Summarize Argument
The author concludes that we should hire Hall Dining next year. This is based on the following:
Most of the students surveyed said they would prefer that the current food vendor be replaced by a different vendor.
The only alternative to the current vendor is Hall Dining.
All else equal, we should adhere to the preferences of the majority of students.
Identify and Describe Flaw
Although most students might want to replace the current food vendor, this doesn’t imply that most students want the current food vendor replaced with Hall Dining. It’s possible, for example, that many of those students want the vendor replaced with a different alternative besides Hall Dining.
A
overlooks the possibility that the students surveyed were unaware that only Hall Dining Services could be hired if the current vendor were not hired
This points out that the students might not prefer Hall Dining to the current vendor. If they thought other alternatives were available, they might have preferred other alternatives to the current vendor. But they might have preferred the current vendor over Hall Dining.
B
relies on a sample that is likely to be unrepresentative
We have no reason to believe that the survey involved an unrepresentative sample of students.
C
overlooks the possibility that student preference is not the only factor to be considered when it comes to deciding which food vendor the university should hire
The author stated that preferences of most students should be adhered to, “all other things being equal.” This acknowledges that there can be other factors that are relevant. The argument is concerned with what we should do if those other factors are held equal.
D
overlooks the possibility that there is disagreement among students concerning the issue of food vendors
The author doesn’t overlook the possibility that there is disagreement among students concerning this issue. The author states that “most” students prefer replacing the current vendor. This acknowledges that there might be some students who disagree and prefer the current vendor.
E
argues that a certain action ought to be undertaken merely on the grounds that it would be popular
The recomm. to hire Hall Dining is not based “only” on the popularity of this decision. The author provides premises that aren’t related to popularity (such as the fact Hall Dining is the only alternative,) Also, the premises do not state that hiring Hall Dining would be popular.
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that hospital staff have become more careful in their patient care because they know their errors are being monitored. This is based on the observed phenomenon that patient injuries have decreased significantly at hospitals that have started to monitor staff errors that result in patient injury.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that the incidence of injury at these hospitals was not affected by another change that happened around the same time. The author also assumes that the staff at these hospitals knew that they were being monitored during the last year.
A
Before the plan was implemented the hospitals already had a policy of thoroughly investigating any staff error that causes life-threatening injury to a patient.
This is irrelevant, because it only applies to life-threatening injuries, whereas the author is discussing patient injuries in general. This pre-existing policy doesn’t tell us anything new about why overall patient injuries have decreased with the new monitoring plan.
B
The incidence of patient injuries at a regional hospital that did not participate in the plan also decreased over the year in question.
This weakens by making it more likely that there is an alternative explanation for the decrease of patient injuries that is unrelated to the consequences of the plan. After all, the other hospital saw the same outcomes without the plan as a possible cause.
C
The plan did not call for the recording of staff errors that could have caused patient injuries but did not.
This is irrelevant, since the argument already tells us that the plan specifically records staff errors that do cause patient injuries. This doesn’t help us figure out whether the plan was the true cause of the decrease in injuries.
D
The decrease in the incidence of the injuries did not begin at any hospital until the staff there became aware that the records were being closely analyzed.
This strengthens the author’s hypothesis by more closely correlating the staff’s knowledge of their being monitored with the decrease in patient injury, making it more plausible that the former is a direct cause of the latter.
E
Under the plan, the hospitals’ staff members who were found to have made errors that caused injuries to patients received only reprimands for their first errors.
Without more information, it isn’t clear how the plan’s policy toward reprimanding or otherwise punishing staff members might have affected the incidence of patient injury, so this doesn’t give us more reason to believe that the plan succeeded.
Summarize Argument
The linguist concludes that Austronesian-speaking peoples originated in Taiwan before migrating elsewhere. This is because Austronesian languages must all have one point of geographic and linguistic origin, and because Taiwan is where Austronesian languages have been spoken the longest.
Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is where Austronesian-speaking peoples originated: “Austronesian-speaking peoples originated in Taiwan and later migrated to other islands.”
A
The Austronesian family of languages has four subfamilies, three of which are found only among indigenous peoples in Taiwan.
This is context for the argument. There’s no support for this statement, so it can’t be a conclusion.
B
Wherever most subfamilies of the Austronesian family of languages have been spoken longest is probably the homeland where Austronesian languages originated.
This is a sub-conclusion that acts as a premise. Since Taiwan is probably the homeland where Austronesian languages originated, Austronesian-speaking peoples likely migrated from Taiwan.
C
Taiwan is probably the homeland where Austronesian languages have been spoken longest.
Our conclusion is about the likelihood that Austronesian-speaking peoples migrated from Taiwan. This answer is a premise that contributes to that conclusion.
D
Austronesian-speaking peoples originated in the homeland where Austronesian languages have been spoken longest.
This is a premise that supports the conclusion. Taiwan is where Austronesian languages have been spoken the longest, and is thus where Austronesian-speaking peoples originated.
E
Austronesian-speaking peoples probably originated in Taiwan and later migrated to other islands.
The linguist establishes Taiwan as the geographic and linguistic origin of Austronesian-speaking peoples. Since Austronesian-speaking peoples are spread broadly from Madagascar across the Pacific, the linguist concludes that they migrated from their origin, Taiwan.