Assertion (A): Learning from real-life problems and concrete experiences gives…

In an Assertion–Reason question, the Assertion (A) and the Reason (R) must each be judged true or false independently. Only if both turn out to be true do we go on to ask whether R actually explains WHY A holds — two statements being true together is not the same as one explaining the other; the reason must supply the causal or logical basis for the assertion's content.

Assertion (A) is true: constructivist and experiential-learning principles in developmental psychology hold that engaging with real-life problems and concrete experiences builds richer cognitive connections, giving learners several distinct pathways to encode and later retrieve the same information. Reason (R) is also true: it states the well-established developmental principle that growth and learning proceed in a relatively predictable, orderly sequence of stages. But R's content — the order in which development unfolds — does not supply the mechanism for A's content — why concrete experience creates multiple retrieval routes. They are two separate principles of child development operating at different levels (a general sequencing principle versus an experiential-encoding principle), so R does not explain A.

Checking the other combinations against the same two statements:

• "Both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A)" overreaches: two statements being true together never by itself proves an explanatory link; that link must be independently demonstrated, and none exists between a sequencing principle and an experiential-encoding principle.

• "(A) is true but (R) is false" incorrectly negates R, though the principle that development proceeds in a relatively orderly, sequential manner is well established in developmental psychology.

• "Both (A) and (R) are false" incorrectly negates both statements, though each is independently well-supported.

Because both statements hold on their own terms but the explanatory link between them is absent, the correct choice states both (A) and (R) are true but (R) does not correctly explain (A).