For-profit colleges serve far fewer students than either public or private non-profit colleges. At the same time, relative to non-profit colleges, for-profit colleges draw a disproportionate share of federal and state financial aid, such as tuition grants and guaranteed loans, for their students. It must be, then, that for-profit colleges enroll a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged students than do non-profit colleges.

The conclusion above depends on which of the following assumptions?

A] Public non-profit colleges and private non-profit colleges enroll a similar proportion of financially disadvantaged students.

B] For-profit colleges do not engage in fraudulent practices in helping their students obtain unneeded federal and state financial aid.

C] The number of students receiving federal and state financial aid at for-profit colleges is greater than the number of students receiving federal and state financial aid at non-profit colleges.

D] For-profit colleges are of similar educational quality as non-profit colleges.

E] The majority of students at for-profit colleges do not default on repayment of their loans after they complete college.




Guess what could be the OA... it is B.


This is a defender assumption question.

When I say X causes Y,

the basic assumption is that no other thing causes Y.

SO if I say that because the For-Profit colleges withdraw such disproportionate loans for their students, then the most needed ones would be getting the highest proportion of loans.

But if I say that fraud is the cause then the argument is not valid any further.

A bit of a tricky stimulus...

Go on guyzzzz...