Study Buddy Eligibility: Three Applications, One Reference Date
The Akita City Library has posted this notice for its summer 'Study Buddy' programme. Volunteers help primary-school children with homework on Saturday mornings, 9:30–11:00, and each Saturday session counts as 1.5 hours.
Rules: applicants must be at least 15 years old on 1 April; must live in Akita City or attend a school in Akita City; must complete one 90-minute training session (main session 20 April, with a make-up session on 12 May for anyone who cannot attend in April); must come on at least 8 of the 12 Saturdays between May and July; and, if under 18, must have a parent or guardian sign the form. Volunteers who complete 10 hours receive a certificate; those who complete 16 hours may ask the coordinator for a letter of recommendation.
Three students apply.
Mei is 14 and turns 15 on 20 April. She lives in Akita City, has a tournament on 20 April, and can come on 9 Saturdays. Her mother has signed.
Kenta is 17. He lives in the next town and commutes to a high school in Akita City. He can attend the April training and 7 Saturdays, and his father has signed.
Sofia is 16, lives in Akita City, has finished the training, and can come on 10 Saturdays. Her parents have signed, but she plans to stop after those 10 Saturdays.
1. For each of the three students, say whether the library should accept the application, naming the single rule that decides it.
Read the worked answer
Mei - reject. The age rule has a fixed reference date: 15 years old on 1 April. On 1 April Mei is 14; her birthday on 20 April comes too late. Her other details are all fine - the tournament is solved by the 12 May make-up session, 9 Saturdays clears the minimum of 8, and her mother has signed - which is exactly why the item is a judgement call: only one rule fails, and it is the one with a date in it.
Kenta - reject. He fails the attendance minimum: 7 Saturdays is below 8. His residency is not a problem, because the rule is 'live in Akita City or attend a school in Akita City', and he commutes in. Students often reject him for the wrong reason; the answer must name the Saturday count.
Sofia - accept. She is 16, lives in the city, has completed training, has a parental signature, and her 10 Saturdays exceed the minimum of 8. Nothing in the rules requires her to stay until July, so her plan to stop is allowed.
Method to state: check the hard, date-stamped rules first (age, training), then the counting rules (Saturdays), then the paperwork (signature).
2. Sofia asks, 'So I'll get the recommendation letter, right?' Write the two corrections the coordinator must give her, and what she would have to change.
Read the worked answer
Correction 1 - she has not earned the letter, only the certificate. Ten Saturdays at 1.5 hours is 15 hours. The certificate needs 10 hours, so she qualifies for that. The letter needs 16 hours, so 15 is one hour short.
Correction 2 - the shortfall is small but real, and it is counted in hours, not Saturdays. To reach 16 hours she needs 11 Saturdays (11 × 1.5 = 16.5). Ten Saturdays gives 15 hours however keenly she works, so 'I did ten, that's nearly eleven' does not count; the rule is hours completed.
What she must change: attend one more Saturday - a single extra session, not a whole extra month. She should also be told that the letter is something she asks the coordinator for after the hours are recorded, not something issued automatically.
The trap: students answer 'she can't stop in July' because the plan sounds lazy. Stopping is permitted; falling under 16 hours is the only actual problem, and it is a calculation, not a behaviour issue.