Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: The superintendent noticed that interns drop out at a much lower rate than other students, so he concludes that the internship program itself is what keeps them in school.

Conclusion: Participating in a work internship causes a student to be less likely to drop out of high school.

Reasoning: The dropout rate for students in internships is only 1 percent, compared to 11 percent for the general student population.

Analysis: The superintendent is confusing correlation with causation. While it's true that interns drop out less often, we don't know if the internship *caused* that behavior. It’s highly likely that students who are motivated enough to seek out and complete an internship are already the types of students who were unlikely to drop out in the first place. Look for an answer that identifies this 'self-selection' bias or the possibility that a third factor explains both the internship and the graduation.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

14.

The reasoning in the superintendent's argument is flawed because the argument

Correct Answer
D
D correctly identifies the classic correlation-to-causation error: inferring that internships cause lower dropout from a correlation that could result from selection effects or other factors.
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep