Research data about technology integration in elementary schools across five districts:DistrictImplementation StatusChange in Reading ScoresChange in ...
GMAT Information and Ideas : (Ideas) Questions
Research data about technology integration in elementary schools across five districts:
| District | Implementation Status | Change in Reading Scores | Change in Math Scores | Change in Overall Performance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| District A | Full Integration | +2.1 | +1.8 | +1.9 |
| District B | Partial Integration | -0.5 | +1.2 | +0.3 |
| District C | Full Integration | +1.4 | +2.2 | +1.8 |
| District D | Partial Integration | -1.1 | -0.8 | -0.9 |
| District E | Partial Integration | +0.2 | -0.4 | -0.1 |
Educational researcher Dr. Martinez has argued that full technology integration may be a "necessary but not sufficient condition" for sustained academic improvement in elementary schools. Dr. Martinez analyzed standardized test score changes across multiple school districts implementing different levels of technology integration.
Which choice best describes data from the table that support this claim?
Both districts with full integration showed increases in overall performance, whereas all districts with partial integration except one showed decreases or minimal gains in overall performance.
Districts with full integration had increases in both reading and math scores, while districts with partial integration showed mixed results across subject areas.
All districts with partial integration were associated with decreases in at least one subject area, whereas districts with full integration showed consistent improvements.
Districts with full integration showed larger gains in math scores than reading scores, while districts with partial integration showed the opposite pattern.
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Create Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| "Research data about technology integration in elementary schools across five districts" |
|
| "District A: Full Integration +2.1, +1.8, +1.9" |
|
| "District B: Partial Integration -0.5, +1.2, +0.3" |
|
| "District C: Full Integration +1.4, +2.2, +1.8" |
|
| "District D: Partial Integration -1.1, -0.8, -0.9" |
|
| "District E: Partial Integration +0.2, -0.4, -0.1" |
|
| "Dr. Martinez has argued that full technology integration may be a necessary but not sufficient condition for sustained academic improvement" |
|
Provide Passage Architecture & Core Elements
Main Point: Research data shows a clear pattern where districts with full technology integration consistently achieved positive academic gains, while districts with partial integration showed mixed or poor results.
Argument Flow: The data presents academic performance across five districts with different technology integration levels. Full integration districts both showed consistent improvements across all measures, while partial integration districts generally struggled or showed inconsistent results.
Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely
What's being asked? We need to identify which data from the table best supports Dr. Martinez's specific claim about full technology integration being "necessary but not sufficient."
What type of answer do we need? A description of data patterns that would support the idea that full integration is required for sustained improvement.
Any limiting keywords? None identified.
Step 3: Prethink the Answer
- To support "necessary but not sufficient," we need data showing that districts WITHOUT full integration generally performed poorly while districts WITH full integration performed well.
- The data shows both full integration districts (A and C) had positive overall performance (+1.9 and +1.8), while partial integration districts had mostly poor results.
Both districts with full integration showed increases in overall performance, whereas all districts with partial integration except one showed decreases or minimal gains in overall performance.
✓ Correct - Accurately captures that both full integration districts showed positive overall performance while partial integration districts mostly underperformed. This pattern directly supports Martinez's claim.
Districts with full integration had increases in both reading and math scores, while districts with partial integration showed mixed results across subject areas.
✗ Incorrect - Focuses on individual subject areas rather than overall performance patterns that support the claim.
All districts with partial integration were associated with decreases in at least one subject area, whereas districts with full integration showed consistent improvements.
✗ Incorrect - Focuses on subject-level details rather than the broader performance pattern that best supports Martinez's theory.
Districts with full integration showed larger gains in math scores than reading scores, while districts with partial integration showed the opposite pattern.
✗ Incorrect - Claims about math vs reading gains that don't hold consistently across the data and don't address the central claim.