LSAT Discussion Forum

Passage Discussion

VIEWSTAMP Analysis:


This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

I struggled with understanding the passage. The questions were pretty straightforward so I managed to get through them surprisingly but I couldn't really identify parts for the VIEWSTAMP Analysis.
The author appears in lines 9-12 ('Much of the literature concerning right-to-work laws implies that such legislation has not actually had a significant impact. This point of view, however, has not gone uncriticized.') Given the main point here, I took the studies by Carroll and Ashenfelter as support for the argument that the legislation had a significant effect. But since I only understood this after I re-read it when I was finished with the practice test, can I ask for an explanation of the implication of the studies by Carroll and Ashenfelter? How are they both suggesting that the wages are lowered in the right to work states?

And reading the passage, I was just so confused with the distinctions (right to work states vs. union shop states, and craft unionism vs. industrial union). Would it be right to say that the passage is suggesting that the union had a positive impact on the position of minorities, and the right to work states weaken their positions? And going back to the main point, these studies suggest the right to work laws had a significant impact in a negative way?
So confused! Any suggestions how to deal with passages like this?

LSAT2018 wrote:I struggled with understanding the passage. The questions were pretty straightforward so I managed to get through them surprisingly but I couldn't really identify parts for the VIEWSTAMP Analysis.
The author appears in lines 9-12 ('Much of the literature concerning right-to-work laws implies that such legislation has not actually had a significant impact. This point of view, however, has not gone uncriticized.') Given the main point here, I took the studies by Carroll and Ashenfelter as support for the argument that the legislation had a significant effect. But since I only understood this after I re-read it when I was finished with the practice test, can I ask for an explanation of the implication of the studies by Carroll and Ashenfelter? How are they both suggesting that the wages are lowered in the right to work states?

And reading the passage, I was just so confused with the distinctions (right to work states vs. union shop states, and craft unionism vs. industrial union). Would it be right to say that the passage is suggesting that the union had a positive impact on the position of minorities, and the right to work states weaken their positions? And going back to the main point, these studies suggest the right to work laws had a significant impact in a negative way?
So confused! Any suggestions how to deal with passages like this?

Hi there LSAT2018, it looks as if you are actually processing the information, but it is a bit jumbled. Why don't you actually try typing out a viewstamp for this passage, on this thread, and then we can attempt to help fill in the holes.

Shannon

Viewpoints: Researchers, Author, Carroll, Ashenfelter (I assumed that the author uses the studies of Carroll and Ashenfelter to counter the literature by the researchers)
Structure: The First Paragraph introduces the right-to-work laws and its general evaluation of it, and the author makes a claim against it which is supported by evidence. The Second Paragraph further supports the claim with other evidence.
Tone: Informative
Arguments: The First Paragraph introduces the literature concerning right-to-work laws which suggests that they had no significant effect, and then proceeds to introduce Carroll's research to go against this. Carroll suggests that right-to-work laws had actually had significant effects, specifically that the reduce wages within right-to-work states.
The Second Paragraph expands on the effects of the right-to-work laws with respect to the wage differentials between the majority and minority workers, specifically that Black workers in right-to-work states would therefore experience a decline in their relative economic positions.

Main Point: The lines below reflects the main point, which is to suggest that the literature concerning right-to-work laws is insufficient.
"Much of the literature concerning right-to-work laws implies that such legislation has not actually had a significant impact. This point of view, however, has not gone uncriticized." (Line 9-12)


I also repeat the questions posted above:
And reading the passage, I was just so confused with the distinctions (right to work states vs. union shop states, and craft unionism vs. industrial union) so how would I deal with them?

Would it be right to say that the passage is suggesting that the union had a positive impact on the position of minorities, and the right to work states weaken their positions? And going back to the main point, these studies suggest the right to work laws had a significant impact in a negative way?
So confused! Any suggestions how to deal with passages like this?

Hi LSAT2018,

Your analysis of the passage looks pretty solid - good work! This passage throws a lot of potentially unfamiliar terms your way, and you did a great job sorting through it. In terms of keeping track of the distinctions you mentioned (e.g., craft vs. industrial unions), it might help to make sure you have a sense of what each term means. Can you come up with definitions based on your reading of the passage? As you diagram the passage, come up with a way to mark each of those terms, so you know to pay special attention to the distinction in those places.

To your second question, yes, that is accurate, on both counts! Unions have a positive impact on the position of minorities, and right-to-work laws hurt minorities, and right-to-work laws generally have a pretty significant negative impact according to the author.

It seems like you're really on the right track here, and just psyched yourself out a little bit. For these types of passages in the future, start by reminding yourself you've got this - you know how to tackle it! Then slow down a bit and take it piece by piece.