The Library Hours Memo: Separating Stated Fact from Assumption
A candidate is given the following internal memo and four minutes to answer questions on it.
To: Library Board From: Head of Operations Subject: Proposed opening hours, September–February
The library currently opens 52 hours a week. From September we propose 44: closed Monday, open Tuesday to Saturday 10:00–18:00, with Thursday evenings until 20:00 retained for students. Our survey of 380 users found 71% opposed to any reduction. However, the same survey showed that Saturday mornings account for only 9% of weekly visits, and the 12 volunteers who staff the Saturday reading group have asked for a break.
This is not a decision about books. It is a decision about whether we heat a building for four people an hour. Last year our energy costs rose by 31%, and the repairs budget is unchanged.
I note that most written objections did not propose an alternative. I am therefore recommending a six-month pilot rather than a permanent change, with a review in March that will include the volunteers' view.
- R. Okafor
1. Which one of these is supported by the memo: (a) most surveyed users oppose any reduction; (b) most users visit on Saturday mornings; (c) energy is the library's largest budget line; (d) the volunteers support the reduction? Justify each rejection.
Read the worked answer
(a) is supported - 71% of the 380 surveyed users opposed any reduction. Note the precise scope: it is a self-selected sample of users who responded, not 'the public', and the memo never claims otherwise.
- (b) is contradicted. Saturday mornings are 9% of weekly visits - a small share, which is the writer's reason for targeting them.
- (c) is not stated. The memo says energy costs rose by 31%; a rate of increase says nothing about a share of the total budget. This is the classic percentage-versus-proportion trap.
- (d) is not stated. The 12 volunteers 'asked for a break' - that is a request about their own commitment, and the writer treats their view as something to be gathered at the March review. Inferring support for the reduction reads a conclusion into the text.
The disciplined method: locate the sentence, check the quantifier (most/all/some), check the comparison (rise vs share), and check who the claim is about (volunteers vs users).
2. What is the function of the sentence 'This is not a decision about books', and what does it reveal about how the writer expects the board to read the objections?
Read the worked answer
Function: it is a reframing move. The sentence pre-empts the objection the writer expects - that a library cutting hours is betraying its purpose - and relocates the issue to cost per user ('whether we heat a building for four people an hour'). The next sentence supplies the evidence (energy +31%, repairs budget flat), so the reframing is doing argumentative work, not just rhetoric.
What it reveals: the writer assumes the board's instinct will be a values-based defence of the library, and that objections are largely expressions of that attachment rather than operational arguments. This is confirmed by 'most written objections did not propose an alternative' - a polite way of saying the opposition was not constructive.
Tone: controlled, faintly impatient, not hostile. The concession in the next paragraph (six-month pilot, review including volunteers) softens the implication and gives the board a face-saving way to agree. A good answer notes the combination: firm on the diagnosis, accommodating on the process.
3. What must be true for the six-month pilot to be a reasonable recommendation? Identify the assumptions, then say which single piece of missing evidence would most weaken it.
Read the worked answer
Assumptions behind the pilot:
- Measurable within the window - usage, cost and complaint data can be collected and compared by March, despite winter being a seasonally unusual period for library visits.
- Reversible - hours can be restored without cost or reputational damage (staff contracts, heating schedules, volunteer rotas).
- Stable demand pattern - the 9% Saturday-morning figure will hold through winter, rather than reflecting a summer lull.
- The volunteers' break is temporary - otherwise the pilot's premise (a short pause) becomes a permanent loss of the reading group.
- Opposition is contained - 71% of respondents will accept a trial rather than escalate publicly.
Most damaging missing evidence: any measure of who the Saturday-morning users are. If the 9% are largely people with no other available slot - shift workers, parents, students using the Thursday evening service already at capacity - then 'only 9%' is a headcount argument that ignores the cost to the people least able to absorb it, and the pilot would test the wrong question.