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

Redeem

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.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
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
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start 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

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Strunk Hospital's

Expert replies
by sumanr84 » Sun Jun 27, 2010 1:56 am
Strunk Hospital's much applauded increase in emergency room efficiency due to its new procedures for handling trauma patients does not withstand careful analysis. Strunk Hospital's average time before treatment for all emergency room patients is nearly 40 minutes - the highest in the city. And for trauma victims, the situation is even worse: The average time before treatment is nearly half an hour-more than twice the city average.

Which of the following, if true, would be most damaging to the conclusion about the value of the new procedures?

a. The cities with the most efficient emergency rooms utilize the same procedures for handling trauma victims as does Strunk Hospital.
b. Because trauma patients account for a large percentage of emergency room patients, procedures that hasten their treatment will likely significantly increase overall emergency room efficiency.
c. After the new procedures went into effect, Strunk's average time before treatment for emergency room patients dropped by 35 percent.
d. Due to differences in location and size of staff, not all emergency rooms can be expected to reach similar levels of efficiency.
e. The recently hired administrators who instituted the new procedures also increased Strunk's emergency room staff by 15 percent.
[spoiler]Source : kaplan Test1, OA later[/spoiler]
I am on a break !!
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by albatross86 » Sun Jun 27, 2010 3:26 am
Facts:

2. Average time before treatment = 40 minutes (highest in the city)
3. Trauma victims - 30 minutes (twice the city average)

Consensus:

New procedures for handling trauma patients have led to increased emergency room efficiency in Strunk.

Conclusion:

This consensus is incorrect because of the facts.

WEAKENER:

A. Does that mean the increased efficiency is due to the procedures? There could be other factors involved and we cannot be sure whether this helps the arguer's case.

B. This says that if the trauma patients are treated faster, the efficiency is increased. This actually strengthens the argument by saying that since trauma patients are treated the slowest in Strunk, it should actually be considered inefficient.

C. Ahah, this addresses something we didn't think of. What if Strunk's average times were much worse before the implementation of the new procedures? Here we are told that the time dropped by 35%, which means that it may be reasonable to conclude that the new procedures increased efficiency - thus weakening the argument that the consensus is wrong.

D. They may not be expected to reach it, but we can still make remarks about whether they have achieved it or not. Irrelevant.

E. Staff increased by 15%. So what?! Irrelevant.

Pick C.
Join the discussion

by dkumar.83 » Sun Jun 27, 2010 3:35 am
I'll go with B.
Join the discussion

by hardik.jadeja » Sun Jun 27, 2010 5:33 am
Agree with albatross86. Pick C.
Join the discussion

by paddle_sweep » Sun Jun 27, 2010 8:18 am
Will go with 'C'
Join the discussion

by sumanr84 » Sun Jun 27, 2010 8:45 am
albatross is right on target..OA - C
I am on a break !!
Join the discussion