In the last two years alone, nearly a dozen of Central

Good Question. I missed it. I opted B.

I agree that D is indeed a good weakening option but I could not understand why B is not right.

Because the President of the Central University is proposing for the fee hike because the excess money collected will be given to good faculties and hence the faculties will remain with the university. And B says that other universities may also increase compensation and then the faculties will not remain with central university.

so, the plan of president will fail.

Then, how is B wrong?

B is a strengthener. If other Universities are providing hike, central university need to do so to retain them.

A) It is inevitable that at least some members of the faculty will ultimately take jobs at other universities, regardless of how much Central University offers to pay them. .. May not weaken the president’s wish, because even if some go, the rest are there
B) other universities are also looking for ways to provide higher salaries to prominent members of the faculty. This will impede the President’s scheme, since the disparity is still maintained. I feel this must be the answer
C) Central University slipped in the last year's ranking of regional schools. --- Ranking is irrelevant to the remuneration issue.
D) The single most important factor in ranking a university is it’s of racial and socioeconomic diversity. …… ranking is irrelevant to the remuneration issue

E) The president of Central University has only been in office for 18 months and has never managed such a large enterprise.--- Experience of the President is outside the ambit of our issue.

Bumping for review and further discussion*.

New project from GMAT Club! Click here

My take-
The conclusion says that - the decision to increase the fees for students will generate more money by which the good instructors can be retrained. This is essential to maintain the school ranking. Now if the rankings are independent of instructors but depend on other factors (as described in option D), the Preseident's proposal will make no significant difference in the school rankings. Hence, Ans D.

B says other schools are trying to increase the salaries and so should the Central university. But it does not relate how such move will improve or help maintain school rankings.

D.

Question type: weaken conclusion.
Conclusion is: protect ranking by increasing tuition to pay for incentives to keep the best teachers around.

A) not relevant. has nothing to do with protecting rankings by tuition hikes/faculty retention.
B) not relevant to the conclusion.
C) not relevant to the conclusion.
D) Bingo. If rankings are based on things besides quality of faculty, then the whole conclusion is worthless.
E) not relevant to the conclusion.

D is the answer.

CU's Plan: increasing tuition by 10% and using the extra money to offer more attractive compensation packages to the most talented and well-known members of its faculty

Conclusion: CU's plan would protect the school's ranking

Weaken: Show reasons to prove that the proposed plan would have no effect on the school's ranking or that some other factors that are not addressed in the stimulus are needed to protect the ranking. Choice D exactly does that.

In the last two years alone, nearly a dozen of Central University's most prominent professors have been lured away by the higher salaries offered by competing academic institutions. In order to protect the school's ranking, Central University's president has proposed increasing tuition by 10% and using the extra money to offer more attractive compensation packages to the most talented and well-known members of its faculty.

Which of the following provides the most persuasive argument against the university president's proposed course of action?

A) It is inevitable that at least some members of the faculty will ultimately take jobs at other universities, regardless of how much Central University offers to pay them.Some or few of the members taking jobs at other universities may not have much effect.
B) Other universities are also looking for ways to provide higher salaries to prominent members of the faculty.What if other universities execute the same plan? CU's plan could still be successful.
C) Central University slipped in the last year's ranking of regional schools.Last year's ranking would have nothing to do with success of the plan this year.
D) The single most important factor in ranking a university is its of racial and socioeconomic diversity.
E) The president of Central University has only been in office for 18 months and has never managed such a large enterprise.President's experience and skills are irrelevant to success of the plan.

More than one choice seem to be weakeners. I think it needs more explanation. I like A as well. Anyone else?

Conclusion - President's plan is aimed at PROTECTING rankings. The Plan is to RETAIN professors by increasing tution. (It is given that professors were lured away earlier by higher salaries)

A) It is inevitable that at least some members of the faculty will ultimately take jobs at other universities, regardless of how much Central University offers to pay them. If this was true it means that it is a weakener , albeit a mild one. New info provided states that no matter what you plan, retention can not be guaranteed and out of the "SOME professors" who will ultimately go to other universities, there can be the prominent ones that President was trying to retain. So this is a weakener in itself as it puts a dent in President's plan. What am I missing ?

B) Other universities are also looking for ways to provide higher salaries to prominent members of the faculty. This is not a weakener for me. Unless the other universities try to bait the professors from CU, it is not a weakener. They can provide higher salaries to their eminent professors and it does not undermine Presidents plan at all as long as the choice is not talking about luring CU faculty

D) The single most important factor in ranking a university is its of racial and socioeconomic diversity. I missed it. But this choice is attacking the conclusion with STRONG words and thus could be the most persuasive of all.

All right,
Let's first understand what the author's conclusion here is
It's that - faculty must be retained to preserve ranking. This is his plan.
He plans to do this, of course, by raising tuition fees.
The only evidence/ justification he provides for this proposal is that "nearly a dozen of Central University's most prominent professors have been lured away by the higher salaries offered by competing academic institutions."

Compare the premise with the conclusion - this will betray the assumptions made by the author.

Some of the points that pop out are
1. Author assumes that the money raised will be enough to dissuade prof from quitting
2. Raising Tuition by itself won't jeopardize ranking
and finally
3. that these "prominent" professors actually matter when it comes to university ranking!

As mentioned the question tag expects you to weaken the argument. Attack the assumptions to achieve this.

Only D addresses this. Option A,B and C have no relevance to the conclusion (that dissuading profs from quitting will ensure higher ranking) E is an obvious rubbish answer.

Hope that made sense,
Cheers,
Ajeeth Peo
Verbal Trainer
Crack Verbal

I think B is more weaken the conclusion than D.
The purpose of the plan is protect the school's ranking. In D, the single most important factor in ranking a university is its of racial and socioeconomic diversity but it isn't only factor deciding the ranking. If that factor is unchanged, the ranking could be protected when increase salaries for professor.
In B, because other universities are also looking for ways to provide higher salaries to prominent members of the faculty, the plan doesn't guarantee the ranking to be protected.

Hi AnChu,

The correct answer is definitely D.

Think about the effect that raising tuition will have. It will likely dissuade those from a disadvantaged background attending, this will affect the 'diversity' score - which is the most important thing.

James

I do not agree with DAAGH......

1. In the last two years a dozen of Central University's prominent professors have been lured away by the higher salaries offered by competing academic institutions.

2. In order to protect the school's ranking, Central University's president has proposed increasing tuition by 10% and using the extra money to offer more attractive compensation packages to the most talented and well-known members of its faculty.

THE POINT IS THAT Central University's president ERRONEOUSLY ASSESSED that the schools ranking is to do with prominent professors..... so he started working on lines of holding them back with higher remunerations....
SUPPOSE HE SUCCEEDED IN HOLDING THEM BACK AND THEN FOUND THAT THE UNIVERSITY RANKING IS STILL LOW......AND THEN REALIZED HIS MISTAKE THAT RANKING HAD ACTUALLY NOTHING TO DO WITH PROMINENT PROFESSORS BUT racial and socioeconomic diversity. HAS'NT HIS PLAN FAILED MISERABLY.....

IF as B says "Other universities are also looking for ways to provide higher salaries to prominent members of the faculty''......how does it make a difference when retaining of prominent professors is a non - issue....
Which of the following provides the most persuasive argument against the university president's proposed course of action?

CORRECT ANSWER.................D) The single most important factor in ranking a university is its of racial and socioeconomic diversity.


KUDOS IF YOU PLEASE...

Even I opted B as I missed to notice that President's objective is to retain school's rating.
I think, University President's objective is retain school's ranking. If ranking doesn't depend upon salaries/professors it doesn't matter. D is the best counter for Proposed solution.
Hope this helps.

Was confused bw A and D but finally choose D in the last moments as the word " single " was there . and means ranking has nothing to do with faculty
Wondering if the answer would have changed if option D said - the most imp factor for ranking ................. instead of single most imp factor

Hope logic is correct.

I chose C based on the logic that C indicates the professors are leaving for a reason other than money, therefore a plan to get them to stay by paying them more money won't work.

In the last two years alone, nearly a dozen of Central University's most prominent professors have been lured away by the higher salaries offered by competing academic institutions. In order to protect the school's ranking, Central University's president has proposed increasing tuition by 10% and using the extra money to offer more attractive compensation packages to the most talented and well-known members of its faculty.

Which of the following provides the most persuasive argument against the university president's proposed course of action?

A) It is inevitable that at least some members of the faculty will ultimately take jobs at other universities, regardless of how much Central University offers to pay them. -These "some" people will always do as they like. We are worried about the school's ranking for which the plan is being formulated by the president.
B) Other universities are also looking for ways to provide higher salaries to prominent members of the faculty. -Out of scope. It doesn't concern with the ranking of the school.
C) Central University slipped in the last year's ranking of regional schools. -We already know this information. This is just a fact set.
D) The single most important factor in ranking a university is its of racial and socioeconomic diversity. -Correct. The compensation package won't help the school. This option provides an alternative solution.
E) The president of Central University has only been in office for 18 months and has never managed such a large enterprise. -We are not worried about the experience of the president.

right, both A and D are 2 common and important patterns. A is a trap b/c A is too extreme; "at least some members" is not enough to weaken the argument. D shows that the gap of the argument.