Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club App Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

It is currently 09 Dec 2016, 21:57
GMAT Club Tests

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: ISB, Hyderabad
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 175
WE 1: 4 years Software Product Development
WE 2: 3 years ERP Consulting
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 50 [0], given: 15

Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Aug 2010, 23:28
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  75% (hard)

Question Stats:

19% (02:22) correct 81% (00:46) wrong based on 26 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents earned doctorates are more likely to earn a doctorate than children whose parents did not earn doctorates.

Hart: But consider this: over 70 percent of all doctorate holders do not have a parent that also holds a doctorate.

Which of the following would explain how both Hart and Choi could be correct in their assertions?

Most doctorates who don't have a parent that also holds a doctorate have an aunt or uncle that holds a doctorate.
Parental education is rarely the overriding factor in determining whether a person earns a doctorate or not.
Both Hart and Choi fail to produce sufficient evidence to prove their cases.
One man uses raw numbers while the other uses percents.
Hart does not dispute Choi, but rather attempts to support his argument with additional evidence.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

-AD

Request Expert Reply
If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
avatar
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 997
Location: Singapore
Followers: 21

Kudos [?]: 733 [1] , given: 36

GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: Kaplan CAT: What Explains both the speakers's assertions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Aug 2010, 00:31
1
This post received
KUDOS
The first rule of gmat - apples cannot be compared with oranges.

They have different points and there is no contradiction. Hart's reply is a scope shift. Hence E is ruled out.

E. Hart does not dispute Choi, but rather attempts to support his argument with additional evidence. -----> Hart does not support Choi. Also does not contradict Choi.

If they both are correct then B is left. Mechanically I can put their replies @ 90 degree so one thing has no bearing on the other.
_________________

Please press kudos if you like my post.

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 28 Feb 2010
Posts: 176
WE 1: 3 (Mining Operations)
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 32 [1] , given: 33

Re: Kaplan CAT: What Explains both the speakers's assertions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Aug 2010, 05:10
1
This post received
KUDOS
Its a good question.

I believe, if they were conversing, it would be like :
Hart: Hey !!!..70 % is negative..How you are correct.
Choi: Read my sentence Man : All factors being equal !!!...Now if Parental education is rarely affecting the education of Child, I am not responsible. If you make all factors equal, and make my "Parental Education" as prime One, then I am sure....the babies are Noble Winners :)
_________________

Regards,
Invincible...:)
"The way to succeed is to double your error rate."
"Most people who succeed in the face of seemingly impossible conditions are people who simply don't know how to quit."

1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
avatar
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 997
Location: Singapore
Followers: 21

Kudos [?]: 733 [1] , given: 36

GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: Kaplan CAT: What Explains both the speakers's assertions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Aug 2010, 00:15
1
This post received
KUDOS
Choi uses the word "more likely" - which is just a possibility. Can you predict the future? Not with certainty. That's the catch.

Most importantly - did you get that Hart's reply was scope shift? Hard did not contradict Choi.

rohitgoel15 wrote:
nusmavrik wrote:
The first rule of gmat - apples cannot be compared with oranges.

They have different points and there is no contradiction. Hart's reply is a scope shift. Hence E is ruled out.

E. Hart does not dispute Choi, but rather attempts to support his argument with additional evidence. -----> Hart does not support Choi. Also does not contradict Choi.

If they both are correct then B is left. Mechanically I can put their replies @ 90 degree so one thing has no bearing on the other.


@nusmavrik
Surely B supports Hart's assertion. But how does that support Choi as he mentions that parental education does play a role.

please advice.

_________________

Please press kudos if you like my post.

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 02 Apr 2010
Posts: 98
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 1

Re: Kaplan CAT: What Explains both the speakers's assertions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Aug 2010, 08:26
B!
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Posts: 313
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 514 [0], given: 20

Re: Kaplan CAT: What Explains both the speakers's assertions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Aug 2010, 20:23
nusmavrik wrote:
The first rule of gmat - apples cannot be compared with oranges.

They have different points and there is no contradiction. Hart's reply is a scope shift. Hence E is ruled out.

E. Hart does not dispute Choi, but rather attempts to support his argument with additional evidence. -----> Hart does not support Choi. Also does not contradict Choi.

If they both are correct then B is left. Mechanically I can put their replies @ 90 degree so one thing has no bearing on the other.


@nusmavrik
Surely B supports Hart's assertion. But how does that support Choi as he mentions that parental education does play a role.

please advice.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Posts: 313
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 514 [0], given: 20

Re: Kaplan CAT: What Explains both the speakers's assertions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Aug 2010, 09:05
Thanks nusmavrik. Kudos for U
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 11 May 2010
Posts: 224
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 113 [0], given: 11

Re: Kaplan CAT: What Explains both the speakers's assertions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Aug 2010, 02:53
Didn't concentrate and pick E.

Should be B by simple POE.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 108
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

Re: Kaplan CAT: What Explains both the speakers's assertions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Aug 2010, 09:24
had trouble with that one. thanks for OA
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Affiliations: Volunteer Operation Smile India, Creative Head of College IEEE branch (2009-10), Chief Editor College Magazine (2009), Finance Head College Magazine (2008)
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 471
Location: India
WE2: Entrepreneur (E-commerce - The Laptop Skin Vault)
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
WE: Marketing (Other)
Followers: 13

Kudos [?]: 142 [0], given: 24

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Kaplan CAT: What Explains both the speakers's assertions [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Sep 2010, 00:16
Nice one!! Foxed me.
_________________

Kidchaos

http://www.laptopskinvault.com

Follow The Laptop Skin Vault on:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/TheLaptopSkinVault
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/LaptopSkinVault

Consider Kudos if you think the Post is good
Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot. Nothing is going to change. It's not. - Dr. Seuss

Re: Kaplan CAT: What Explains both the speakers's assertions   [#permalink] 07 Sep 2010, 00:16
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
35 Experts publish their posts in the topic Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents dhruvd 11 13 Jun 2013, 03:48
1 Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents bschool83 16 21 Jul 2011, 17:03
5 Experts publish their posts in the topic Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents dixitraghav 22 23 May 2010, 18:31
1 Choi : all other factors being equal, children whose parents prasun84 11 09 Nov 2008, 02:48
65 Experts publish their posts in the topic Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents perfectstranger 68 19 Jul 2008, 06:53
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| 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®.