Critical Reasoning: Evaluating an Artificial Turf Proposal Quiz — 5 Free Questions

📖 Read the passage, then answer the questions below

A city recreation department is considering a proposal to replace natural grass on its most heavily used sports fields with artificial turf. Proponents argue that artificial turf can be played on immediately after rain, unlike grass fields which must often be closed to prevent damage, that turf fields can host several times more hours of play per week without becoming worn or muddy, and that turf eliminates the need for regular mowing, seeding, and irrigation.

Based on a two-year trial in which one heavily used field was converted to artificial turf, the recreation department has concluded that converting its other heavily used fields to turf would increase the total hours of play available citywide and reduce the department's long-term field-maintenance costs, without increasing injury rates among players.

Question 1

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the specific claim about reduced maintenance costs?

Question 2

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the specific claim that injury rates would not increase?

Question 3

Based on the passage, proponents believe artificial turf is advantageous primarily because of which combination of factors?

Question 4

Suppose a critic pointed out that several of the department's other heavily used fields have poorer drainage and a wetter climate than the trial field. This criticism would be most relevant to which part of the recreation department's argument?

Question 5

Which of the following is an assumption underlying the claim that injury rates would not increase?

📚 All Quizzes

Browse every category and see the full list of quizzes on BriskQuiz

→

About Critical Reasoning: Evaluating an Artificial Turf Proposal

CLAT's Logical Reasoning section tests critical reasoning directly: a short passage lays out an argument, and the questions that follow test whether you can identify its conclusion, its assumptions, and what would strengthen or weaken it -- no prior knowledge of the topic is needed, since every answer follows from the passage itself.

This quiz works through a single original argument about a city recreation department's proposal, examining every angle CLAT actually tests: the argument's main conclusion, the assumptions it depends on, evidence that would strengthen or weaken specific claims within it, what can be validly inferred, and a weakness in its reasoning.

The twenty questions include an Assertion-Reason question and a multi-statement combination question alongside the dominant strengthen, weaken, and assumption format, keeping the same variety CLAT itself uses across a single passage.

Only five of the twenty questions are shown on any single attempt, so replaying this quiz brings a genuinely different set of questions rather than the same five memorised by rote.