The number of students assigned to special “disruptive

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 2:52 am
The number of students assigned to special "disruptive behavior" classes in a school district has dropped by 55% over the past decade. The district superintendent gives all the credit for the decrease to teachers for providing better discipline and guidance in appropriate classroom etiquette to the students.

The school district superintendent's reasoning is most called into question by which of the following, if true?

A)Other school districts have begun to run "disruptive behavior" classes in the past year as well.

B)Students who are in the "disruptive behavior" classes have approximately the same number of detentions annually as students not enrolled in the classes.

C)Over the past decade, students who previously would have been classified as "disruptive" have increasingly been diagnosed instead as having Attention Deficit Disorder, and have been medicated to control that condition.

D)Disruptive behavior in the school district, when it does happen now, is less extreme than it used to be.

E)Classes for "disruptive behavior" are a state-sanctioned method for controlling students who pose disciplinary challenges.

I will provide OA later

Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 6:03 pm

by natali » Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:45 am
nasheen wrote: I will provide OA later
The number of students assigned to special "disruptive behavior" classes in a school district has dropped by 55% over the past decade. The district superintendent gives all the credit for the decrease to teachers for providing better discipline and guidance in appropriate classroom etiquette to the students.

The school district superintendent's reasoning is most called into question by which of the following, if true?

A)Other school districts have begun to run "disruptive behavior" classes in the past year as well. ( we dont care of " other school districts" we only care of why the number of student decreased so out of state

B)Students who are in the "disruptive behavior" classes have approximately the same number of detentions annually as students not enrolled in the classes. " out"

C)Over the past decade, students who previously would have been classified as "disruptive" have increasingly been diagnosed instead as having Attention Deficit Disorder, and have been medicated to control that condition. ( nope, it doesnt talk about diagnosing"

D)Disruptive behavior in the school district, when it does happen now, is less extreme than it used to be. my choice

E)Classes for "disruptive behavior" are a state-sanctioned method for controlling students who pose disciplinary challenges. ( Irrelevant)

i choose A

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Mon Sep 10, 2012 8:56 am
A)Other school districts have begun to run "disruptive behavior" classes in the past year as well.
we are only concerned about this school

B)Students who are in the "disruptive behavior" classes have approximately the same number of detentions annually as students not enrolled in the classes.
argument does not mention "detention" and hence we do not know what effect does this statistic has on argument. moreover we are not concerned about other students

C)Over the past decade, students who previously would have been classified as "disruptive" have increasingly been diagnosed instead as having Attention Deficit Disorder, and have been medicated to control that condition.
Provides alternative reason for the decrease in the % of students in disruptive behavior classes and hence weakens the conclusion that credits teachers for the decrease in %

D)Disruptive behavior in the school district, when it does happen now, is less extreme than it used to be.
we are not concerned about the "extreme-ness" of disruptive behavior

E)Classes for "disruptive behavior" are a state-sanctioned method for controlling students who pose disciplinary challenges.
this one has no effect on argument. whosoever proposed/started the method is irrelevant
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 502
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:36 pm
Thanked: 99 times
Followed by:21 members

by vk_vinayak » Mon Sep 10, 2012 9:19 am
nasheen wrote:The number of students assigned to special "disruptive behavior" classes in a school district has dropped by 55% over the past decade. The district superintendent gives all the credit for the decrease to teachers for providing better discipline and guidance in appropriate classroom etiquette to the students.

The school district superintendent's reasoning is most called into question by which of the following, if true?

A)Other school districts have begun to run "disruptive behavior" classes in the past year as well.

B)Students who are in the "disruptive behavior" classes have approximately the same number of detentions annually as students not enrolled in the classes.

C)Over the past decade, students who previously would have been classified as "disruptive" have increasingly been diagnosed instead as having Attention Deficit Disorder, and have been medicated to control that condition.

D)Disruptive behavior in the school district, when it does happen now, is less extreme than it used to be.

E)Classes for "disruptive behavior" are a state-sanctioned method for controlling students who pose disciplinary challenges.

I will provide OA later
Situation: The number of students assigned to special "disruptive behavior" classes has dropped. The DS says it is because teachers have provided better guidance and discipline to the students.

How to weaken his argument? One of the ways is to show alternative cause for decrease in the numbers. C does just that.

C says that the number of students has decreased NOT because of teachers' guidance, but rather because of changed categorization. The students who'd have been categorized as 'disruptive students' are now being categorized as students with some disorder and are given medical treatments.
- VK

I will (Learn. Recognize. Apply)

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 435
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:27 am
Thanked: 48 times
Followed by:16 members

by alex.gellatly » Mon Sep 10, 2012 5:32 pm
Another vote for C!
A useful website I found that has every quant OG video explanation:

https://www.beatthegmat.com/useful-websi ... tml#475231

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 7:57 am
Thanked: 1 times

by mparakala » Wed Jan 16, 2013 5:25 pm
X causes Y is the conclusion

option specifying anything other than X causing Y, - weakens the argument

C does the job

teachers methods are not causing decreased numbers.
instead disorder is causing the decreased numbers,

OA: C

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 2:57 pm
Location: Everywhere
Thanked: 503 times
Followed by:192 members
GMAT Score:780

by Bill@VeritasPrep » Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:22 am
Gotta be C. Providing an alternative explanation (medication) for the result (fewer "disruptive" students) is one of the classic ways to weaken a conclusion.
Join Veritas Prep's 2010 Instructor of the Year, Matt Douglas for GMATT Mondays

Visit the Veritas Prep Blog

Try the FREE Veritas Prep Practice Test