In this example, both option 4 and 5 seem to be relevant options. How can i choose between them? Both of them contain outside information that can poke holes in the teacher’s conclusions. Then how is one better than other?
Please explain your logic for each
Both the options are able to poke holes in the theory tht students are getting unusually bad score once and then improving alter. If we wanna disprove the teachers theory or weaken it, We will think of some other reason for this. Which cud either be students being sick on those exam or just random low atypical score, so they get back to normal scores later.
Now… what is your logic?
For option 5 it says “for every quiz or assignment”, so their performance shouldn’t have improved in the subsequent quiz if illness was the cause
Isn’t it like for every quiz, some students are sick meaning random few and not exactly the same bunch? Else it would have said for every quiz, “these” students would fall sick?
Yeah but unless it said more were sick on the test with the lower performance, it wouldn’t really weaken it
Sorry. I didnt understand what you said. Can u please explain further?
Why would it matter if there are more or less?
Teacher says that by punishing any students who got those uncharacteisic results, their next performance is improved.
OK, so the students did badly on the first test and then they did badly on the second test in between these tests. The teachers issued some harsh punishments. Because the scores went up, the teachers have concluded that it’s because of the harsh punishment that the score has went up. If we want to we can this argument we want to find another possible reason why the scores went up other than the harsh punishments.
OK, so the problem with the fifth option is that it says for every quiz, including the first one where the students did badly and the second one with students did well it says that some students were not feeling well. If students are feeling unwell for both tests this is not enough evidence to say that the illness was the cause of the performance in the first test.
OK, the fourth reason is saying that whenever students perform badly in a test such as this example here they normally go back to then their default performance, which is higher in the subsequent test. This suggest that this might be what’s happening here and the students are just going back to their old performance and this would’ve happened regardless of the negative feedback thing that their teachers implemented.
Now I understood. Thanks.
1 Like