Very few students take advantage of Shelbyville's school breakfast program, although it is available to all students. There is substantial...
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
Very few students take advantage of Shelbyville's school breakfast program, although it is available to all students. There is substantial research to show that students who do not eat breakfast learn less well than students who do. Therefore, in order to enhance the quality of learning that goes on in Shelbyville's schools, the school administrators should take steps to greatly increase the percentage of students who participate in the breakfast program.
Knowing which of the following would be most helpful in assessing the letter writer's argument?
Passage Analysis:
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| Very few students take advantage of Shelbyville's school breakfast program, although it is available to all students. |
|
| There is substantial research to show that students who do not eat breakfast learn less well than students who do. |
|
| Therefore, in order to enhance the quality of learning that goes on in Shelbyville's schools, the school administrators should take steps to greatly increase the percentage of students who participate in the breakfast program. |
|
Argument Flow:
The argument starts by identifying a problem (low breakfast program participation), then provides research evidence linking breakfast to learning, and finally recommends a solution based on connecting these two pieces of information.
Main Conclusion:
School administrators should greatly increase student participation in the breakfast program to improve learning quality in Shelbyville's schools.
Logical Structure:
The argument assumes that since research shows breakfast helps learning, and few students currently eat school breakfast, then getting more students to eat school breakfast will improve learning. The logic depends on the assumption that students who aren't using the program also aren't eating breakfast elsewhere.
Prethinking:
Question type:
Evaluate - We need to find what information would help us judge whether the author's recommendation (increasing breakfast program participation) will actually improve learning quality in Shelbyville schools
Precision of Claims
The argument makes specific claims about current low participation rates, research showing breakfast improves learning, and recommends dramatically increasing participation to enhance learning quality
Strategy
For evaluate questions, we need to think of key assumptions the argument makes and create scenarios that would either strengthen or weaken the conclusion when we get more information. We should focus on potential gaps between the research cited and the specific situation in Shelbyville schools
The percentage of Shelbyville students who think that breakfast is the most important meal of the day - This information about student opinions doesn't help us evaluate whether increasing breakfast program participation will actually improve learning outcomes. Students' beliefs about breakfast importance don't tell us whether they're currently eating breakfast or whether the school program would make a difference. This is irrelevant to assessing the argument's logic.
The percentage of Shelbyville students who eat breakfast at home on school days - This directly addresses the argument's critical assumption. If we learn that most students already eat breakfast at home, then increasing school breakfast participation won't improve learning outcomes as predicted, significantly weakening the argument. If few students eat breakfast at home, this would strengthen the argument's recommendation. This information is essential for evaluating whether the proposed solution will work.
The percentage of Shelbyville students who are aware of the school breakfast program - While this might explain why participation is low, it doesn't help us assess whether increasing participation will improve learning. Even if awareness is the problem and we can solve it, we still need to know whether these students are getting breakfast elsewhere. This addresses implementation but not the argument's core logic.
The percentage of school-age children in Shelbyville who do not attend school regularly - This information about truancy doesn't help evaluate the breakfast program argument. Students who don't attend school regularly are outside the scope of this school-based intervention, and their attendance patterns don't affect whether breakfast helps the students who do attend school learn better.
The percentage of students who participate in breakfast programs in towns other than Shelbyville - Participation rates in other towns don't help us evaluate whether Shelbyville's specific recommendation will work. Other towns might have different circumstances, demographics, or breakfast habits that make comparison irrelevant to assessing Shelbyville's situation.