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

It is currently 21 Oct 2014, 12:23

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

Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Oct 2005
Posts: 139
Location: Boston,MA
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 0

Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the [#permalink] New post 29 Nov 2007, 03:45
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (02:44) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument?

A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores.
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930
_________________

--gregspirited

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 20 Jun 2007
Posts: 157
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 29 Nov 2007, 03:53
Got to be D. What this is saying is that some of the pre-1930's hotels with poor carpentry have already been demolished.

This is a sampling question. The sample looked at by the reviewer has been distorted.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 649
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 29 Nov 2007, 06:38
(E). Will try to explain if correct.
Edit: I think it actually strengthens the argument. I am not sure.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2593
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 197 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Quality of work [#permalink] New post 29 Nov 2007, 08:08
gregspirited wrote:
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument?

A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores.
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930



D.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 09 Aug 2006
Posts: 529
Followers: 2

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

Re: CR - Quality of work [#permalink] New post 29 Nov 2007, 08:47
gregspirited wrote:
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument?

A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores.
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930


What is the OA and OE ??
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 144
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Quality of work [#permalink] New post 29 Nov 2007, 08:47
At first I was thinking about E, but this one strengthens the argument.
Thinking more about it, yes it is D, even if initially I eliminated that answer.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Oct 2005
Posts: 139
Location: Boston,MA
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 29 Nov 2007, 10:29
OA is D
_________________

--gregspirited

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Nov 2007
Posts: 64
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 29 Nov 2007, 12:18
Can you explain how. I feel D is strengthening.
It explains" better the qualite ; less likely will it eb demolished". The writer is staying in such hotels constructed in 1930 which indicates they are not demolished and hence are better. If not better that the current ones ; they are still good. How does it weaken??????????
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2007
Posts: 87
Followers: 0

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

 [#permalink] New post 29 Nov 2007, 14:38
sztiwari wrote:
Can you explain how. I feel D is strengthening.
It explains" better the qualite ; less likely will it eb demolished". The writer is staying in such hotels constructed in 1930 which indicates they are not demolished and hence are better. If not better that the current ones ; they are still good. How does it weaken??????????


The passage concludes that carpenters were better in the 1930s, because houses surviving from that period are of higher quality than today's houses. But if all the houses that survived were the best quality houses, then maybe the carpenters back then, on the whole, weren't any better than today's--it's just that all the 1930s bad carpenters had their houses fall apart in the meantime, so we don't see them today. In other words, D tells us that all we see are the best houses from that period, so we can't draw conclusions about the quality of the houses as a whole.

(It's as if, when asked to send a random sample of students to be examined for a school assessment, a principal arranged instead to send the top 10 students. The assessors would think the school was really great--but it's really just the principal gaming the system.)
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Posts: 182
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 29 Nov 2007, 14:57
johnrb wrote:
sztiwari wrote:
Can you explain how. I feel D is strengthening.
It explains" better the qualite ; less likely will it eb demolished". The writer is staying in such hotels constructed in 1930 which indicates they are not demolished and hence are better. If not better that the current ones ; they are still good. How does it weaken??????????


The passage concludes that carpenters were better in the 1930s, because houses surviving from that period are of higher quality than today's houses. But if all the houses that survived were the best quality houses, then maybe the carpenters back then, on the whole, weren't any better than today's--it's just that all the 1930s bad carpenters had their houses fall apart in the meantime, so we don't see them today. In other words, D tells us that all we see are the best houses from that period, so we can't draw conclusions about the quality of the houses as a whole.

(It's as if, when asked to send a random sample of students to be examined for a school assessment, a principal arranged instead to send the top 10 students. The assessors would think the school was really great--but it's really just the principal gaming the system.)


i.e. survivorship bias.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 19 Nov 2007
Posts: 477
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 4

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: CR - Quality of work [#permalink] New post 01 Dec 2007, 13:46
moni77 wrote:
At first I was thinking about E, but this one strengthens the argument.
Thinking more about it, yes it is D, even if initially I eliminated that answer.


True, E strengthens it. It explains why pre-1930s carpenters were more skilled. It boils down to D ultimately.

Good one!
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1551
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 231 [0], given: 1

Re: CR - Quality of work [#permalink] New post 08 Aug 2008, 07:41
I still have a problem with option D. This is because it doesn't explain why the quality of the carpentry after the 1930's is worst than that of the carpentry before the 1930's. According to option D, if indeed the better the quality of the carpentry, the less likely that such buildings would be demolished, then how come that didn't happen to the buildings after the 1930's?

If people have kept only the good quality buildings throughout these years, then shouldn't we rather see only the good quality carpentry in the buildings in both before and after the 1930's? Option D doesn't even imply that such a practice was done only to the buildings before the 1930's, so it means that we can also apply it to the buildings after the 1930's. If so, then this option rather strengthens the argument because by keeping only the best quality buildings made after the 1930's, those buildings are still worst than the buildings made before the 1930's. So the argument is strengthened.

Can anyone help out with this one??
thanks!
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1406
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 121 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Quality of work [#permalink] New post 08 Aug 2008, 19:15
gregspirited wrote:
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument?

A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores. -> out of scope since this talks about comparing hotels with other monuments
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930. -> this weakens since it says post 1930 built hotels accomodate more people suggesting that the hotels are comfortable
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930. -> when materials arte of same qualiuty then doubt comes on skill set of workers hence this favours the argument eliminate
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished. -> out of scope this discusses consequences of better carpentry quality
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930 -> this strengthens saying that post 1930 the workers were of lower skill could not learn more

_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Apr 2008
Posts: 452
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 50 [0], given: 1

Re: CR - Quality of work [#permalink] New post 08 Aug 2008, 19:21
gregspirited wrote:
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument?

A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores.
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930


IMO B)
Re: CR - Quality of work   [#permalink] 08 Aug 2008, 19:21
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the tracyyahoo 11 02 Aug 2011, 07:02
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the fanatico 3 03 Apr 2011, 22:06
2 Experts publish their posts in the topic Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the az780 9 08 Feb 2008, 04:53
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the s_positive 8 20 Oct 2007, 09:15
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the Puilunchristin 2 16 Jan 2006, 14:02
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the

  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®.