A recent study showed that, in general, students studying psychology who receive their instruction via distance-education courses show greater learnin...
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
A recent study showed that, in general, students studying psychology who receive their instruction via distance-education courses show greater learning gains than do students studying psychology who receive traditional instruction in a classroom setting. Citing the result of this study as evidence, an advocate of distance education has claimed that, for teaching psychology, at least, distance education is actually the more effective of these two means of instruction.
In order to evaluate whether the result of the study does indeed provide support for the advocate's claim, it would be most useful to determine which of the following?
Passage Analysis:
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| A recent study showed that, in general, students studying psychology who receive their instruction via distance-education courses show greater learning gains than do students studying psychology who receive traditional instruction in a classroom setting. |
|
| Citing the result of this study as evidence, an advocate of distance education has claimed that, for teaching psychology, at least, distance education is actually the more effective of these two means of instruction. |
|
Argument Flow:
We start with study results showing distance education students have better learning outcomes, then an advocate uses this evidence to make a claim about which teaching method is more effective overall.
Main Conclusion:
The advocate claims that distance education is more effective than traditional classroom instruction for teaching psychology.
Logical Structure:
The advocate takes the study's finding (distance education students show greater learning gains) as evidence to support the conclusion that distance education is the more effective teaching method. This is a straightforward evidence-to-conclusion structure where study results are used to support a broader effectiveness claim.
Prethinking:
Question type:
Evaluate - We need to think of assumptions and create evaluation scenarios that either strengthen or weaken the conclusion when taken to an extreme
Precision of Claims
The study shows a general comparison between distance education and traditional classroom instruction for psychology students, with the advocate claiming distance education is more effective based on greater learning gains
Strategy
For evaluate questions, we need to identify what additional information would help us determine whether the study actually supports the advocate's claim. We should think about potential flaws or gaps in how the study was conducted or how the advocate is interpreting the results. We want scenarios that, when taken to extremes, would either make us more confident or less confident in the advocate's conclusion.
Whether all distance education students had previous classroom experience is not crucial for evaluating the advocate's claim. The study is comparing current performance between two groups, and previous experience with different teaching methods doesn't directly affect whether distance education is more effective than traditional instruction. This information wouldn't help us determine if the study supports the effectiveness claim.
This directly addresses a potential flaw in the advocate's reasoning. If distance education students were more highly motivated than traditional classroom students, their better learning gains might be due to their motivation rather than the teaching method itself. This would provide an alternative explanation for the results and significantly weaken the advocate's claim that distance education is more effective. Knowing about motivation differences would be crucial for evaluating whether the study truly supports the conclusion.
Information about other academic subjects being better suited for distance education doesn't help evaluate the advocate's specific claim about psychology instruction. The advocate is only claiming that distance education is more effective for teaching psychology, so comparisons to other subjects are irrelevant to assessing this particular claim.
The advocate's personal teaching experience doesn't affect whether the study results support their claim. The strength of the argument depends on the study's methodology and results, not on who is making the claim. The advocate's background is irrelevant to evaluating the logical connection between evidence and conclusion.
While previous exposure to psychological concepts among distance education students could matter, this choice is too narrow. It only considers the distance education group and doesn't address potential differences between the two groups being compared. We'd need to know about differences in previous exposure between both groups, and even then, motivation differences (Choice B) would be more fundamental to the comparison's validity.