but I don't really understand. Please explain your answer. Thanks.

I feel only (B) is remotely related to the question.

(A) Teachers differ in their ability to teach in accordance with standardized programs.
It's not difference in teachers abilities.

(B) The educational research on which the standardized teaching programs are based is sound.
If this is true than the bad result can only be because the translation is flawed.

(C) Researchers should be the ones to translate their own research into teaching programs.
This would not be an assumption, may be a further inference.

(D) The ways in which teachers choose to implement the programs are ineffective.
If this is true then the translation may not be flawed, does not support the conclusion.

(E) The level of student learning will vary from state to state.
Nobody talked about state differences.

Thank you for the explaination.This is what I see from the passage:
Conclusion:The translation by the administrators of theory into prescribed practice must therefore be flawed.
Evidence:Students are learning less effectively.
++++

What is the missing link that connects the conclusion and evidence?How does (b) do the job?Tx.

Anna

HongHu wrote:

I feel only (B) is remotely related to the question.

(A) Teachers differ in their ability to teach in accordance with standardized programs. It's not difference in teachers abilities.

(B) The educational research on which the standardized teaching programs are based is sound. If this is true than the bad result can only be because the translation is flawed.

(C) Researchers should be the ones to translate their own research into teaching programs. This would not be an assumption, may be a further inference.

(D) The ways in which teachers choose to implement the programs are ineffective. If this is true then the translation may not be flawed, does not support the conclusion.

(E) The level of student learning will vary from state to state. Nobody talked about state differences.

Thank you for the explaination.This is what I see from the passage: Conclusion:The translation by the administrators of theory into prescribed practice must therefore be flawed. Evidence:Students are learning less effectively. ++++

What is the missing link that connects the conclusion and evidence?How does (b) do the job?Tx.

Anna

If the method itself is not sound, then the poor performance of the students may not be due to a flawed translation, since it could be because the method itself is bad. To get to the conclusion that the translation is bad, we have to assume all the others are not bad.

Quoting the original stem: "When school administrators translate educational research into a standardized teaching program and mandate its use by teachers, students learn less and learn less well than they did before, even though the teachers are the same. The translation by the administrators of theory into prescribed practice must therefore be flawed."

Bare-bone paraphrasing: Students learn less through study material which results from the translation of research into std teaching prog. Therefore, the translation MUST be flawed.

The conclusion is that the translation must be flawed. Using the CPA (Conclusion-Premise-Assumption) approach, let us break this process down: We start off with

Educational research -> std teaching programs -> taught by teachers -> to students.

Now, the first conversion (from educational research to std teaching prog is flawed) and hence, the students end up learning less. Therefore, there is no loss of efficiency in the remaining steps (sorry to repeat this point, but just for the sake of clarification).

Examining our finding above, let us evaluate the options:

(A) - ruled out. Against our finding that there is no loss of efficiency from teacher -> student

(B) - Keep it: The educational research is sound; this implies that students are indeed learning less because of the loss of efficiency in the translation process

(C) - ruled out: We're not looking for recommendations to improve the process. We're looking for assumptions

(D) - ruled out: same argument as (A)

(E) - ruled out: completely irrelevant

Thus, by POE, we can zero in on (B), though it's still a pretty vague assumption. Nevertheless, we have to live with the lesser devil - that's the principle of the ETS.

Please put in your views - this is an interesting CR.

When school administrators translate educational research into a standardized teaching program and mandate its use by teachers, students learn less and learn less well than they did before, even though the teachers are the same. The translation by the administrators of theory into prescribed practice must therefore be flawed. The argument above is based on which of the following assumptions? (A) Teachers differ in their ability to teach in accordance with standardized programs. (B) The educational research on which the standardized teaching programs are based is sound. (C) Researchers should be the ones to translate their own research into teaching programs. (D) The ways in which teachers choose to implement the programs are ineffective. (E) The level of student learning will vary from state to state.

I can use POE and get to the correct answer but I don't really understand. Please explain your answer. Thanks.

Here is my reasoning, hope it will do you good.

argument: (research --> teaching program)---> students learn less well

conclustion: the translation must be flawed.

If the conclustion is right, the premise must be that research itself is sound. Or one can argue that the unsoundness of the research makes the translation flawed.