Passage
There may be reasons to reject the idea of lengthening the school day. None of them, however, are good reasons. Rather, the supposed demerits of such a proposal fall easily in the face of its numerous advantages.The first of these advantages lies in reducing the need for childcare. It is a curious fact of American life that the adult's work schedule and the child's school schedule are misaligned. Children rise with the sun to head to classes, only to be sent home again hours before parents return from their jobs. In a society where, more often than not, both parents work, this discordance creates the need for an expensive arrangement to fill the gap in families' routines. For instance, studies show that in 2016, childcare costs accounted for 9.5 to 17.5 percent of median family income, depending on the state. Today, 40 percent of families nationwide spend over 15 percent of their income on childcare. Transportation to and from care sites only adds to that expense.An extended school day also allows for greater diversity and depth in curricula. Schools across the country have increasingly cut instruction in arts, music, and physical education (as well as recess) in order to meet objectives in reading and math. While this unfortunate state of affairs can be partially blamed on overzealous attention to standardized tests, it points to the larger deleterious trend of narrowing students' instruction. With a longer school day such eliminated subjects can be restored, enriching students with a more well-rounded education.To this proposal, however, critics may object that the added time would impose strain on educators. Can we truly ask schoolteachers-already among the most overworked individuals in society-to endure even more hours in the classroom? The answer is that a lengthened school day need not distress teachers nor add to their already cumbersome workload. By providing for additional areas of study in the arts and humanities, the extension would give schools cause to hire new, perhaps specialized, faculty to offer these courses. Moreover, the time could also be allocated to sports, academic clubs, and other extracurricular activities.However, this point speaks to another objection, namely, the cost of adjusting the school day. Whether through paying current teachers more or hiring new ones, implementing such a proposal would entail a significant financial expenditure. There are at least two responses to this line of thinking. First is that this increase in the cost of schooling would be offset and likely surpassed by the aforementioned savings in childcare. Thus, while it is true that schools would require greater funding (potentially necessitating higher property taxes), parents would ultimately pay the same or less overall, with greater educational opportunities for their children and fewer transportational burdens. Second is that schools should be better funded regardless. Recently, some schools-especially those in rural areas-have even reduced school weeks to only four days as a cost-saving measure. It is beyond dispute that schools across the board both need and deserve a radically increased investment from citizens. Lengthening the school day is simply one manifestation of how such funding should be utilized.With this one change, states can coordinate the lives of parents and children, expand curricular offerings, and reduce the need for costly childcare. These worthy and desirable aims provide a clear justification for extending the school day.
-Which of the following pieces of information would be most important to know in order to evaluate the author's argument?

Question

Passage
There may be reasons to reject the idea of lengthening the school day.  None of them, however, are good reasons.  Rather, the supposed demerits of such a proposal fall easily in the face of its numerous advantages.The first of these advantages lies in reducing the need for childcare.  It is a curious fact of American life that the adult's work schedule and the child's school schedule are misaligned.  Children rise with the sun to head to classes, only to be sent home again hours before parents return from their jobs.  In a society where, more often than not, both parents work, this discordance creates the need for an expensive arrangement to fill the gap in families' routines.  For instance, studies show that in 2016, childcare costs accounted for 9.5 to 17.5 percent of median family income, depending on the state.  Today, 40 percent of families nationwide spend over 15 percent of their income on childcare.  Transportation to and from care sites only adds to that expense.An extended school day also allows for greater diversity and depth in curricula.  Schools across the country have increasingly cut instruction in arts, music, and physical education (as well as recess) in order to meet objectives in reading and math.  While this unfortunate state of affairs can be partially blamed on overzealous attention to standardized tests, it points to the larger deleterious trend of narrowing students' instruction.  With a longer school day such eliminated subjects can be restored, enriching students with a more well-rounded education.To this proposal, however, critics may object that the added time would impose strain on educators.  Can we truly ask schoolteachers-already among the most overworked individuals in society-to endure even more hours in the classroom?  The answer is that a lengthened school day need not distress teachers nor add to their already cumbersome workload.  By providing for additional areas of study in the arts and humanities, the extension would give schools cause to hire new, perhaps specialized, faculty to offer these courses.  Moreover, the time could also be allocated to sports, academic clubs, and other extracurricular activities.However, this point speaks to another objection, namely, the cost of adjusting the school day.  Whether through paying current teachers more or hiring new ones, implementing such a proposal would entail a significant financial expenditure.  There are at least two responses to this line of thinking.  First is that this increase in the cost of schooling would be offset and likely surpassed by the aforementioned savings in childcare.  Thus, while it is true that schools would require greater funding (potentially necessitating higher property taxes), parents would ultimately pay the same or less overall, with greater educational opportunities for their children and fewer transportational burdens.  Second is that schools should be better funded regardless.  Recently, some schools-especially those in rural areas-have even reduced school weeks to only four days as a cost-saving measure.  It is beyond dispute that schools across the board both need and deserve a radically increased investment from citizens.  Lengthening the school day is simply one manifestation of how such funding should be utilized.With this one change, states can coordinate the lives of parents and children, expand curricular offerings, and reduce the need for costly childcare.  These worthy and desirable aims provide a clear justification for extending the school day.
-Which of the following pieces of information would be most important to know in order to evaluate the author's argument?

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Paragraph 2 states that the "first of these advantages [of lengthening the school day] lies in reducing the need for childcare." Schoolchildren are "sent home again hours before parents return from their jobs," and this misalignment of schedules "creates the need for an expensive arrangement to fill the gap in families' routines." Therefore, the author implies that the burdens and costs of childcare are largely due to the needs of school-age children with working parents. However, if most of the money that "40 percent of families nationwide pay…for childcare" (Paragraph 2) is spent on care for babies and toddlers (ie, children who are not school-age), then lengthening the school day would not affect those families' childcare arrangements. Consequently, in order to evaluate the author's argument, it would be most important to know whether the statistics on childcare refer specifically to school-age children. (Choice A) The fact that "some schools…have even reduced school weeks to only four days as a cost-saving measure" is related to the author's general claim that "schools should be better funded" (Paragraph 5). However, whether that practice is a growing trend does not affect the author's argument about the benefits of lengthening the school day, which are meant to "coordinate the lives of parents and children, expand curricular offerings, and reduce the need for costly childcare" (Paragraph 6). (Choice C) The author argues for lengthening the school day in order to "coordinate the lives of parents and children, expand curricular offerings, and reduce the need for costly childcare" (Paragraph 6). Even if a significant amount of class time is currently spent on non-core subjects, it could still be beneficial to expand curricular offerings. Moreover, the other goals (ie, coordinating the lives of parents and children and reducing the need for childcare) would be unaffected. Accordingly, knowing the percentage of class time that is currently spent on non-core subjects would not significantly impact the author's argument. (Choice D) Paragraph 4 states that some of the time in a longer school day "could be allocated to sports, academic clubs, and other extracurricular activities." Accordingly, the percentage of students currently participating in after-school activities could affect some details of the author's argument. However, that information is less important than whether the statistics on childcare refer specifically to school-age children, because those statistics determine whether the argument is relevant to the problem it is designed to address.

Passage There May Be Reasons to Reject the Idea of Lengthening