We usually use "convinced that X and that Y", where X and Y are the clauses.

Examples:

He is convinced that the proposal should be approved and that the fund should be sent to the victims.


--> here, the main difference is "COMMA + and THAT".

I think "Convinced that X and that Y" should not have comma before and.

In case of comma +and that, that is used as a pronoun that refers something mentioned in the earlier part of the sentence.

Example:

They were also limited to one piece of carry-on baggage, including a purse or briefcase, and that piece had to be stowed in an overhead.

You have two guys that think they're right, and that will obviously make for a little bit of a confrontation

On the basis of this we can eliminate the option B.

Am I missing something?

Thanks.

I think the use of conjunction and is incorrect in B on account of faulty parallelism.

Edith Abbott was convinced that social work education should be in the university, and that students could be offered a broad range of courses.

This means that -
1) Edith Abbott was convinced that social work education should be in the university
2) Edith Abbott was convinced that students could be offered a broad range of courses.

We need to show a consequence. so would have been a better conjunction in this construction.

Edith Abbott was convinced that social work education should be in the university so that students could be offered a broad range of courses.

In addition to this,
education should be in the university is plain weird. I have never come across such a phrase.

imo 'should be in the university' sounds strange. Should be taught would have been ok.

'belonged in the university' also sounded similarly strange, but the 'where' clicks better than 'and that'. 'and that' suggests Abbott was convinced that social work education belonged in the university + Abbott was convinced that students could be offered a range of courses. Abbott needs only to be convinced that social work belonged in the university. Its the university where the courses can be offered. Her conviction of whether courses can be offered is not under question.

Whats is the OA ??

Hey guys,

Great discussion - the correct answer has to be D, and I want to highlight the role that logical meaning plays in this sentence.

Many have noted that "education should be in the university" just sounds wrong (and it is). The reason for that is less grammatical and more logical - "education" is a construct, a virtue, etc....but it's not a physical item that could "be in the university". It sounds wrong because it's illogical.

In addition to the comma splice in B, the "and that students could be offered" creates parallel, different notions out of "education should be in the university" and "students could be offered courses". That's an illogical application of the sentence, though - the purpose of this sentence is that Abbott wanted social work education to take place in schools (and not under an apprenticeship model) because schools themselves offered the potential of a broad range of courses. That meaning is reflected perfectly in D, while the structure of B implies that Abbott has two separate-but-equal thoughts.



I bring all this up because we've noticed a trend on the GMAT to employ more logical differences in sentences - that doesn't mean that they're getting away from grammar, but some of the harder-to-describe grammatical flaws are often much easier to understand by focusing on the logic, and the GMAT is rewarding that.

As others have pointed out and as Brian has mentioned I also think that should be is wrong here. Just want to add one point on what Brian said, should be means obligation.

B changes the meaning by that obligation. In other words B says that social work is obligated to be in university, which is not correct.

Coorect me if I am wrong