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

 It is currently 02 Aug 2015, 03:35

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic

 Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:
Senior Manager
Joined: 31 Oct 2011
Posts: 329
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 353 [3] , given: 18

In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic [#permalink]  06 May 2012, 05:07
3
This post received
KUDOS
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

39% (02:47) correct 61% (02:02) wrong based on 689 sessions
In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic recession because many businesses cut back operations. However, any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools. This is because Vargonia has just introduced a legal requirement that education in government-funded schools be available, free of charge, to all Vargonian children regardless of the state of the economy, and that current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

A. The current student-teacher ratio at Vargonia’s government-funded schools is higher than it was during the most recent period of economic recession.

B. During recent periods when the Vargonian economy has been strong, almost 25 percent of Vargonian children have attended privately funded schools, many of which charge substantial fees.

C. Nearly 20 percent more teachers are currently employed in Vargonia’s government-funded schools than had been employed in those schools in the period before the last economic recession.

D. Teachers in Vargonia’s government-funded schools are well paid relative to teachers in most privately funded schools in Vargonia, many of which rely heavily on part-time teachers.

E. During the last economic recession in Vargonia, the government permanently closed a number of the schools that it had funded.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Senior Manager
Joined: 31 Oct 2011
Posts: 329
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 353 [1] , given: 18

Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink]  06 May 2012, 05:08
1
This post received
KUDOS
this means that, if you add more students, you HAVE to add more teachers. if you don't get rid of students, you CAN'T get rid of teachers.
therefore, any choice that implies that you won't lose students, or you'll even gain students, will be a HUGE strengthener.
this is what (b) does. it strongly suggests that the public schools will see an influx of students who used to attend private school but can't afford it anymore.

This explanation is from Manhatten website. Also, many people mention this explanation above as the reason that B is correct.

But I am still confused a little bit.

B just states the fact that when the economy is strong, almost 25 percent students go to private school.
I think that with only the fact above, we don't know whether those students go to goverment-funded school when the economy is bad.
We could guess, but cannot be sure.
I'd like to know the logic in more details.

Also, I picked C although I doubted when I picked it.
Could you explain what is wrong with C?
Intern
Joined: 09 Jan 2012
Posts: 4
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 3

Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink]  09 May 2012, 20:53
I chose C because it cites a stat to support an argument.B did not even look like a contender.Author is clearly talking about gov funded schools how does it make sense to introduce private schools in argument.

How does it make sense to say that students will leave private schools and join gov schools .

Any one can explain better
Intern
Joined: 09 Dec 2011
Posts: 2
Followers: 0

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

Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink]  09 May 2012, 22:47
eybrj2 wrote:
In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic recession because many businesses cut back operations. However, any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools. This is because Vargonia has just introduced a legal requirement that education in government-funded schools be available, free of charge, to all Vargonian children regardless of the state of the economy, and that current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

A. The current student-teacher ratio at Vargonia’s government-funded schools is higher than it was during the most recent period of economic recession.

B. During recent periods when the Vargonian economy has been strong, almost 25 percent of Vargonian children have attended privately funded schools, many of which charge substantial fees.

C. Nearly 20 percent more teachers are currently employed in Vargonia’s government-funded schools than had been employed in those schools in the period before the last economic recession.

D. Teachers in Vargonia’s government-funded schools are well paid relative to teachers in most privately funded schools in Vargonia, many of which rely heavily on part-time teachers.

E. During the last economic recession in Vargonia, the government permanently closed a number of the schools that it had funded.

I am also for C. The conclusion is that future recessions will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools.
B is about those attended private schools which charge substantially fee which is out of scope of the stimulus here.
C states that there are now more teachers than BEFORE the last recession. A rough example: there were 100 teachers before the recession, and now (after recession) the number of teacher is 120. It is clear that the recession did not reduce the availability of teaching jobs -> strengthen !
Please cite the source of the question plz?
Manager
Joined: 21 Feb 2012
Posts: 115
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 600 Q49 V23
GPA: 3.8
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 49 [4] , given: 15

Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink]  10 May 2012, 08:35
4
This post received
KUDOS
eybrj2 wrote:
In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic recession because many businesses cut back operations. However, any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools. This is because Vargonia has just introduced a legal requirement that education in government-funded schools be available, free of charge, to all Vargonian children regardless of the state of the economy, and that current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

A. The current student-teacher ratio at Vargonia’s government-funded schools is higher than it was during the most recent period of economic recession.
B. During recent periods when the Vargonian economy has been strong, almost 25 percent of Vargonian children have attended privately funded schools, many of which charge substantial fees.
C. Nearly 20 percent more teachers are currently employed in Vargonia’s government-funded schools than had been employed in those schools in the period before the last economic recession.
D. Teachers in Vargonia’s government-funded schools are well paid relative to teachers in most privately funded schools in Vargonia, many of which rely heavily on part-time teachers.
E. During the last economic recession in Vargonia, the government permanently closed a number of the schools that it had funded.

B is the correct answer.
B. During recent periods when the Vargonian economy has been strong, almost 25 percent of Vargonian children have attended privately funded schools, many of which charge substantial fees.--> During the recent periods when the economy is strong almost 25 percent children attended privately funded schools.This means that the rest of the 75 percent children are studying in government funded schools.So, even if the recession comes again, then those children studying in government funded schools will continue to study there without their education getting affected, whereas there may be a possibility for those children who are studying in private funded schools
to shift to government funded schools during recession (in order to save money by their parents).
Morover the stem states that as now when the economy is strong, most of the children study in government schools, thereby strengthening the stem that in Vargonia most of the parents send their children to government funded schools.

If you find it helpful, consider giving me kudos....!!
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 5746
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 1446

Kudos [?]: 7603 [9] , given: 186

Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink]  10 May 2012, 10:06
9
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
eybrj2 wrote:
In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic recession because many businesses cut back operations. However, any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools. This is because Vargonia has just introduced a legal requirement that education in government-funded schools be available, free of charge, to all Vargonian children regardless of the state of the economy, and that current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

A. The current student-teacher ratio at Vargonia’s government-funded schools is higher than it was during the most recent period of economic recession.

B. During recent periods when the Vargonian economy has been strong, almost 25 percent of Vargonian children have attended privately funded schools, many of which charge substantial fees.

C. Nearly 20 percent more teachers are currently employed in Vargonia’s government-funded schools than had been employed in those schools in the period before the last economic recession.

D. Teachers in Vargonia’s government-funded schools are well paid relative to teachers in most privately funded schools in Vargonia, many of which rely heavily on part-time teachers.

E. During the last economic recession in Vargonia, the government permanently closed a number of the schools that it had funded.

Ok, there are a lot of words there so try to paraphrase and make sense of it in the first read itself. This is what the argument is saying:
[highlight]Conclusion: A recession in the future will not hurt teaching jobs at government-funded schools.[/highlight]Why?
Premises:
1. Education has to be made available to all children in govt schools.
2. Student teacher ratio cannot be increased.

What will strengthen this conclusion?
Something which gives you further evidence that recession will not hurt teaching jobs at govt schools. If student-teacher ratio has to be maintained, what can lead to fewer jobs for teachers? Fewer students. So if we can establish that during recession, the number of students in govt schools will not reduce, we can establish that teaching jobs in govt schools are secure no matter the state of the economy.

(B) tells you that 25% students study in private schools which charge high fees. What do you think could happen in recession? Either nothing happens or people move their kids to govt schools. In either case, govt school teachers have a secure job. (There is actually a possibility of more demand of govt school teachers during recession.) Your argument is strengthened.

(C) tells you that more teachers are currently employed in govt schools than previously. How does it imply that their jobs are secure? If anything, it lends a shade of weakness to the argument, not strength - if there are too many teachers right now, some of them may need to leave during recession. Mind you, I am not saying that it is weakening the argument since there can be very valid reasons for extra teachers now (because education has to be made available to every child and probably the student teacher ratio required the govt schools to hire more teachers etc). Whatever the reasons, it certainly doesn't say that the job of the govt school teachers in future are more secure.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199 Veritas Prep Reviews Manager Joined: 02 Jan 2011 Posts: 201 Followers: 1 Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 22 Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink] 23 May 2012, 06:57 Chose C in the first read. But after reading Karishma's explanation, I am convinced that B is the answer. Thank you karishma. Intern Joined: 12 Jan 2012 Posts: 2 Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0 Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink] 26 Jun 2012, 20:13 Hello Karishma, I very well agree with your line of reasoning. However, one small doubt, Current teacher student ratio is not to be exceeded, the above states in an indirect way that those children who are currently studying in govt. schools will continue to do so, but what if students from private schools shift to govt schools ? Will that not affect the current student teacher ratio? Hope to get some clarifications on this. Thanks Manish Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor Joined: 16 Oct 2010 Posts: 5746 Location: Pune, India Followers: 1446 Kudos [?]: 7603 [0], given: 186 Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink] 26 Jun 2012, 20:53 Expert's post manrisaw wrote: Hello Karishma, I very well agree with your line of reasoning. However, one small doubt, Current teacher student ratio is not to be exceeded, the above states in an indirect way that those children who are currently studying in govt. schools will continue to do so, but what if students from private schools shift to govt schools ? Will that not affect the current student teacher ratio? Hope to get some clarifications on this. Thanks Manish What do you mean by 'current student teacher ratio should not be exceeded'? It means that if more students join, you will need to hire more teachers. Say if the current ratio is 10:1, it means that for every 10 students there is 1 teacher. If no of students increases, more teachers will be hired. If students move from private schools to govt schools in recession, no of students will increase. Since student teacher ratio cannot increase, more teachers will be hired. So a recession will not hurt teaching jobs at government-funded schools. _________________ Karishma Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor My Blog Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Director
Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 682
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 154

Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink]  02 Oct 2012, 20:25
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
eybrj2 wrote:
In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic recession because many businesses cut back operations. However, any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools. This is because Vargonia has just introduced a legal requirement that education in government-funded schools be available, free of charge, to all Vargonian children regardless of the state of the economy, and that current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

A. The current student-teacher ratio at Vargonia’s government-funded schools is higher than it was during the most recent period of economic recession.

B. During recent periods when the Vargonian economy has been strong, almost 25 percent of Vargonian children have attended privately funded schools, many of which charge substantial fees.

C. Nearly 20 percent more teachers are currently employed in Vargonia’s government-funded schools than had been employed in those schools in the period before the last economic recession.

D. Teachers in Vargonia’s government-funded schools are well paid relative to teachers in most privately funded schools in Vargonia, many of which rely heavily on part-time teachers.

E. During the last economic recession in Vargonia, the government permanently closed a number of the schools that it had funded.

Ok, there are a lot of words there so try to paraphrase and make sense of it in the first read itself. This is what the argument is saying:
Conclusion: A recession in the future will not hurt teaching jobs at government-funded schools.Why?
Premises:
1. Education has to be made available to all children in govt schools.
2. Student teacher ratio cannot be increased.

What will strengthen this conclusion?
Something which gives you further evidence that recession will not hurt teaching jobs at govt schools. If student-teacher ratio has to be maintained, what can lead to fewer jobs for teachers? Fewer students. So if we can establish that during recession, the number of students in govt schools will not reduce, we can establish that teaching jobs in govt schools are secure no matter the state of the economy.

(B) tells you that 25% students study in private schools which charge high fees. What do you think could happen in recession? Either nothing happens or people move their kids to govt schools. In either case, govt school teachers have a secure job. (There is actually a possibility of more demand of govt school teachers during recession.) Your argument is strengthened.

(C) tells you that more teachers are currently employed in govt schools than previously. How does it imply that their jobs are secure? If anything, it lends a shade of weakness to the argument, not strength - if there are too many teachers right now, some of them may need to leave during recession. Mind you, I am not saying that it is weakening the argument since there can be very valid reasons for extra teachers now (because education has to be made available to every child and probably the student teacher ratio required the govt schools to hire more teachers etc). Whatever the reasons, it certainly doesn't say that the job of the govt school teachers in future are more secure.

great explanation. we want the expert discuss more and detaily.

but I have a question. Normally, some persons advise to prethink an assumption before going to answer choices for strengthen and weaken question. I do not see you prethink an assumption when you do this question. pls, show us where you do prethinking assumption. pls, detail the process of your thingking/doing this question so that we can imitate you.

Thank you very much.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 5746
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 1446

Kudos [?]: 7603 [3] , given: 186

Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink]  02 Oct 2012, 21:44
3
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
thangvietnam wrote:

but I have a question. Normally, some persons advise to prethink an assumption before going to answer choices for strengthen and weaken question. I do not see you prethink an assumption when you do this question. pls, show us where you do prethinking assumption. pls, detail the process of your thingking/doing this question so that we can imitate you.

Thank you very much.

Yes, thinking objectively beforehand about what you expect from the correct option can help in many cases. I do tend to think about what I am looking for before reaching out for the options.

Look at this in my explanation above:

"What will strengthen this conclusion?
Something which gives you further evidence that recession will not hurt teaching jobs at govt schools. If student-teacher ratio has to be maintained, what can lead to fewer jobs for teachers? Fewer students. So if we can establish that during recession, the number of students in govt schools will not reduce, we can establish that teaching jobs in govt schools are secure no matter the state of the economy."

This is what I think beforehand. I have to strengthen the conclusion. What will strengthen my conclusion? The premises tell me that student-teacher has to be maintained. The conclusion says that recession will not hurt govt-teaching jobs. If I can say that no. of students will not reduce during recession in govt schools, then to maintain the ratio, the number of teachers cannot reduce either. This strengthens my conclusion.

CR is very analytical. If you go one step at a time and keep things clear in your mind, very few questions will trip you.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199 Veritas Prep Reviews Manager Joined: 31 Oct 2011 Posts: 50 Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V35 GPA: 3.4 WE: Accounting (Commercial Banking) Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 7 Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic [#permalink] 11 Oct 2012, 21:45 How's about E ? E. During the last economic recession in Vargonia, the government permanently closed a number of the schools that it had funded. Last economic recession caused some schools closed but due to the latest government regulation, the schools should be available for ALL students, therefore some students who were forced out of school during last economic recession have chance to come back to school , thus raising the need of teachers. What's wrong in my reasoning? Manager Joined: 13 Feb 2012 Posts: 147 Location: Italy Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship GMAT 1: 560 Q36 V34 GPA: 3.1 WE: Sales (Transportation) Followers: 4 Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 85 Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink] 30 Jan 2013, 03:55 VeritasPrepKarishma wrote: eybrj2 wrote: (B) tells you that 25% students study in private schools which charge high fees. What do you think could happen in recession? Either nothing happens or people move their kids to govt schools. In either case, govt school teachers have a secure job. (There is actually a possibility of more demand of govt school teachers during recession.) Your argument is strengthened. Let's imagine a different scenario: a new crisis comes and many poor parents withdraw their kids from school, while all the rich ones keep theirs in the private institutions. Wouldn't this generate an excessive number of teachers in public schools? The children are not legally obliged to go to school, as far as I understand. _________________ "The Burnout" - My Debrief Kudos if I helped you Andy Intern Joined: 15 Jun 2012 Posts: 8 Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 5 Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic [#permalink] 30 Jan 2013, 08:11 After taking the LSAT, and doing very well, I've endeavored to take the GMAT. From my experience, choosing B doesn't strengthen this argument. If you assume that because of the recession people will enter public schools, that would stregnthen it, but one shouldn't assume what's offered as evidence and concluded. If you don't assume that, then this answer choice does nothing to the argument. By it doing nothing to the argument, then the argument isn't strengthened. Perhaps I'm off, or looking to literally from my vast experience in dealing with "LSAT CR Questions," but this answer choice seems off. Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor Joined: 16 Oct 2010 Posts: 5746 Location: Pune, India Followers: 1446 Kudos [?]: 7603 [0], given: 186 Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink] 30 Jan 2013, 19:44 Expert's post highdiving wrote: VeritasPrepKarishma wrote: eybrj2 wrote: (B) tells you that 25% students study in private schools which charge high fees. What do you think could happen in recession? Either nothing happens or people move their kids to govt schools. In either case, govt school teachers have a secure job. (There is actually a possibility of more demand of govt school teachers during recession.) Your argument is strengthened. Let's imagine a different scenario: a new crisis comes and many poor parents withdraw their kids from school, while all the rich ones keep theirs in the private institutions. Wouldn't this generate an excessive number of teachers in public schools? The children are not legally obliged to go to school, as far as I understand. The argument clearly gives you "Vargonia has just introduced a legal requirement that education in government-funded schools be available, free of charge, to all Vargonian children regardless of the state of the economy" Education is available free of charge, recession or no recession. There is no reason to assume that people will take their wards out of school. _________________ Karishma Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor My Blog Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 5746
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 1446

Kudos [?]: 7603 [0], given: 186

Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic [#permalink]  30 Jan 2013, 19:55
Expert's post
variablechange wrote:
After taking the LSAT, and doing very well, I've endeavored to take the GMAT. From my experience, choosing B doesn't strengthen this argument.

If you assume that because of the recession people will enter public schools, that would stregnthen it, but one shouldn't assume what's offered as evidence and concluded.

If you don't assume that, then this answer choice does nothing to the argument. By it doing nothing to the argument, then the argument isn't strengthened.

Perhaps I'm off, or looking to literally from my vast experience in dealing with "LSAT CR Questions," but this answer choice seems off.

The wording of option B hints at a connection between economy and private/public schools.

During recent periods when the Vargonian economy has been strong, almost 25 percent of Vargonian children have attended privately funded schools, many of which charge substantial fees.

If we change option B to 'almost 25 percent of Vargonian children attend privately funded schools', then I agree that we would need to assume a lot to strengthen the conclusion.

Mind you, CR in LSAT and CR in GMAT are not identical. That is the reason I do not suggest my students to work on LSAT CR while preparing for GMAT (or to work very selectively). This question is from GMAT Prep so it is an official question. If you plan to take GMAT, try to identify the logic so that you can use it in other GMAT questions too.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199 Veritas Prep Reviews Manager Joined: 13 Feb 2012 Posts: 147 Location: Italy Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship GMAT 1: 560 Q36 V34 GPA: 3.1 WE: Sales (Transportation) Followers: 4 Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 85 Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic [#permalink] 31 Jan 2013, 01:22 @Karishma What if they have to withdraw their kids from school in order to work and help the family? That is exactly what happens in some countries during deep crisis'. I realize this is just me being polemical, but you have to admit the are some flaws in this question. One should never think this hard on any given question, but once one does, there is, in my opinion, no way to rule out all of the other possibilities. _________________ "The Burnout" - My Debrief Kudos if I helped you Andy Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor Joined: 16 Oct 2010 Posts: 5746 Location: Pune, India Followers: 1446 Kudos [?]: 7603 [0], given: 186 Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic [#permalink] 31 Jan 2013, 10:53 Expert's post highdiving wrote: @Karishma What if they have to withdraw their kids from school in order to work and help the family? That is exactly what happens in some countries during deep crisis'. I realize this is just me being polemical, but you have to admit the are some flaws in this question. One should never think this hard on any given question, but once one does, there is, in my opinion, no way to rule out all of the other possibilities. New info will always bring some assumptions along with it. No data provided will be perfect. Often, you will be able to provide additional data and make the new info serve a contrarian purpose. For more on this, check the following explanation a posted some days back: which-of-the-following-most-logically-completes-the-143975-20.html#p1174789 _________________ Karishma Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor My Blog Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 395
Location: India
Followers: 20

Kudos [?]: 260 [0], given: 10

Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink]  31 Jan 2013, 21:38
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
manrisaw wrote:
Hello Karishma,

I very well agree with your line of reasoning. However, one small doubt,

Current teacher student ratio is not to be exceeded,

the above states in an indirect way that those children who are currently studying in govt. schools will continue to do so, but what if students from private schools shift to govt schools ? Will that not affect the current student teacher ratio?

Hope to get some clarifications on this.

Thanks
Manish

What do you mean by 'current student teacher ratio should not be exceeded'?
It means that if more students join, you will need to hire more teachers. Say if the current ratio is 10:1, it means that for every 10 students there is 1 teacher. If no of students increases, more teachers will be hired. If students move from private schools to govt schools in recession, no of students will increase. Since student teacher ratio cannot increase, more teachers will be hired. So a recession will not hurt teaching jobs at government-funded schools.

Let us analyze choice A. It says that the current student-teacher ratio is higher now at government funded schools than it was during the last recession. Let us assume the current period to be a period of stronger economy. A higher student-teacher ratio during the current period means that during the last recession period there were less students who attended the government funded schools. It cannot be more teachers because till now during recession, jobs were cut down. This implies more students attended the private schools during last recession than during the current period of stronger economy. We can reasonably conclude that cost was not a major factor in the students's decision in choosing the school, as private schools charge higher than the government funded schools. The other major factor being the quality of education should have weighed in more in the students decision in the choice of the school. Based on the above we can conclude that the government funded schools provided a better or at least no less quality education than the private schools.

Now with the decision of the government to make the education free, many more would want to join the government funded schools and so more teachers would be hired Thus choice A in fact would strengthen argument that there would not be a cut in the number of teachers jobs at the government funded schools.

Choice B in my opinion is not as solid because it doesn't automatically imply that the students who were studying at private schools during stronger economy would join the government funded schools during recession because as mentioned above there are two factors that weigh in students decision, being quality of education and cost of education. So if the private schools were markedly higher in the quality of education that they offer we would see little number of students moving to government funded schools during recession.

So to me choice A appears to strengthen the argument better.
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna Test Prep
http://www.sravna.com

Classroom Courses in Chennai
Free Online Material

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 5746
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 1446

Kudos [?]: 7603 [0], given: 186

Re: GWD #16 V11 [#permalink]  31 Jan 2013, 22:18
Expert's post
I disagree.

SravnaTestPrep wrote:
Let us analyze choice A. It says that the current student-teacher ratio is higher now at government funded schools than it was during the last recession. Let us assume the current period to be a period of stronger economy. A higher student-teacher ratio during the current period means that during the last recession period there were less students who attended the government funded schools. It cannot be more teachers because till now during recession, jobs were cut down.

We don't know what was the scenario during recession last time. Perhaps the demography was such that there were fewer kids leading to higher student-teacher ratios. Perhaps there were more teachers in the system and with declining demand, the number of teachers in the system has decreased which has increased the student-teacher ratio. There are n number of possibilities. Nothing is given that links last recession with the current scenario. What you are given is the current scenario and what you can expect in the next recession. So choice (A) is out of scope.

SravnaTestPrep wrote:
Choice B in my opinion is not as solid because it doesn't automatically imply that the students who were studying at private schools during stronger economy would join the government funded schools during recession because as mentioned above there are two factors that weigh in students decision, being quality of education and cost of education. So if the private schools were markedly higher in the quality of education that they offer we would see little number of students moving to government funded schools during recession.

So to me choice A appears to strengthen the argument better.

Again, quality of education is out of scope here. There are a dozen other factors parents weigh while selecting a school but none of the others are relevant to our argument. The argument only deals with cost and student-teacher ratio. Option B very clearly states that during strong times, many kids are attending private schools which charge substantial fees. Also, since it is given that jobs are harder to come by in recession, it is possible that some people might be forced to use free-of-cost govt schools.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Re: GWD #16 V11   [#permalink] 31 Jan 2013, 22:18

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 32 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
12 In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic 34 24 Dec 2009, 09:59
In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic 11 16 Apr 2007, 00:18
In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic 9 23 Dec 2005, 23:57
In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic 6 10 Aug 2005, 02:56
In general , jobs are harder to get in times of economic 3 06 Aug 2005, 19:46
Display posts from previous: Sort by

In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic

 Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 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®.