GRE General TestAnalytical WritingEasy
A local school board is debating whether to implement a new curriculum focused on digital literacy for all students from kindergarten through high school. A board member argues, 'Given the increasing reliance on technology in daily life and future careers, it is imperative that our students are proficient in digital literacy. Therefore, we must adopt this new curriculum immediately to ensure their success.' Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the board member's conclusion?
- AThe proposed curriculum emphasizes coding skills, while the majority of future careers requiring digital literacy focus on data analysis and critical evaluation of information.
- BOther school districts that implemented similar curricula saw a significant improvement in student engagement.
- CSurveys show that parents overwhelmingly support the idea of a digital literacy curriculum for their children.
- DMany current teachers lack the specialized training required to effectively teach the new digital literacy curriculum.
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: A. The proposed curriculum emphasizes coding skills, while the majority of future careers requiring digital literacy focus on data analysis and critical evaluation of information.
The board member argues that digital literacy is imperative for student success. If the proposed curriculum doesn't align with the actual skills needed for 'digital literacy' in future careers, then adopting it immediately might not ensure their success, thus weakening the conclusion.
Why the other options are wrong
- B. Improved engagement doesn't necessarily mean improved digital literacy for future careers, especially if the curriculum is misaligned.
- C. Parental support is irrelevant to whether the curriculum effectively prepares students for future success.
- D. This weakens the feasibility of implementation, not the necessity or efficacy of the curriculum itself for student success.
Weakening an Argument
To weaken an argument, one must identify a piece of information that makes the conclusion less likely to be true, often by challenging a premise or an unstated assumption.
- Targets the link between premises and conclusion.
- Introduces new information.
- Makes the conclusion less probable.
Memory trick: Hammer the link, drop the conclusion's rank.