BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Another one where I don't agree with the answer

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 6:54 pm
Location: US of A

Another one where I don't agree with the answer

by Auzbee » Mon Dec 31, 2007 1:30 am
For years, the debate over public education reform has centered on financing. Many claim that pouring more money into the public schools will improve student performance. However, the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches. Today the schools are organized to benefit their adult employees rather than the students.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?
A. Schools that have instituted “new approaches” attract the best performing students.
B. Schools without outside playgrounds have lower levels of student performance than schools that do.
C. Studies show that student performance corresponded most directly with the education of the students’ families.
D. School employees, by an overwhelming margin, said that the system performed well.
E. Researchers in education have shown that students from school districts with high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests.

The OA is E but it does not weaken the conclusion 'the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches'. IMO the right answer should be C as it shows that it is not really new ideas or new approaches that helps improve student's performance.

How do you explain the OA?
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 214
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:30 am
Thanked: 15 times

by sujaysolanki » Mon Dec 31, 2007 7:23 am
Finance is imp for schools ..many claim that more money ..better preformance
..But ideas are needed not money ...


Hence we get something in the answer choices that says that more money leads to better education ..will weaken the argument

Option C is out because no where in the argument are they talking about the families of the studentds

Hope this helps ..
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 195
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:33 am
Thanked: 10 times

by sankruth » Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:13 am
sujaysolanki wrote:Finance is imp for schools ..many claim that more money ..better preformance
..But ideas are needed not money ...


Hence we get something in the answer choices that says that more money leads to better education ..will weaken the argument

Option C is out because no where in the argument are they talking about the families of the studentds

Hope this helps ..
I like C

In order to weaken the argument all that we need to show is that there is different reason for students that perform better. We do not have to go all the way to prove that more funding in schools results in better student performance.

C provides the alternate reason for student performance weakening the argument.

E talks about high scores standardised tests but there is no evidence in the argument to say that high score in a standardised test means better performance.
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:15 am

by nauman » Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:29 am
this is not guarantee if you teach student faimily's will help to improve students performance and second thing is this argument is revolving around two things spending more money or inject new ideas and approaches.
and B and E are the best choices among all. Because sometimes physical activity will help to improve student performance but argument is not focusing on playground or physical activity so B is out.
As for E if you spend more on student which is also against the claim that author made in the argument that employees are getting benefit not student also help to weaken the argument and second it improves the score in test which is also effect the student performance which is based on Study so E is the best choice.
Top
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 6:28 am

by nikhil_havele » Mon Apr 07, 2008 10:10 am
Here the claim is that: "New ideas and approaches will improve school system not the financing" So in order to weaken this, we should look for statement which completely opposes it. So, best choice is E because it gives example of how financing helped to improve the school system.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:570

by reply2spg » Tue Aug 03, 2010 4:52 am
I am opening this thread not because I get the right answer, but because I didn't understand what is the conclusion here???? I choose E because none other options are relevant to the stimulus. Please shed some light.
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 8:50 am
Thanked: 29 times
Followed by:3 members

by diebeatsthegmat » Tue Aug 03, 2010 6:37 am
Auzbee wrote:For years, the debate over public education reform has centered on financing. Many claim that pouring more money into the public schools will improve student performance. However, the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches. Today the schools are organized to benefit their adult employees rather than the students.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?
A. Schools that have instituted �new approaches� attract the best performing students.
B. Schools without outside playgrounds have lower levels of student performance than schools that do.
C. Studies show that student performance corresponded most directly with the education of the students� families.
D. School employees, by an overwhelming margin, said that the system performed well.
E. Researchers in education have shown that students from school districts with high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests.

The OA is E but it does not weaken the conclusion 'the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches'. IMO the right answer should be C as it shows that it is not really new ideas or new approaches that helps improve student's performance.

How do you explain the OA?
i do agree that the answer should be E because the student family is out of scope. the passage does tell no words about the student family
E here is good because it says that the more money the school pays for its exployees the better score its students get (high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests. ) it does weaken the conclusion that "Today the schools are organized to benefit their adult employees rather than the students"
it means " well, i benefit the employees and the employee benefit the student so that the students are getting higher and higher performance, watch, the invidence is that the students score are getting higher and higher)
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:570

by reply2spg » Tue Aug 03, 2010 6:57 am
Thanks I got it now
diebeatsthegmat wrote:
Auzbee wrote:For years, the debate over public education reform has centered on financing. Many claim that pouring more money into the public schools will improve student performance. However, the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches. Today the schools are organized to benefit their adult employees rather than the students.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?
A. Schools that have instituted �new approaches� attract the best performing students.
B. Schools without outside playgrounds have lower levels of student performance than schools that do.
C. Studies show that student performance corresponded most directly with the education of the students� families.
D. School employees, by an overwhelming margin, said that the system performed well.
E. Researchers in education have shown that students from school districts with high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests.

The OA is E but it does not weaken the conclusion 'the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches'. IMO the right answer should be C as it shows that it is not really new ideas or new approaches that helps improve student's performance.

How do you explain the OA?
i do agree that the answer should be E because the student family is out of scope. the passage does tell no words about the student family
E here is good because it says that the more money the school pays for its exployees the better score its students get (high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests. ) it does weaken the conclusion that "Today the schools are organized to benefit their adult employees rather than the students"
it means " well, i benefit the employees and the employee benefit the student so that the students are getting higher and higher performance, watch, the invidence is that the students score are getting higher and higher)
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1