Q11

[cvoldstad]

I was caught on this question because although I was first drawn to B it seemed like the author's argument was about the benefits of education in statutes IN law school- its impact on curricular and cognitive skill development... so learning about them after would be irrelevant

aka the argument is "statutory law is often given too little attention by law schools" (lines 4-5)
... essential skill for law students to learn (line 25)

[Athomas87]

It was between B and E for me. I ended up choosing E because it seemed like the passage was saying that students who get more training in statutory laws are able to think about cases in an interrelated manner (29-31) and E says that despite this training, the students have a narrow perspective. I understand why B could be right but I'm not sure how E better, how it's able to be eliminated.

[maryadkins]

I would say the author raises (E) in the final paragraph and addresses it such that it doesn't weaken as much as (B), which he has not addressed. (See lines 50-55.)

As for the other answer choices:

(A) if anything supports his argument in favor of statutory training.

(C) is a fact that the author already acknowledges and addresses.

(D) is like (C)—already stated.