Thanks for the question! So let’s take a look at this stimulus first. Essentially, the argument’s conclusion is that computers won’t be able to replace teachers. And why is that? Because this relies on the assumption that the teacher’s job is to make the facts and rules explicit and convey them to the student. If that’s how it worked, then yeah, computers could do it. But, this argument asserts, understanding is more than just that, it’s also about grasping general concepts underlying these facts and rules.
Now we’re looking for something that’ll undermine the overall conclusion. (C) tells us that actually, computers can teach understanding general concepts that underlie specific facts and rules. So that sounds like a pretty good way to weaken the argument, so (C)’s a pretty strong contender.
Now let’s take a look at (E), which tells us that it’s not possible for students to develop an understanding of the concepts underlying facts and rules through practice drills and coaching. Well, if that’s the case, and the students can’t grasp the underlying concepts through practice drills and coaching, then that seems to strengthen the argument! Since that would suggest that computers shouldn’t be replacing the teachers, since all the computers can really do is practice drills and coach. So (E) actually makes us believe more in the author’s conclusion, and that’s why it’s the wrong answer here.
Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.
liwenong28August 2, 2020
Thank you for the detailed explanation, this really helped me understand the correct answer better!
