Studies in educational psychology indicate that formally trained instructors improve student achievement more successfully than peer-to-peer instructi...
GMAT Information and Ideas : (Ideas) Questions
Studies in educational psychology indicate that formally trained instructors improve student achievement more successfully than peer-to-peer instruction. However, when educational researcher Dr. Maria Santos and her colleagues analyzed student outcomes in beginning calculus classes, they found that students assisted by peer mentors who had just finished the identical course demonstrated substantially better progress than those instructed by graduate teaching assistants with official educational training. A possible explanation for this result could be that although students acknowledged the teaching assistants' advanced credentials, they were more affected by the peer mentors' recent experience with the same content; in other words, students might have reacted in this manner because ______
Which choice most logically completes the text?
peer mentors had just worked through identical academic difficulties that present students were encountering while teaching assistants had not, rendering this common experience more beneficial to students than the teaching assistants' official preparation.
students perceived peer mentors as more accessible and less daunting than teaching assistants, irrespective of their comparative credentials.
peer mentors delivered the content using approaches that were more comprehensible than the techniques employed by officially trained teaching assistants.
students doubted the value of the teaching assistants' official preparation but had confidence in the scholarly achievement shown by peer mentors.
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Create Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| 'Studies in educational psychology indicate that formally trained instructors improve student achievement more successfully than peer-to-peer instruction.' |
|
| 'However, when educational researcher Dr. Maria Santos and her colleagues analyzed student outcomes in beginning calculus classes, they found that students assisted by peer mentors who had just finished the identical course demonstrated substantially better progress than those instructed by graduate teaching assistants with official educational training.' |
|
| 'A possible explanation for this result could be that although students acknowledged the teaching assistants' advanced credentials, they were more affected by the peer mentors' recent experience with the same content;' |
|
| 'in other words, students might have reacted in this manner because ______' |
|
Provide Passage Architecture & Core Elements
Main Point: Dr. Santos discovered that peer mentors outperformed formally trained teaching assistants, possibly because students valued the mentors' recent experience with identical course content more than official credentials.
Argument Flow: The passage establishes conventional wisdom about formal training being superior, then presents Santos' contradictory findings where peer mentors performed better. It offers a preliminary explanation focusing on recent experience versus credentials, then asks us to complete this reasoning with a more specific clarification.
Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely
This is a fill-in-the-blank question asking us to choose the best logical connector. The answer must create the right relationship between what comes before and after the blank.
Step 3: Prethink the Answer
- The correct answer should explain specifically why 'recent experience with the same content' would be more valuable to students than formal training
- It needs to clarify what made the peer mentors' recent experience particularly helpful
- Likely something about their ability to relate to current students' struggles or provide insights that formally trained instructors couldn't offer
peer mentors had just worked through identical academic difficulties that present students were encountering while teaching assistants had not, rendering this common experience more beneficial to students than the teaching assistants' official preparation.
✓ Correct
- Explains that peer mentors had just worked through identical difficulties that current students face, while TAs hadn't
- This makes the 'recent experience' concrete and directly shows why this common experience would be more beneficial than official preparation
students perceived peer mentors as more accessible and less daunting than teaching assistants, irrespective of their comparative credentials.
✗ Incorrect
- Focuses on perception and accessibility rather than the educational effectiveness mentioned in the passage
- Doesn't build on the 'recent experience with the same content' explanation the passage emphasizes
peer mentors delivered the content using approaches that were more comprehensible than the techniques employed by officially trained teaching assistants.
✗ Incorrect
- Claims peer mentors had better teaching methods, but the passage doesn't suggest this
- Doesn't explain why recent experience specifically would lead to better approaches
students doubted the value of the teaching assistants' official preparation but had confidence in the scholarly achievement shown by peer mentors.
✗ Incorrect
- Suggests students doubted TAs' preparation, but the passage clearly states students 'acknowledged the teaching assistants' advanced credentials'
- This contradicts the passage's indication that students recognized TAs' qualifications