Version 1
Dr. Ordonez, in his speech on January 26, 2009, mentioned an experiment involving 50 schools in Michigan
where arithmetic was taken by students starting only from Grade 5. After Grade 7, these students took the standard test
in arithmetic. The test results showed that they performed as well as those who had been taking arithmetic since Grade 1,
confirming research that had earlier established that children's aptitude for computational skills” develops much later
than their "aptitude for linguistic skills." One wonders then if those who had been taking arithmetic since Grade 1
wasted 40 minutes daily for four years.
Version 2
Children's aptitude for computational skills is developed much later than their aptitude for linguistic skills. Yet
in school an equal amount of time is given to the two skills at every level. In an experiment in Michigan involving 50
schools, arithmetic was offered only Grades 5-7. When the students took the standard arithmetic tests, they fared and
equally well as the other students who had been taking arithmetic since Grade 1. So the question is asked if the other
students wasted 40 minutes a day during the first four years.
Which of the two versions above is an acceptable and correct paraphrase? Is it the first version, or the second one? State
3
reasons:​