Top college graduates are having more difficulty demonstrating their

Medium difficulty

(A) Today’s students are not higher achievers than the students of twenty years ago. Good enough to not cancel out. Plays the defender role. Negation technique: If students today were higher achievers, then schools would not need to inflate grades, thereby weakening the conclusion.

(B) Awarding too many honors degrees causes colleges to inflate grades. Reverse causal relationship. It really weakens the conclusion, whereas an assumption would either defend or strengthen the relationship. We are looking for an assumption.

(C) Today’s employers rely on honors ranking in making their hiring decisions. Making hiring decisions is out of scope; furthermore, this weakens the conclusion.

(D) It is not easy for students with low grades to obtain jobs. Didn't feel right because the relationship that needs defending is grade inflation -> meaningless honors

(E) Colleges must make employers aware of the criteria used to determine who receives an honors degree Out of scope. That said, this would even weaken the relationship. If employers made decisions based off honors, then the criteria would be meaningful.

what's wrong with C. If I negate C and employer's don't rely on honors degree's rankings to make decisions than the colleges don't need to control inflated grades because it doesn't matter to employers.....

The argument gives you "Today’s employers are less impressed with the honors degree. Thehonors degree goes to more than 50 percent of a graduating class."

then how can (C) be an assumption?
(C) Today’s employers rely on honors ranking in making their hiring decisions.

The argument clearly states that they don't rely much on honors degree anymore. An assumption needs to strengthen our argument. (C) doesn't do that.

I understood your point, but could not understand, if today's students are actually higher achievers, then why they are facing difficulty in demonstrating their superiority to prospective employers than did the top students of twenty years ago. Would you please make me clear?

Top college graduates are having more difficulty demonstrating their superiority to prospective employers than did the top students of twenty years ago when an honors degree was distinction enough. Today’s employers are less impressed with the honors degree. Twenty years ago no more than 10 percent of a given class graduated with honors. Today, however, because of grade inflation, the honors degree goes to more than 50 percent of a graduating class. Therefore, to restore confidence in the degrees they award, colleges must take steps to control grade inflation.

Which one of the following is an assumption that, if true, would support the conclusion in the passage?

(A) Today’s students are not higher achievers than the students of twenty years ago. -Lets hold on to this one as it seems correct.
(B) Awarding too many honors degrees causes colleges to inflate grades. -Opposite of the premise
(C) Today’s employers rely on honors ranking in making their hiring decisions. -Out of scope
(D) It is not easy for students with low grades to obtain jobs. -Out of scope
(E) Colleges must make employers aware of the criteria used to determine who receives an honors degree -Out of scope

The answer is A.

B states the inverse of what the passage says. Grade inflation is why much more honors degrees are awarded, not vice-versa. The information that C presents goes against what the passage says. The passage says that today’s employers care much less about honors rankings, which implies that they are not relying on them. D is simply irrelevant. E goes against the conclusion. The conclusion states a course of action that the colleges must take to restore confidence in their degrees, but E suggests a different course of action. If the author was to make this assumption, they would not wrie this conclusion. A is the right answer because this assumption removes the possibility that the colleges are not inflating grades and that there are much more honors degrees being awarded because today’s students are just higher achievers.

Hi VeritasKarishma,

I was wondering could you please explain why option B is incorrect when we negate it?

Negated option B: Awarding too many honors degrees does not cause colleges to inflate grades. I know we are given the opposite of this in our argument but when we negate this option, doesn't it weaken the conclusion?

If you could please help clear my confusion, I would greatly appreciate it!

Negating an assumption needs to break the conclusion.

Negated (B): Awarding too many honors degrees does not cause colleges to inflate grades.

Conclusion: To restore confidence in the degrees they award, colleges must take steps to control grade inflation

What happens to grades when colleges award too many honors degrees is irrelevant. In fact, there is no connection. It is because of grade inflation that too many donors degrees are given. Hence, this statement does not make sense that awarding too many honors degrees causes (or does not cause) grade inflation.
Option (B) and its negation make no sense.

Why can't (C) be the answer?
If the employers don't rely on honours ranking, wouldn't the whole argument collapse?
If they don't rely on honours ranking, it doesn't matter whatever the colleges do to control grade inflation.

Super easy if you follow my way.
Conc:-to restore confidence in the degrees they award, colleges must take steps to control grade inflation.
pre:- Twenty years ago no more than 10 percent of a given class graduated with honors. Today, however, because of grade inflation, the honors degree goes to more than 50 percent of a graduating class.
Ask this question under what condition is the conclusion not true?
What if gradeflation is not the reason behind restoring confidence? What if today's students are overachivers.
These conditions under which the conclusion does not hold true/will break this argument.
Now let's negate this to get a presumed assumption. Students should not be overachivers or gradeflation is the only reason for such increase. No other cause is there.
Let's go back to the question with this understanding

Top college graduates are having more difficulty demonstrating their superiority to prospective employers than did the top students of twenty years ago when an honors degree was distinction enough. Today’s employers are less impressed with the honors degree. Twenty years ago no more than 10 percent of a given class graduated with honors. Today, however, because of grade inflation, the honors degree goes to more than 50 percent of a graduating class. Therefore, to restore confidence in the degrees they award, colleges must take steps to control grade inflation.

Which one of the following is an assumption that, if true, would support the conclusion in the passage?


(A) Today’s students are not higher achievers than the students of twenty years ago. Yes, if this is true gradeflation is the only reason. Negate it and the conclusion breaks.

(B) Awarding too many honors degrees causes colleges to inflate grades. Out of scope

(C) Today’s employers rely on honors ranking in making their hiring decisions. don't know what they rely on. Not our concern.

(D) It is not easy for students with low grades to obtain jobs. Out of scope

(E) Colleges must make employers aware of the criteria used to determine who receives an honors degree. opposite effect instead of taking steps to control gradeflation they are going to explain the employers

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.