Passage Summary: The teacher said you can't get an A without good stats. I had good stats but got a B, so I'm claiming the teacher broke her own rule.

Conclusion: The professor failed to follow her own stated grading criteria when grading the student's paper.

Reasoning: The professor's rule was that she would give A's only to papers with reliable statistical evidence; the student's paper had such evidence, but received a B.

Analysis: This student is falling into a classic logical trap: confusing a necessary condition with a sufficient one. The professor said statistical evidence is required for an A ('A's only if...'), but she never said it was the *only* thing required. A paper could have perfect stats but still be poorly written or completely off-topic. The student's outrage is based on the mistaken belief that meeting one requirement guarantees the top grade. Look for an answer that describes this confusion between a requirement and a guarantee.