MoYassen23 wrote:I would say B.

A) "to lure..." is not parallel to "that educate".
C) "to lure..." is not to parallel to "for education
D) "to lure..." is the correct idiom
E) "at luring.." is not parallel to "the education of"

That would be my explanation...

Looking forward to an expert's opinion...

MoYassen23 wrote:I think, because there is a sequence of events. First the school must be successful at "luring" the students before it can "educate them".

MoYassen23 wrote:"C" says that we are luring public school students in order to educate them.

You will probably get a better explanation from an expert.

Tommy Wallach wrote:Hey Guys,

Expert opinion has arrived!

Some schools have been successful in attempts to lure middle-income students from public schools and that educate these students in specialized subjects.

A) to lure middle-income students from public schools and that educate
B) to lure middle-income students from public schools and educate
C) to lure middle-income students from public schools for educating
D) which lure middle-income students from public schools to educate
E) at luring middle-income students from public schools and by the education of

(A) Breaks parallelism "to lure" and "that educate".
(B) CORRECT. "to lure" and "educate". The word "to" distributes in the parallel structure, much like has/have: "I have gone to the store and bought a puppy, which I plan to eat."
(C) Meaning problem. They aren't luring them "for educating" them, but luring them "[in order] to educate" them. I can't say "I ate the sandwich for getting rid of my hunger." We use "to" for intention.
(D) "Which" requires a comma.
(E) Break parallelism "at luring" and "by the education of". Also weird meaning in that last piece: "by the education of," as if it somehow aids the act of luring.

Hope that helps!

-t