Critical Reasoning

A city's chancellor of schools has proposed charging a fee of $500 per year for students who are bused from outside the neighborhood to attend the city's most overcrowded magnet school, claiming that the fee will relieve the overcrowding. The chancellor reasons that this fee will motivate many parents of children at this school to send their children to other city schools where no such fee will be charged.

Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the chancellor's reasoning is flawed?

(A)
Projected increases in the cost of mass transit will increase the cost of transporting children to the overcrowded school from outside the neighborhood.

(B)
The cost of required special supplies currently makes the overcrowded magnet school more expensive for students' parents than are other city schools.


(C)
The parents of most children attending other city schools do not currently have the option of sending their children to the overcrowded magnet school.

(D)
Many parents opposing the chancellor's plan have indicated that they would rather currently have the option of sending their children to the overcrowded magnet school than pay the $500 fee.


(E)
Thirty percent of the students who attend the overcrowded magnet school live within the school's neighborhood.

PLS! Explain!

IMO B

B says that cost of something else is already more expensive for student's parents than other city schools. So if parents are already paying HIGH FEES that means a hike in fees would not deter them from sending their kids to this school.

Language of D(certainly not the answer) is somewhat confusing. It is saying parents(opposing the plan) would rather send their child to magnet school than paying $500. How can this be .... i think the option should be changed to "rather send their child to other school" then this would make sense.

Thank you Vikram! You explanation was clear and logical. It's much better than the book's solution. I have been wondering what " required special supplies" refers to, and for a moment thought that 500 was charged as special supplies, which makes no sense. D as you said would look better if it were "rather send their child to other school". In the given form it sounds like they do not want to send their children to magnet school, but if charged 500 dollars, they would send them.

The cost of the Special supply Eg. could the tuition fee - 300$ permonth. In tat case wont 500$ be a factor.

finance wrote:A city's chancellor of schools has proposed charging a fee of $500 per year for students who are bused from outside the neighborhood to attend the city's most overcrowded magnet school, claiming that the fee will relieve the overcrowding. The chancellor reasons that this fee will motivate many parents of children at this school to send their children to other city schools where no such fee will be charged.

Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the chancellor's reasoning is flawed?

(A)
Projected increases in the cost of mass transit will increase the cost of transporting children to the overcrowded school from outside the neighborhood.

(B)
The cost of required special supplies currently makes the overcrowded magnet school more expensive for students' parents than are other city schools.


(C)
The parents of most children attending other city schools do not currently have the option of sending their children to the overcrowded magnet school.

(D)
Many parents opposing the chancellor's plan have indicated that they would rather currently have the option of sending their children to the overcrowded magnet school than pay the $500 fee.


(E)
Thirty percent of the students who attend the overcrowded magnet school live within the school's neighborhood.

PLS! Explain!

Hey whats the source ?

I think it is Knewton

I posted a similar veritas Cr a few days back . Whats the OA here ?

In Knewton the OA is B.

OA is B. Source 800score.com

B!
I have seen a similer qsn somewhere!
Was it OG?