LSAT 119 – Section 3 – Question 11

LSAT 119 - Section 3 - Question 11

June 2005

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:57

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT119 S3 Q11
+LR
Must be true +MBT
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Math +Math
A
2%
151
B
95%
164
C
1%
148
D
2%
156
E
0%
148
132
139
146
 +Easier 145.195 +SubsectionEasier

In early 1990, Queenston instituted a tax increase that gave its school system a larger operating budget. The school system used the larger budget to increase the total number of teachers in the system by 30 percent between 1990 and 1993. Nevertheless, there was no change in the average number of students per teacher between 1990 and 1993.

Summary
In 1990, Queenston instituted a tax increase that gave its school system a larger operating budget. The school system used the larger budget to increase the total number of teachers by 30 percent between 1990 and 1993. Nevertheless, the average number of students per teacher between 1990 and 1993 did not change.

Notable Valid Inferences
Between 1990 and 1993, the number of students in Queenston’s school system increased.

A
No classes in Queenston’s school system experienced an increase in enrollment between 1990 and 1993.
Must be false. If the number of teachers increased by 30 percent but the average student per teacher ratio did not change, then there must be more students and classes would experience an increase in enrollment.
B
The total number of students enrolled in Queenston’s school system increased between 1990 and 1993.
Must be true. If the number of teachers increased by 30 percent but the average student per teacher ratio did not change, then it must be true that the number of students also increased.
C
The operating budget of Queenston’s school system increased by exactly 30 percent between 1990 and 1993.
Could be false. We only know that Queestion’s school system increased the total number of teachers by 30 percent. We do not have any information in the stimulus that tells us what percentage the operating budget increased.
D
Most teachers who worked for Queenston’s school system in 1990 were still working for the system in 1993.
Could be false. We know that the total number of teachers increased, but this does not necessarily mean that most teachers stayed during this time period. It is possible that the school system had high teacher turnover and still increased the total number of teachers.
E
The quality of education in Queenston’s school system improved between 1990 and 1993.
Could be false. We don’t have any information in the stimulus about the quality of Queenston’s education. We cannot assume that because the total number of teachers increased, education quality improved as well.

Detailed Explanation

We have an MBT question which we can glean from the question stem which reads: If the statements above are true, then on the basis of them which one of the following must also be true?

Our stimulus tells us that in the year 1990, the municipality of Queesnton raised taxes that increased the budget of its school system. The schools in turn used the increase in budget to increase the number of teachers they employed by 30%. However, the average number of students per teacher remained constant between 1990 and 1993.

This is almost phrased like an RRE question, right? It’s constructed as if there’s a paradox here. But let’s think about this: is it hard to reconcile the fact that the number of teachers went up while the average number of students to teachers stayed the same? No! Think about it: if the total number of dogs went up in NYC but the number of dogs per household stayed the same, would that make sense? Yes! It just means there are more households that own dogs. If we think about this as a fraction, both the numerator and denominator (top and bottom) of the fraction went up at the same rate. The same thing could be true for our students per teacher average, right? If the number of teachers went up and the number of students rose at the same rate (in this case 30%), then the average number of students per teacher would remain the same.

Ok now that we’ve synthesized the information here, let’s look at the answer choices:

Answer Choice (A) We need the classes to increase in enrollment because otherwise the number of students would remain constant while the number of teachers would increase. This would throw off our proportion so the average number of students per teacher would not remain the same.

Correct Answer Choice (B) This is exactly what we need. If the number of teachers goes up, we need the number of students to increase as well in order for the average number of students per teacher to remain the same.

Answer Choice (C) This is unsupported. We know that the increase in budget allowed the school district to hire more teachers, but it’s really immaterial how much the budget increased by. We already know the number of teachers increased, how the budget corresponds to that is not necessary for us to understand.

Answer Choice (D) There’s nothing to suggest that the district either retained old teachers or hired new teachers–the bottom line is that the number of teachers increased.

Answer Choice (E) This is completely unrelated to the ratio of students to teachers and is wholly unsupported by our passage.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 119 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply