Live GMAT classes with Target Test Prep start Nov 21 and Nov 22. First class free.

See classes
Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
GMATLiveTeachStarts Nov 22
Josh Braslow, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Josh Braslow, 20+ years in test prep

Nov 22 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemandStart anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

with

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemandStart anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions
Start free 5-day trial
Read 563 reviewsTarget Test Prep

*Princeton Diagnostic* Help

Expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Subscribe topic
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 10:53 amFollowed by: 4 members
Thanked: 5 times
by ankit0411 » Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:46 am
Some medical colleges have recently extended the duration of a medical education by adding a research project to the other tasks medical students must complete. These schools maintain that this alteration is a response to requests from the public for more thoroughly educated doctors, rather than an attempt to generate more income from tuition. Obviously, their claim is inaccurate. If it were true, medical schools would use the more modern patient-based learning format, which produces more thoroughly trained doctors than do research projects.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument against the medical colleges?

A)When medical colleges first started encouraging research projects, the projects were of longer duration than the projects suggested currently.


B)Medical colleges have said they will not eliminate the research project requirement unless they can find a way to compensate for the loss of revenue that would result from this elimination.


C)Many prospective medical students have expressed interest in courses using patient-based learning.


D)The public has no clear understanding of what is necessary to train a medical doctor thoroughly.


E)Research projects cannot be legitimately compared to course formats, either patient-based or otherwise.

Can anyone please explain the above problem ?

OA is B
Don't predict future , create it !
Top
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:13 amFollowed by: 4 members
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Thanked: 16 times
GMAT Score:650

by tisrar02 » Sun Aug 05, 2012 7:18 am
This questions requires us to weaken the argument laid out by the medical colleges that this course is a response by the public. Others believe that this new alteration of the extended program is a way to make more money. How do we weaken the medical schools arguments?

If the public tries to take away this new extended program and the colleges argue that they will need to figure out a new way to compensate for the revenue or money made from this new program, then this weakens the argument laid out by the medical colleges. This is because the colleges state they ONLY have the programs because the public felt it was needed. The new argument is that they will only remove the program if the college is properly compensated for the lost revenue. This logically weakens the arugument.

Hope this helps
Top
Join the discussion
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 10:53 amFollowed by: 4 members
Thanked: 5 times

by ankit0411 » Sun Aug 05, 2012 7:46 am
tisrar02 wrote:This questions requires us to weaken the argument laid out by the medical colleges that this course is a response by the public. Others believe that this new alteration of the extended program is a way to make more money. How do we weaken the medical schools arguments?

If the public tries to take away this new extended program and the colleges argue that they will need to figure out a new way to compensate for the revenue or money made from this new program, then this weakens the argument laid out by the medical colleges. This is because the colleges state they ONLY have the programs because the public felt it was needed. The new argument is that they will only remove the program if the college is properly compensated for the lost revenue. This logically weakens the arugument.

Hope this helps

Thanks mate, sounds good :)
Don't predict future , create it !
Top
Join the discussion
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 502
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:36 pmFollowed by: 21 members
Thanked: 99 times

by vk_vinayak » Sun Aug 05, 2012 8:48 pm
ankit0411 wrote:Some medical colleges have recently extended the duration of a medical education by adding a research project to the other tasks medical students must complete. These schools maintain that this alteration is a response to requests from the public for more thoroughly educated doctors, rather than an attempt to generate more income from tuition. Obviously, their claim is inaccurate. If it were true, medical schools would use the more modern patient-based learning format, which produces more thoroughly trained doctors than do research projects.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument against the medical colleges?

A)When medical colleges first started encouraging research projects, the projects were of longer duration than the projects suggested currently.


B)Medical colleges have said they will not eliminate the research project requirement unless they can find a way to compensate for the loss of revenue that would result from this elimination.


C)Many prospective medical students have expressed interest in courses using patient-based learning.


D)The public has no clear understanding of what is necessary to train a medical doctor thoroughly.


E)Research projects cannot be legitimately compared to course formats, either patient-based or otherwise.

Can anyone please explain the above problem ?

OA is B
Argument by the school: We have extended the duration of study because we want to educate our students thoroughly and not because we want to generate more income from the additional tuition.

To weaken this argument we need to show that schools have indeed extended the duration of study for monetary cause. B says just that. If the schools were really interested in educating their students thoroughly, then schools should be open to any idea that helps their student. By attaching the clause of 'compensate the loss of revenue', schools are showing that they've extended the study duration only for the purpose of making more money.
- VK

I will (Learn. Recognize. Apply)
Top
Join the discussion