Difficulty: Easy
Correct Answer: Neither Assumption I nor II is implicit
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:
The principal issues a punctuality directive. We must detect which hidden beliefs are indispensable for issuing such an instruction. Note that speculative reactions of third parties (parents) are not automatically assumed unless the instruction depends on anticipating them.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:
An implicit assumption must be necessary. Ask: If we deny I and II (no protests/withdrawal requests), does the instruction lose logic? No—the directive is justified by school needs (e.g., assembly, safety checks, traffic management) irrespective of parental reaction predictions.
Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Identify the purpose of the instruction: improve punctuality/logistics.2) Test Assumption I: If parents do not protest, the instruction still stands; not necessary.3) Test Assumption II: If parents do not request withdrawal, the instruction still stands; not necessary.
Verification / Alternative check:
School administrations routinely issue time-bound reporting rules for examinations, drills, or events. Such directives do not presuppose opposition; they anticipate compliance. Therefore, neither I nor II underpins the instruction’s validity.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Only I/Only II/Both/Either” incorrectly treat speculative parental behavior as a precondition, which it is not.
Common Pitfalls:
Confusing potential stakeholder reactions (which may or may not occur) with logical prerequisites for issuing an administrative directive.
Final Answer:
Neither Assumption I nor II is implicit.
Discussion & Comments