LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 lina2020
  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: Jul 23, 2020
|
#80447
Hi PowerScore,

I didn't see an explanation listed for this question on the forum so thought I would create one! I recognized this question as a Justify because of the "if" in the question stem but I had a lot of trouble diagramming it and was never able to connect any of the terms to determine which variables are repeated and which one is new in the conclusion. Would you mind diagramming out the full stimulus and explaining your step by step thought process in terms of attacking this question? Thank you in advance!
 Rachael Wilkenfeld
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1358
  • Joined: Dec 15, 2011
|
#80552
Hi Lina,

Great job identifying this as a justify question. Here's how I'd diagram it.

P: Teachers shouldn't perform an action that would cause students to lose respect
P: Students know when people are trying to hide what they don't know.

C: Teacher doesn't know answer :arrow: shouldn't pretend to know answer.

We need to justify that conclusion that the teacher shouldn't pretend to know the answer. Pretending to know an answer sounds a lot like trying to hide what they don't know. So, we just need to connect the first premise---that teachers shouldn't cause students to lose respect.

That's what answer choice (E) does for us.

Students sense teachers lying :arrow: students lose respect for teacher.

With that answer choice we can link the teachers not knowing the answer to the students losing respect for them if they pretend to know the answer.

Hope that helps!
Rachael

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.