Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 27 Aug 2014, 07:18

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
2 KUDOS received
VP
VP
avatar
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1096
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Followers: 32

Kudos [?]: 250 [2] , given: 67

Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 21 Sep 2012, 19:58
2
This post received
KUDOS
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  55% (hard)

Question Stats:

47% (02:36) correct 53% (01:50) wrong based on 424 sessions
Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process. However, there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism; our decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the representative's argument depends?

A. The agency's prior placements of babies with parents who were previously acquainted with its staff have not, in general, been more successful than those with parents unacquainted with the staff.
B.Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.
C.For a time period equal in duration to that during which the data were collected, the average number of babies placed by the agency is close to ten.
D.Most prospective parents who apply to adopt babies do not meet the agency's criteria for adoption.
E.The agency will only place babies with parents who not only meet the legal and institutional criteria for adoption, but who in fact surpass those criteria.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
VP
VP
avatar
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1096
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Followers: 32

Kudos [?]: 250 [0], given: 67

Re: CR Assumption [#permalink] New post 22 Sep 2012, 13:37
pls help wid dis one i am finding it really difficult can any expert help on this
Current Student
User avatar
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 514
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 33

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 269

CAT Tests
Re: CR Assumption [#permalink] New post 24 Sep 2012, 21:44
Archit143 wrote:
pls help wid dis one i am finding it really difficult can any expert help on this


+1 B

Hi Archit

First of all, I am no expert. :)

Premise 1 – It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process.
Premise 2 – decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.

Conclusion – there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism

Assumption are made to connect the premise with conclusion

Now, if you think, option B fits well. It connects Premise 2 and the Conclusion. They have stated in the argument that the new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy and that they also knew 8 of them. In the end they have concluded that there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism only if the 8 selected parents were also surpassing the criteria.

:-D
_________________

First Attempt 710 - first-attempt-141273.html

VP
VP
avatar
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1096
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Followers: 32

Kudos [?]: 250 [0], given: 67

Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 27 Sep 2012, 14:12
Doesnt B tells about their bias as the staffs were knowing that those ppl are reach before hand
Director
Director
avatar
Status: Gonna rock this time!!!
Joined: 22 Jul 2012
Posts: 550
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q43 V34
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 562

GMAT Tests User
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 10 Jan 2013, 04:45
I don't find the conclusion falling apart by negating the way I have done below:

Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, hardly anybody or none was personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.



Please help what is wrong with the negation above.
_________________

hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.

Who says you need a 700 ?Check this out : http://gmatclub.com/forum/who-says-you-need-a-149706.html#p1201595

My GMAT Journey : end-of-my-gmat-journey-149328.html#p1197992

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Final Lap
Joined: 25 Oct 2012
Posts: 293
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
Schools: Oxford
GPA: 3.54
WE: Project Management (Retail Banking)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 85

Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 10 Jan 2013, 06:02
Sachin9 wrote:
I don't find the conclusion falling apart by negating the way I have done below:

Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, hardly anybody or none was personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.



Please help what is wrong with the negation above.


Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process. However, there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism; our decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.



I think by the negating process :
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process , WHICH means that the blue part of the premise will not be valid at all :

Hence, B is the answer ..
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

"If you don't change your life, your life will change you"

Director
Director
avatar
Status: Gonna rock this time!!!
Joined: 22 Jul 2012
Posts: 550
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q43 V34
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 562

GMAT Tests User
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 10 Jan 2013, 06:09
Rock750 wrote:
Sachin9 wrote:
I don't find the conclusion falling apart by negating the way I have done below:

Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, hardly anybody or none was personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.



Please help what is wrong with the negation above.


Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process. However, there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism; our decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.



I think by the negating process :
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process , WHICH means that the blue part of the premise will not be valid at all :

Hence, B is the answer ..

you are right, but how do we decide what is to be negated?
_________________

hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.

Who says you need a 700 ?Check this out : http://gmatclub.com/forum/who-says-you-need-a-149706.html#p1201595

My GMAT Journey : end-of-my-gmat-journey-149328.html#p1197992

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Final Lap
Joined: 25 Oct 2012
Posts: 293
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
Schools: Oxford
GPA: 3.54
WE: Project Management (Retail Banking)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 85

Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 10 Jan 2013, 06:15
you are right, but how do we decide what is to be negated?[/quote]

You should focus on the meaning rather than the negation technique itself ... :wink:
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

"If you don't change your life, your life will change you"

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 890
Concentration: General Management, General Management
Schools: ISB '16
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 186 [0], given: 304

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 13 Jan 2013, 06:35
Confused indeed.

"B" States that
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

Negate it:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

If most were not known to STAFF members then yes the conclusion holds strongly that there is no favoritism.Then isn't this option(After negation) supporting the conclusion despite weakening it.
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Final Lap
Joined: 25 Oct 2012
Posts: 293
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
Schools: Oxford
GPA: 3.54
WE: Project Management (Retail Banking)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 85

Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 14 Jan 2013, 01:08
targetgmatchotu wrote:
Confused indeed.

"B" States that
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

Negate it:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

If most were not known to STAFF members then yes the conclusion holds strongly that there is no favoritism.Then isn't this option(After negation) supporting the conclusion despite weakening it.


Hi targetgmatchotu
We are looking here for what been assumed in this argument.
The argument stated that EIGHT/ TEN (Most Of them) last babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process.
After negation, B becomes : most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process... Is the argument still valid ?? No ..

Hope it's clear
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

"If you don't change your life, your life will change you"

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 890
Concentration: General Management, General Management
Schools: ISB '16
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 186 [0], given: 304

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 14 Jan 2013, 19:48
Rock750 wrote:
targetgmatchotu wrote:
Confused indeed.

"B" States that
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

Negate it:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

If most were not known to STAFF members then yes the conclusion holds strongly that there is no favoritism.Then isn't this option(After negation) supporting the conclusion despite weakening it.


Hi targetgmatchotu
We are looking here for what been assumed in this argument.
The argument stated that EIGHT/ TEN (Most Of them) last babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process.
After negation, B becomes : most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process... Is the argument still valid ?? No ..

Hope it's clear



Conclusion – there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism

(B).most were personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process...
~(B).most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process...

If most were not ACQ with agency staff , doesn't it supports the conclusion as mentioned above that "there is no truth of the accusation of facoritism".

Plz tell where I am going wrong.

Rgds,
Saurabh
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Jan 2013
Posts: 82
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 1

Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 15 Jan 2013, 14:38
targetgmatchotu wrote:
Rock750 wrote:
targetgmatchotu wrote:
Confused indeed.

"B" States that
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

Negate it:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

If most were not known to STAFF members then yes the conclusion holds strongly that there is no favoritism.Then isn't this option(After negation) supporting the conclusion despite weakening it.


Hi targetgmatchotu
We are looking here for what been assumed in this argument.
The argument stated that EIGHT/ TEN (Most Of them) last babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process.
After negation, B becomes : most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process... Is the argument still valid ?? No ..

Hope it's clear



Conclusion – there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism

(B).most were personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process...
~(B).most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process...

If most were not ACQ with agency staff , doesn't it supports the conclusion as mentioned above that "there is no truth of the accusation of facoritism".

Plz tell where I am going wrong.

Rgds,
Saurabh


i personally agree with you @targetgmat option B only makes sense when negated..so i dont know why it is an option to the question when it is either negated or just as it is.

Posted from my mobile device Image
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Final Lap
Joined: 25 Oct 2012
Posts: 293
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
Schools: Oxford
GPA: 3.54
WE: Project Management (Retail Banking)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 85

Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 15 Jan 2013, 16:49
targetgmatchotu wrote:
Rock750 wrote:
targetgmatchotu wrote:
Confused indeed.

"B" States that
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

Negate it:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

If most were not known to STAFF members then yes the conclusion holds strongly that there is no favoritism.Then isn't this option(After negation) supporting the conclusion despite weakening it.


Hi targetgmatchotu
We are looking here for what been assumed in this argument.
The argument stated that EIGHT/ TEN (Most Of them) last babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process.
After negation, B becomes : most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process... Is the argument still valid ?? No ..

Hope it's clear



Conclusion – there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism

(B).most were personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process...
~(B).most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process...

If most were not ACQ with agency staff , doesn't it supports the conclusion as mentioned above that "there is no truth of the accusation of facoritism".

Plz tell where I am going wrong.

Rgds,
Saurabh


This option , when negated, neither supports nor weakens the argument.
It just tell us that we need the option as an assumption to make the argument logically correct because negate it and you will destroy the argument. That's how the technique works, you need just to check if the argument is still ok when negating an option ..
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

"If you don't change your life, your life will change you"

Expert Post
3 KUDOS received
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1779
Followers: 1236

Kudos [?]: 3397 [3] , given: 181

Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 15 Jan 2013, 18:15
3
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
Archit143 wrote:
Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process. However, there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism; our decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the representative's argument depends?

A. The agency's prior placements of babies with parents who were previously acquainted with its staff have not, in general, been more successful than those with parents unacquainted with the staff.
B.Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.
C.For a time period equal in duration to that during which the data were collected, the average number of babies placed by the agency is close to ten.
D.Most prospective parents who apply to adopt babies do not meet the agency's criteria for adoption.
E.The agency will only place babies with parents who not only meet the legal and institutional criteria for adoption, but who in fact surpass those criteria.


Hi folks,

Let me add my two cents to the discussion around option B.

Basically, an assumption can play either of the two roles: first, bridge the logical gap in the argument and second, defend against weakeners.

In our case, option B plays the second role i.e. it defends the argument against a weakener. What is that weakener? The weakener is that people acquainted with staff of the agency were allocated disproportionate number of babies.

In other words, the argument is saying that the decisions are guided solely by the best interest of children (and not whether the person is a personal acquaintance of staff member). So, for example, if it is shown that 100 personal acquaintances and 50 other people for the adoption process and more than 2/3rd of the children were placed with personal acquaintances, it would show a disproportionate allocation and weaken the argument that the process did not favor personal acquaintances.

We know from the passage that 8 of the last 10 babies have been placed with personal acquaintances, therefore in order to defend our argument of impartiality, we need to assume that around 80% of the people who applied for adoption were personal acquaintances. This is what is communicated by option statement B.

Hope this helps :)

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________



Free Webinar: August 24, 2014 - Improve by 70 Points in 30 days: Register for this Free Webinar to learn how to define your strategy, analyze your mocks and improve by 70 points in 30 days. Click here to register.

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 890
Concentration: General Management, General Management
Schools: ISB '16
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 186 [0], given: 304

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 15 Jan 2013, 20:02
Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process. However, there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism; our decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.

Green: Conclusion
Blue: Supporting Premise
Red: Counter premise
B.Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

B: Supporting the counter premise by saying that of all those ten babies' parents most obey to counter premise,thereby weakening the conclusion.
Still unclear how can it be by any chance a assumption .
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 11 Jun 2012
Posts: 1
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 33

Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 16 Jan 2013, 06:49
Negation of B : most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

if most were not ACQNTed before, then the ACQntance must have happened during the adoption process .

if there is no favoritism in the process , then either ALL the parents would have got ACNqted or none . but only most parents did.
some sort of favoritism is thr.

So the argument doesnt hold true.. ans - B
4 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 837
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Real Estate
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V29
GMAT 2: 670 Q50 V29
GMAT 3: 620 Q49 V26
GMAT 4: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.6
Followers: 37

Kudos [?]: 565 [4] , given: 197

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 09 Jul 2013, 14:20
4
This post received
KUDOS
Archit143 wrote:
Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process. However, there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism; our decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the representative's argument depends?

A. The agency's prior placements of babies with parents who were previously acquainted with its staff have not, in general, been more successful than those with parents unacquainted with the staff.
B.Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.
C.For a time period equal in duration to that during which the data were collected, the average number of babies placed by the agency is close to ten.
D.Most prospective parents who apply to adopt babies do not meet the agency's criteria for adoption.
E.The agency will only place babies with parents who not only meet the legal and institutional criteria for adoption, but who in fact surpass those criteria.


here is OE

(1) Identify the Question Type
The word "assumption" in the question stem indicates that this is a Find the Assumption question.

(2) Deconstruct the Argument
According to the argument, the adoption agency has awarded the majority of its recent placements to parents who were personally acquainted with agency staff. The argument denies that this discrepancy is a sign of favoritism toward certain applicants, on the grounds that all ten placements were made with parents who surpassed the agency's (and the law's) criteria for adoption.

(3) State the Goal
On Find the Assumption questions, we're looking for something that the author must believe to be true in order to draw the given conclusion. The argument concludes that the agency did not engage in favoritism because all of the chosen parents surpassed the adoption criteria. However, the argument is also assuming that, among all well-qualified applicants, there was no favoritism toward individuals who were personally acquainted with the agency staff.

For example, suppose there were 100 fully qualified families and only 8 of them were personally acquainted with the staff; those 8 happened to be chosen, while only 2 of 92 qualified applicants who were not acquainted with staff were chosen. If that were true, it would undermine the author's claim that the agency did not show any favoritism. The author must be assuming that this is NOT the case.

(4) Work from Wrong to Right

(A) The argument is concerned only with whether a bias toward personally acquainted applicants is present or absent; it is not concerned with whether such a bias may, in fact, lead to placements that are more successful in the long term.

(B) CORRECT. For the argument to establish lack of bias toward certain applicants, the proportion of "previously acquainted" people among those applicants chosen for placement must reflect the corresponding proportion among all applicants. In other words, if eight out of the ten parents actually chosen were personally acquainted with the staff, then a similar majority of all applicants should have been similarly acquainted with the staff. Alternatively, use the negation test. If this statement is false, then the majority of qualified applicants were in fact unacquainted with agency staff – a situation in which the placement of eight of ten babies with personally acquainted applicants is a clear signal of bias. Since the negation of this statement defeats the argument, the original statement must be assumed.

(C) The argument is concerned only with determining whether a bias is demonstrated by the agency's ten most recent placements; it does not involve the idea of whether those placements were made at a typical rate.

(D) Applicants who do not meet the criteria are irrelevant; the argument is concerned with determining whether a bias exists among fully qualified applicants. Therefore, the relative proportion of unqualified candidates among all applicants does not affect the argument.

(E) Although all ten of the agency's most recent placements may indeed have been placed with parents who "far surpassed" the criteria, there is nothing in the argument to suggest that all successful applicants must substantially surpass those criteria (as opposed to simply meeting or fulfilling them).
_________________

When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe ...then you will be successfull....

GIVE VALUE TO OFFICIAL QUESTIONS...



GMAT RCs VOCABULARY LIST: vocabulary-list-for-gmat-reading-comprehension-155228.html
learn AWA writing techniques while watching video : http://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat- ... assessment
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APt9ITygGss

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 367
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 291

Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 08 Oct 2013, 20:30
I don't understand. Isn't B simply restating the first sentence of the argument. How is it an assumption? Aren't '8/10' and 'most' synonymous?
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Feb 2013
Posts: 184
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 25

Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 16 Nov 2013, 05:12
It took me about 10 mins to understand the question and the choices and why B is correct... :( I hope the real GMAT won't be as convoluted as this one!
Here's my understanding, hopefully it'll help others:

The adoption agency says that 8 out of the 10 last babies were placed with acquaintances. Now, the catch here is that we can say that 10 people applied, and 8 of those were acquaintances. Also, those 8 "exceeded the standards" of the adoption agency, hence it indeed server the children's best interest. Therefore the adoption agency cannot be accused of favoritism (they didn't have much choice anyway since 8/10 were acquaintances and ALSO surpassed the criteria!).
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: folding sleeves up
Joined: 26 Apr 2013
Posts: 74
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GMAT Date: 05-01-2014
GPA: 3.5
WE: Consulting (Computer Hardware)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 34

Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our [#permalink] New post 18 Jan 2014, 02:55
Why not A when the conclusion also includes "guided solely by best interests of children". Choice A supports this conclusion.
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our   [#permalink] 18 Jan 2014, 02:55
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
5 Jane and William will represent our school at the modern gmataspirant2009 40 08 Nov 2009, 08:39
Jane and William will represent our school at the modern tejal777 2 20 Oct 2009, 19:31
Adoption IrinaOK 4 30 Aug 2007, 09:40
Student representative: Our university, in expelling a jyotsnasarabu 9 21 Nov 2006, 10:18
1 Student representative: Our university, in expelling a WinWinMBA 23 25 May 2005, 07:59
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 22 posts ] 



cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.