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

It is currently 02 Oct 2014, 01:13

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

Causation question

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 18 Jul 2007
Posts: 160
Location: Europe
Schools: HBS class of 2011
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 2

Causation question [#permalink] New post 06 Apr 2008, 11:01
Can somebody please be so kind as to explain me why the ans is E and not D (example comes from Kaplan's GMAT 800 - but I still don't get the explanation).

Reading skills among high school students in Gotham have been steadily declining, which can only be the result of overcrowding in the schools.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?

A. The high school system in Gotham succeeds in giving students a good education at considerably less cost than do most systems.

B. Several cities have found that overcrowding in the schools is not always associated with lower reading scores.

C. Gotham schools have a greater teacher-to-student ratio than most other school systems.

D. Students' reading skills have not declined in other cities where the high schools are just as overcrowded as those of Gotham.

E. Schools are not overcrowded in many cities where high school reading scores have declined more than they have in Gotham.

Why E??? For me it's clearly D because:
1) it offers alternative explanation (there must be some other reason for decline in reading skills than overcrowded schools)
2) E talks about "scores" not "skills" - isn't it a shift of scope?
Kaplan GMAT Prep Discount CodesKnewton GMAT Discount CodesVeritas Prep GMAT Discount Codes
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
Posts: 258
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 0

Re: Causation question [#permalink] New post 06 Apr 2008, 11:41
garbus222 wrote:
Can somebody please be so kind as to explain me why the ans is E and not D (example comes from Kaplan's GMAT 800 - but I still don't get the explanation).

Reading skills among high school students in Gotham have been steadily declining, which can only be the result of overcrowding in the schools.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?

A. The high school system in Gotham succeeds in giving students a good education at considerably less cost than do most systems.

B. Several cities have found that overcrowding in the schools is not always associated with lower reading scores.

C. Gotham schools have a greater teacher-to-student ratio than most other school systems.

D. Students' reading skills have not declined in other cities where the high schools are just as overcrowded as those of Gotham.

E. Schools are not overcrowded in many cities where high school reading scores have declined more than they have in Gotham.

Why E??? For me it's clearly D because:
1) it offers alternative explanation (there must be some other reason for decline in reading skills than overcrowded schools)
2) E talks about "scores" not "skills" - isn't it a shift of scope?



Here is why it is not D --

It is possible that the schools in Gotham have now become equally overcrowded as the schools in other cities while that was not the case before. Where as the schools in the other cities have not seen any increase in the overcrowding and hence the students' reading skills have not declined.

For example in 1985:
Gotham City overcrowding ratio = 0.85, Other Cities overcrowding ratio = 0.99
Reading Skill for Gotham City Students = 87, Reading Skill for Other city students = 75

Now in 1989:
Gotham City overcrowding ratio = 0.99, Other Cities overcrowding ratio = 0.99 (unchanged)
Reading Skill for Gotham City Students = 75, Reading Skill for Other city students = 75

So just the fact that the students of other cities have not seen any declines in reading skills (even though the crowding ratio is equal) is not enough to weaken the argument.


E makes sense....think it through...
_________________

Stay Hungry, Stay Foolish

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 18 Feb 2008
Posts: 798
Followers: 20

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 25

Re: Causation question [#permalink] New post 06 Apr 2008, 13:17
If I didn't read E, I would probably picked D.

But E is right, the problem is "the problem can only be caused by overcrowding" is the argument. To weaken this argument, the best counter is to say there are other school with different set of situation are experiencing the same problem they have, thus there are other causes for the problem and overcrowding isn't the only one. If the problem states this way: "The problem is caused by overcrowding" then D would be the right answer. See the difference?

Thanks
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 18 Jul 2007
Posts: 160
Location: Europe
Schools: HBS class of 2011
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 2

Re: Causation question [#permalink] New post 07 Apr 2008, 11:31
Neelesh, Billyjeans - thanks for replies. Neelesh - thank you for explanation and very useful example illustrating the issue!
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 07 Apr 2008
Posts: 22
Followers: 0

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

Re: Causation question [#permalink] New post 07 Apr 2008, 12:31
A -irrelevant
B-sounds good
C-not sufficient
D- strengthen the arg , so false
E-means over crowding is NOT the cause ..nails it!

now, look at B again--->>over crowding MAY be the cause..MAY NOT be the cause as welll - in case of gowtham..doesn't nail it.

E confirmed !!

garbus222 wrote:
Can somebody please be so kind as to explain me why the ans is E and not D (example comes from Kaplan's GMAT 800 - but I still don't get the explanation).

Reading skills among high school students in Gotham have been steadily declining, which can only be the result of overcrowding in the schools.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?

A. The high school system in Gotham succeeds in giving students a good education at considerably less cost than do most systems.

B. Several cities have found that overcrowding in the schools is not always associated with lower reading scores.

C. Gotham schools have a greater teacher-to-student ratio than most other school systems.

D. Students' reading skills have not declined in other cities where the high schools are just as overcrowded as those of Gotham.

E. Schools are not overcrowded in many cities where high school reading scores have declined more than they have in Gotham.

Why E??? For me it's clearly D because:
1) it offers alternative explanation (there must be some other reason for decline in reading skills than overcrowded schools)
2) E talks about "scores" not "skills" - isn't it a shift of scope?
Re: Causation question   [#permalink] 07 Apr 2008, 12:31
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Question wiseguy 4 17 Nov 2005, 20:29
question Jennif102 1 19 Oct 2005, 11:40
Question wiseguy 0 16 Sep 2005, 05:40
Weaken by Causation, the governor Verdant argument... mbassmbass04 8 20 Aug 2005, 15:05
Question vickypaul 6 25 Jan 2005, 01:48
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Causation question

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


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®.