Loading...
Premila: Everybody who works with your quality-assurance process has thoroughly internalized all aspects of it, but we also need a written explanation of every step in the process, just in case someone else has to apply the process.
Graciela: I agree. However, we don't need to spend any time documenting it, because we already have the procedures manual used by the Internal Programs department. All the steps in our process are the same as in the quality-assurance process used by Internal Programs.
Graciela's argument depends on the assumption that
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| Everybody who works with your quality-assurance process has thoroughly internalized all aspects of it, but we also need a written explanation of every step in the process, just in case someone else has to apply the process. |
|
| I agree. |
|
| However, we don't need to spend any time documenting it, because we already have the procedures manual used by the Internal Programs department. |
|
| All the steps in our process are the same as in the quality-assurance process used by Internal Programs. |
|
Premila identifies a need for written documentation. Graciela agrees with the need but argues they can use an existing manual from Internal Programs instead of creating new documentation. She supports this by claiming their processes are identical.
We don't need to spend time documenting our quality-assurance process because we can use Internal Programs' existing manual.
The argument relies on the premise that if two processes are identical, then documentation for one process can serve for the other. Graciela's logic is: Internal Programs has a manual + our processes are the same = we can use their manual instead of creating our own.
Assumption - We need to find what Graciela must believe to be true for her argument to work. Her conclusion is that they don't need to spend time documenting because they can use Internal Programs' manual.
Graciela makes a specific claim about process identity (all steps are the same) and availability of documentation (Internal Programs has a procedures manual). We need to focus on what gaps exist between these facts and her conclusion.
Look for ways Graciela's solution could fail even though the processes have identical steps. What could make Internal Programs' manual unusable or inadequate for their needs? Focus on accessibility, format, comprehensiveness, and practical usability issues.
This choice suggests Graciela assumes some people haven't fully internalized the process. However, Graciela actually agrees with Premila's statement that everybody has thoroughly internalized all aspects. This assumption isn't necessary for Graciela's argument about using an existing manual instead of creating new documentation.
This is the key assumption Graciela's argument requires. She's saying they can use Internal Programs' manual because their processes are identical. But for this to work, the manual must actually explain all the steps in Internal Programs' process. If the manual exists but doesn't contain explanations of all steps, then having identical processes wouldn't solve their documentation need. Graciela must assume the manual is comprehensive.
Whether the manual's steps will be modified in the future is irrelevant to Graciela's current argument. She's focused on using the existing manual as-is to meet their immediate documentation need. Future modifications don't affect whether her solution works now.
This choice suggests people learned Graciela's process by reading Internal Programs' manual. This isn't necessary for her argument and actually contradicts the setup - we're told people have internalized the process, but there's no indication they learned it from Internal Programs' documentation.
This choice discusses why Internal Programs created their manual, but Graciela's argument doesn't depend on the reasons behind its creation. She only cares that the manual exists and can serve their documentation needs. The motivations for creating it are irrelevant to her solution.