4

Set 2: Inferences (Intermediate)

Explanation

Answer: D

PASSAGE

Researchers studying classroom dynamics found that students seated near the front of the room performed better on exams. However, further analysis revealed that high-achieving students self-selected front seats, while struggling students tended to sit in the back. When seating was randomly assigned, the correlation between seat location and performance largely disappeared.

What can be inferred about the initial correlation between seating and performance?

A. Random seating assignments harm student performance.
B. All students prefer to sit in the back.
C. Sitting in front directly causes better grades.
D. The correlation was likely driven by student characteristics rather than seat position itself.✓ Correct

Detailed Explanation

This question asks you to draw a logical conclusion from the text. Self-selection explained the pattern; random assignment eliminated it—seat position wasn't the cause. A valid inference must be supported by evidence in the passage, even if not stated directly. Look for clues in the text that strongly suggest the answer. Avoid conclusions that require assumptions beyond what's written. Valid inferences are strongly supported by multiple pieces of evidence in the text. Be cautious of choices that go too far beyond what the passage actually states. The best inference is the one most directly supported by textual evidence.

Key Evidence:

• "high-achieving students self-selected front seats"

• "correlation largely disappeared with random assignment"

Why others are wrong: A (Random seating just removed the correlation.), B (High achievers preferred the front.), C (Random assignment removed the effect—not causal.).