Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in eighteenth-century Britain, among them Bristol, Plymouth, and New Hall. Each center ...

GMAT Two Part Analysis : (TPA) Questions

Source: Official Guide

Two Part Analysis

Verbal - CR

HARD

...

Notes

Post a Query

Archaeologist: There were several porcelain-production centers in eighteenth-century Britain, among them Bristol, Plymouth, and New Hall. Each center developed a unique recipe for its porcelain that might include flint glass, soapstone, bone ash, clay, quartz, and so on. We will therefore be able to determine, on the basis of compositional analysis, where the next cup we recover from this archaeological site was made.

Indicate two different statements as follows: one statement identifies an assumption required by the archaeologist's argument and the other identifies a possible fact that, if true, would, provide significant logical support for the required assumption.

Assumption required

Possible fact

Other cups have been recovered from the archaeological site, all of which were made of porcelain.

Some of the cups recovered from the archeological site were not made of porcelain.

The next cup to be recovered from the site will likely be made of porcelain.

Porcelain makers often traveled between centers, experimenting with one another's recipes.

There was considerable overlap of materials in the recipes used by the various centers.

Most porcelain in 18th century Britain was made at one of the several centers.

Solution

Phase 1: Owning the Dataset

First, Create an Argument Analysis Table

Text from Passage	Analysis
"There were several porcelain-production centers in eighteenth-century Britain, among them Bristol, Plymouth, and New Hall."	What it says: Multiple locations made porcelain in 18th century Britain What it does: Provides background fact Key connections: Sets up the context for identifying origin Visualization: Multiple distinct production centers
"Each center developed a unique recipe for its porcelain that might include flint glass, soapstone, bone ash, clay, quartz, and so on."	What it says: Different centers used different ingredient combinations What it does: Key evidence for the conclusion Key connections: Unique recipes = identifiable signatures Visualization: Each center has a distinct "fingerprint"
"We will therefore be able to determine, on the basis of compositional analysis, where the next cup we recover from this archaeological site was made."	What it says: We can identify the origin of the next cup through chemical analysis What it does: Main conclusion Key connections: Relies on unique recipes being detectable Visualization: Cup → Analysis → Origin identified

Second, Identify Argument Structure

Main conclusion: We can determine where the next cup was made using compositional analysis
Supporting evidence: Each porcelain center had unique recipes
Key assumption: The archaeologist assumes something crucial about the next cup's material
Logical flow: Unique recipes → Compositional analysis can identify origin

Phase 2: Question Analysis & Prethinking

First, Understand What Each Part Asks

Part 1: An assumption required by the argument (something that must be true for the conclusion to hold)
Part 2: A fact that would support this assumption
Relationship: Part 2 should strengthen whatever assumption we identify in Part 1

Second, Generate Prethinking Based on Question Type

For the assumption, I need to ask: What must be true for compositional analysis of porcelain recipes to help identify where the next cup was made?

The critical gap: The archaeologist talks about porcelain recipes but concludes about "the next cup." What if the next cup isn't porcelain at all?

Third, Develop Specific Prethinking for Each Part

For Part 1: The next cup must be made of porcelain (otherwise knowing porcelain recipes won't help)
For Part 2: Evidence suggesting cups at this site tend to be porcelain

Phase 3: Answer Choice Evaluation

Evaluating Each Choice

Choice 1: "Other cups have been recovered from the archaeological site, all of which were made of porcelain."

For Part 1: Not an assumption, but evidence
For Part 2: Would strongly support the assumption that the next cup is porcelain ✓

Choice 2: "Some of the cups recovered from the archeological site were not made of porcelain."

For Part 1: Not an assumption
For Part 2: Would actually weaken the assumption

Choice 3: "The next cup to be recovered from the site will likely be made of porcelain."

For Part 1: This IS the required assumption ✓
For Part 2: Can't support itself

Choice 4: "Porcelain makers often traveled between centers, experimenting with one another's recipes."

For Part 1: Not an assumption
For Part 2: Would actually weaken the main conclusion (recipes wouldn't be unique)

Choice 5: "There was considerable overlap of materials in the recipes used by the various centers."

For Part 1: Not an assumption
For Part 2: Would weaken the conclusion (harder to distinguish origins)

Choice 6: "Most porcelain in 18th century Britain was made at one of the several centers."

For Part 1: Not an assumption about the next cup
For Part 2: Doesn't specifically support that the next cup is porcelain

The Correct Answers

For Part 1 (Assumption required): "The next cup to be recovered from the site will likely be made of porcelain."
For Part 2 (Possible fact): "Other cups have been recovered from the archaeological site, all of which were made of porcelain."

Common Traps to Highlight

Choice 4 & 5: These might seem relevant because they discuss porcelain production, but they actually undermine the archaeologist's conclusion rather than supporting it
Choice 6: While it strengthens the general framework, it doesn't address the specific assumption about the next cup's material

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...