Text 1Traditional lecture-based teaching methods have dominated higher education for centuries, but they are now outdated and ineffective for today's...
GMAT Craft and Structure : (Structure) Questions
Text 1
Traditional lecture-based teaching methods have dominated higher education for centuries, but they are now outdated and ineffective for today's students. Students learn passively, retain little information, and lack critical thinking skills. Universities should abandon these antiquated approaches and adopt fully interactive, technology-enhanced learning environments to remain relevant in the modern educational landscape.
Text 2
While lecture-based methods have limitations, they shouldn't be completely discarded because many students still benefit from structured presentations of complex information, and not all institutions have resources for full technological overhaul. Instead of wholesale replacement, universities can blend traditional lectures with interactive elements. Professor Sarah Chen's flipped classroom model successfully combines brief lectures with collaborative problem-solving, and student engagement has improved significantly since its implementation.
Based on the texts, how would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to the underlined claim in Text 1?
By suggesting that universities should consider incorporating interactive elements into traditional lectures instead of completely abandoning them
By agreeing that students have largely stopped engaging with lecture-based courses because they're so outdated
By pointing out that most universities could improve student outcomes by investing in fully technology-enhanced environments
By questioning whether lecture-based methods are truly outdated and rejecting the need for any interactive components
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Part A: Create Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| Text 1: "Traditional lecture-based teaching methods have dominated higher education for centuries, but they are now outdated and ineffective for today's students." |
|
| "Students learn passively, retain little information, and lack critical thinking skills." |
|
| "Universities should abandon these antiquated approaches and adopt fully interactive, technology-enhanced learning environments to remain relevant in the modern educational landscape." |
|
| Text 2: "While lecture-based methods have limitations, they shouldn't be completely discarded because many students still benefit from structured presentations of complex information, and not all institutions have resources for full technological overhaul." |
|
| "Instead of wholesale replacement, universities can blend traditional lectures with interactive elements." |
|
| "Professor Sarah Chen's flipped classroom model successfully combines brief lectures with collaborative problem-solving, and student engagement has improved significantly since its implementation." |
|
Part B: Provide Passage Architecture & Core Elements
Main Point: Text 1 argues for completely abandoning traditional lectures for technology-enhanced learning, while Text 2 advocates for a balanced approach that blends traditional and interactive methods.
Argument Flow: Text 1 builds a case against traditional methods by identifying problems and proposing total replacement. Text 2 directly counters this by acknowledging limitations but arguing against complete abandonment, instead proposing a blended solution supported by real evidence of success.
Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely
What's being asked? How would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to the underlined claim in Text 1?
What type of answer do we need? We need to predict Text 2 author's response based on their established position and reasoning.
Any limiting keywords? Higher Order Inference question requiring understanding of authorial perspective and position.
Step 3: Prethink the Answer
- Text 2's author has a clear position: they believe traditional lectures should not be completely abandoned but should be improved by blending with interactive elements
- They explicitly argue against "wholesale replacement" and support their position with practical concerns and concrete evidence
- The right answer should reflect Text 2's core position of opposing complete abandonment while supporting a blended approach that incorporates interactive elements into traditional methods
By suggesting that universities should consider incorporating interactive elements into traditional lectures instead of completely abandoning them
- This perfectly captures Text 2's central argument against complete abandonment
- Directly matches their proposed solution of blending traditional lectures with interactive elements
- Aligns with their evidence about Professor Chen's successful combination approach
By agreeing that students have largely stopped engaging with lecture-based courses because they're so outdated
- Text 2 never agrees that students have stopped engaging with lectures
- Actually argues that many students still benefit from structured presentations
By pointing out that most universities could improve student outcomes by investing in fully technology-enhanced environments
- Text 2 explicitly states that not all institutions have resources for full technological overhaul
- This would contradict their resource-constraint argument
By questioning whether lecture-based methods are truly outdated and rejecting the need for any interactive components
- Text 2 does acknowledge that lecture methods have limitations
- They actually support adding interactive components rather than rejecting them