Introduction / Context:
The school plans an educational field trip to a forest to broaden understanding of natural resources. We must uncover the assumptions that make this plan educationally meaningful.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Purpose: Widen knowledge of natural resources.
- Location: Forest.
- Assumption I: Forests provide ample examples of natural resources (flora, fauna, water, soil, biodiversity).
- Assumption II: Experiential learning in a new environment enhances understanding.
Concept / Approach:
Field trips rest on content relevance (the site offers the subject matter) and pedagogical value (students learn better by exposure and interaction). Both are necessary for the justification.
Step-by-Step Solution:
If I were false, the forest would not be a suitable venue for learning about natural resources.If II were false, the trip would not serve its stated educational goal.
Verification / Alternative check:
Educational theory supports place-based learning to deepen conceptual grasp—validating II; ecology confirms forests as reservoirs of natural resources—validating I.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
I-only/II-only omit one of the two educational pillars.Neither ignores both relevance and pedagogy.
Common Pitfalls:
Assuming “natural resources” means only minerals; it includes biological and environmental assets found in forests.
Final Answer:
Both I and II are implicit
Discussion & Comments