School superintendent: It is a sad fact that, until now, entry into the academically best high school in our district has been restricted to the children of people who were wealthy enough to pay the high tuition. Parents who were previously denied the option of sending their children to this school now have this option, since I am replacing the tuition requirement with a requirement that allows only those who live in the neighborhood of the school to attend.
Situation: only wealthy enough to pay the high tuition -> accept to best high school
Plan: Replacing tuition requirement that allows only those who live in the neighborhood -> those who were denied now can attend.
There is no GAP that needs to be filled, so we should look for defender assumption, the alternate possibility that the plan might go off the rail.
The superintendent's claim about the effect of replacing the tuition requirement relies on the assumption that
Quote:
(A) the residents of the school's neighborhood tend to be wealthy
This has nothing to do with those who were denied. (A) is out.
Quote:
(B) people other than those wealthy enough to have paid the old tuition are able to live in the neighborhood of the school
Sounds promising. Hang on to this.
Quote:
(C) people less wealthy than those who were able to pay the old tuition are in the majority in the district
Sounds promising as well. Hang on to this.
Quote:
(D) there are no high schools in the district other than the one referred to by the superintendent
We are only care about 1 school. Other schools are irrelevant. (D) is out.
Quote:
(E) there are many people not wealthy enough to have paid the old tuition who wish to have their children attend the school
But do they meet the requirement? Yes and No? Then this assumption is not required. (E) is out.
Down to (B) and (C). What is the difference between the two answer choices?
(B) is saying that those who are not wealthy enough to pay for tuition are ABLE to live in the neighborhood of the school. This means that if you are not able to live there, you won't be able to attend the school. So this must be true, otherwise the change of the tuition does not change the situation at all.
(C) is saying that those who are not wealthy enough to pay for tuition are in the MAJORITY in the district. This leaves the possibility that even if those people are in the minority, 50%, or majority, they will still be able to attend now because of the change. Hence, (C) does not necessarily have to be true.
(B) is our answer.