Critical Reasoning

In defending the Hyperion School of Journalism from charges that its program is of little or no value to its students, the dean of the school pointed to this recent success in placing students: 65 percent of its graduates went on to internships or jobs in print or broadcast journalism.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the defense offered by the dean?
(A) More than half of the school’s students came from jobs in journalism to improve their skills.
(B) Some newspaper editors do not regard journalism school as a necessary part of the training of a journalist.
(C) The number of cities with more than one major newspaper has declined sharply over the last 25 years.
(D) The program offered by the Hyperion School of Journalism is similar in quality and content to those offered by its peer institutions.
(E) The proportion of applicants to the Hyperion School of Journalism that are admitted is lower than it was the years ago.

This is a classic case of confusion between numbers and percents.
65% of how many numbers??


Id go with E!!

I will go with A

A - makes dean defense strong.The course has value.

I am confused between D & E
I will go for D.

65 percent of its graduates went on to internships or jobs in print or broadcast journalism.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the defense offered by the dean?
(A) More than half of the school’s students came from jobs in journalism to improve their skills.

Dean is saying that course is providing them with internships. A is saying that their contacts in industry or the past experience is getting them the internships or jobs.


(B) Some newspaper editors do not regard journalism school as a necessary part of the training of a journalist.
(C) The number of cities with more than one major newspaper has declined sharply over the last 25 years.

(D) The program offered by the Hyperion School of Journalism is similar in quality and content to those offered by its peer institutions.

If Its the same quality does not attack Dean's conclusion


(E) The proportion of applicants to the Hyperion School of Journalism that are admitted is lower than it was the years ago.

Lets say 200 people were admitted in the past and now 100 people. We dont know how many were successful as per Dean in the past. It can be more than 65% percent in which case it will weaken, if its less than 65% it will strengthen or equal to 65% in which case it does not weaken or strengthen

My pick A. What is the OA?

- First realize this is a weaken question
- Second find the conclusion (The school program must be good because 65 percent of its graduates went on to internships or jobs in print or broadcast journalism)

Answer A tells us that more than 50% of the students were already in journalism before joining the school hence it tells us that the data provided by the dean does not help in gauzing the value of the program.

Correct answer - A

As per A
Student came to improve there skills from the job because they value it.
A supports dean.

Here rather than validating the value of the program , the q stem is about attacking the defense statement , which says students are well placed.

This can be done by option A / B.

A .. is more stronger than B ..
In B it states 'some journ... ' there can be chances where this some may refer to 1 too ..

SO i will pick A

IMO: A

Weigh
65 percent of graduates and more than half of ALL THE STUDENTS.
In most of the cases 65 percent would be lesser or (say) equivalent to more than half of the students. So basically school is doing nothing or little to its students.

IMO:B

i have a doubt guys..

1)IF more that 50% who came to improve their skills already had jobs in journalism why would they go back as interns..
2)It says "some editors" dont consider the training important.It is possible that these " some editors" might have taken all 65% students..

Let me know if and where i am going wrong..

thx..

Its internships or jobs

The argument is saying school taught them stuff that helped these people land those internships or jobs

A is opening up the possibility that they might have learned some thing at school but the jobs/internships are because of their contacts and experience

Hi chidcguy, raunekk

The dean means that most of the student after graduate in the school have job.

A, weaken this, it states that most student have job already and come to school to horn their job skills

IMO A

The answer should refute or weaken (most seriously undermine) the Dean's defense involving "placing students." So you should be looking for an answer that says "Hyperion has little or no value to placing students...and here's why."

A) Refutes the Dean's defense. If journalism students already have a job, they don't need to be placed in one after they attend Hyperion.
B) indicates: "Most editors say, "You don't need a journalism degree for a job/internship in journalism". This undermines the Dean's conclusion that because a student attended Hyperion, the student obtained a job/internship.
C) Has nothing to do with anything
D) Strengthens the Dean's argument by equating other schools (which probably have value) to his school. If Hyperion has no value, other schools have no value.
E) Indicates Hyperion has been more selective than in the past, giving value to the school.

After thinking about it, I like A. It says "Well, most people had jobs going into the school anyway."

Interesting discussion.

What probably mislead some people is the fact that one might think that (A) implies that the school has a reputation that interested people who had jobs in journalism to improve their skills, but that is just an assumption.

(A) is correct, because it seriously undermines the link between the evidence provided by the dean and the defense of the school. It attacks the basic assumption that it was the quality of the program that helped the students to get internships and jobs.