Education

IMO : C

Assumption that the academic rigor in liberals art> other fields of studies leads the reader
to conclude that less degrees in liberal arts granted means less rigor.
So C.

Hi imskpwr

A recent article stated that only 5.5% of American colleges grant the majority of their degrees in the liberal arts. Citing this, a reader wrote to lament that this was further evidence of the decline of academic rigor in American post high school education.

Which of the following is an assumption on the part of the reader?

The percentage of American colleges granting liberal arts degrees would continue to drop. - out of scope

All colleges should grant the majority of their degrees in the liberal arts. - not an assumption for sure

Most post-secondary scientific, engineering, and vocational training does not involve as much academic rigor as liberal arts training. - Only on the basis of the liberal arts, the author is saying that there is a decline in academic rigor. He clearly assumes that the other trainings have nothing to do with it.

Academic rigor is the most important aspect of post high school education. - exaggerated and out of scope

Of the colleges that do not grant the majority of their degrees in the liberal arts, many granted fewer than a quarter of their degrees in the liberal arts - out of scope

IMO C
let me know if I am wrong.[/quote]

das.ashmita wrote:Hi imskpwr

All colleges should grant the majority of their degrees in the liberal arts. - not an assumption for sure

I understand the problem and my mistake, but need to see others strategy to better navigate through such silly errors.
what made you reject this for an assumption?

Hi imskpwr

In the question above:
premise - only 5.5% of American colleges grant the majority of their degrees in the liberal arts
conclusion - decline of academic rigor in American post high school education.

We need to find an assumption here which is correlating the premise and the conclusion.

All colleges should grant the majority of their degrees in the liberal arts

option B here is more like a solution considering the argument to be true.

I hope it clears your doubt.

U have considered Case1
Case:1

premise - only 5.5% of American colleges grant the majority of their degrees in the liberal arts

Assumption: Most post-secondary scientific, engineering, and vocational training does not involve as much academic rigor as liberal arts training.

conclusion - decline of academic rigor in American post high school education.

The assumption is not sufficient to validate the argument.

Case:2
premise - only 5.5% of American colleges grant the majority of their degrees in the liberal arts

Assumption:1
All colleges should grant the majority of their degrees in the liberal arts

Assumption:2
Most post-secondary scientific, engineering, and vocational training does not involve as much academic rigor as liberal arts training.

conclusion - decline of academic rigor in American post high school education.
I think both the statements are necessary assumption and hence both are required to validate the argument. Each of them can be taken up as Assumption.

What do you think Ashmita das ?

Hi imskpwr

I understand your confusion. I re read option B and it can be a contender.
But, in GMAT we don't have the liberty to choose 2 options.
So, we need to choose the best.

B talks about "all colleges". I feel its extreme and is talking more on a broader level. Thus, can be eliminated.

imskpwr wrote:
Case:2
premise - only 5.5% of American colleges grant the majority of their degrees in the liberal arts

Assumption:1
All colleges should grant the majority of their degrees in the liberal arts

Assumption:2
Most post-secondary scientific, engineering, and vocational training does not involve as much academic rigor as liberal arts training.

conclusion - decline of academic rigor in American post high school education.
I think both the statements are necessary assumption and hence both are required to validate the argument. Each of them can be taken up as Assumption.

here, assumption 1 is not a valid assumption. Take this analogy :

All successful 750+ GMAT scorers spend more than 2 months in their preparation. So, if John want to score 770 in GMAT, he must spend more than 2 months in preparing for GMAT.

Assumption 1 - John should spend more than 2 months.... - this is not the correct assumption.

for an assumption to work - we have to look for a statement that works within the core of the argument.

Hope this helps !!

avik.ch wrote: here, assumption 1 is not a valid assumption. Take this analogy :

All successful 750+ GMAT scorers spend more than 2 months in their preparation. So, if John want to score 770 in GMAT, he must spend more than 2 months in preparing for GMAT.

Assumption 1 - John should spend more than 2 months.... - this is not the correct assumption.

for an assumption to work - we have to look for a statement that works within the core of the argument.

Hope this helps !!

What I thought:

A recent MOM stated that Only 15% of applml contract provide the majority of its provisions in the High Sea Sales. Citing this, Avik spoke to mock that this was evidence of the decline of commercial rigor in Applml contract.

All contracts should provide the majority of their provisions in the High Sea Sales.
It is only "applml contract". So if it has to work as an ASSUMPTION it must be worded as "all applml contracts".
Further, "should" is incorrect for an assumption.
I hope this is the only reason here.

C is the answer

imskpwr wrote:
What I thought:

A recent MOM stated that Only 15% of applml contract provide the majority of its provisions in the High Sea Sales. Citing this, Avik spoke to mock that this was evidence of the decline of commercial rigor in Applml contract.

All contracts should provide the majority of their provisions in the High Sea Sales.
It is only "applml contract". So if it has to work as an ASSUMPTION it must be worded as "all applml contracts".
Further, "should" is incorrect for an assumption.
I hope this is the only reason here.

yes, this is not an assumption of the above argument - "should" makes it inappropriate.

For more on this, refer the analogy from OG-12 # 76 ( option A and B - how "should" is inappropriate)

hope this helps !!

What is the OA for this question? I still am confused with the discussions!! Any Experts???

what is the OA ?