Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
May 1810:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 25 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.
May 1212:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Make the most of your break with the most realistic GMAT™ prep. Take up to $700 off select products. Ends 6/1
May 1501:00 PM IST
-11:00 AM IST
Start your journey with a fully customized action plan and work with a dedicated mentor to achieve a 735+ score.- May 19
12:00 PM PDT
-01:00 PM PDT
Scoring 329 on the GRE is not always about using more books, more courses, or a longer study plan. In this episode of GRE Success Talks, Ashutosh shares his GRE preparation strategy, study plan, and test-day experience, explaining how he kept his prep.... - Jun 10
06:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..
23 Dec 2024, 13:35
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi everyone 
Patron 1 focuses on two aspects:
First answer: the best match is: "Emphasizes the personal impact the policy has on individual patrons."
Patron 2 counters Patron 1's argument by:
Patron 1 focuses on two aspects:
- Personal Impact: They argue that the policy is inadequate for individuals who rely on the library to supplement their book collections.
- Fairness: They assert that the exception for university students is discriminatory and not justified.
First answer: the best match is: "Emphasizes the personal impact the policy has on individual patrons."
Patron 2 counters Patron 1's argument by:
- Providing a broader perspective, emphasizing the library’s need to ensure equitable access to resources for all patrons.
- Justifying the exception for university students, citing their intensive reading requirements for academic purposes.
jkkamau
Joined: 25 May 2020
Last visit: 18 May 2026
Posts: 226
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 143
Location: Kenya
Schools: Jones '26 (A$$)
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V46
GPA: 3.5
23 Dec 2024, 14:16
Kudos
Bookmarks
Patron 1 calls into question the assumption that the students have greater reading needs than the patrons. Therefore he (E) Asserts the exception for students is not justified by their unique needs.
Patron 2 supports the school decision by Suggesting that the policy is a reasonable compromise given the library's constraints
Hence choice ED
Patron 2 supports the school decision by Suggesting that the policy is a reasonable compromise given the library's constraints
Hence choice ED
Bunuel
23 Dec 2024, 16:41
Kudos
Bookmarks
A local library has recently implemented a new policy that limits the number of books patrons can borrow at one time. The policy states that a patron may only check out up to 5 books at a time, with the exception of students enrolled in university courses who are allowed to check out up to 10 books.
Patron 1: "The new policy is unreasonable. Many of us use the library to supplement our home book collections, and a limit of 5 books is not enough to satisfy our reading needs. Even with the exception for university students, it doesn't seem fair to discriminate based on academic status."
Patron 2: "I understand the frustration, but the library likely implemented this policy to ensure broader access to their collection. With limited resources, they need to balance the needs of all patrons. The higher limit for students makes sense, as they often have more intensive reading requirements for their coursework."
In the first column, indicate a statement that describes how Patron 1 develops their objection to the library's policy. In the second column, indicate a statement that describes how Patron 2 responds to Patron 1's argument.
Here for Patron 1's argument only "Emphasized the personal impact..." makes sense.
For Patron 2's though, we need to understand that it does not draw any analagy, as it does not counter any previous analgy or is against the different threshold for stundents. Only "suggest the policy..." makes sense here.
Patron 1: "The new policy is unreasonable. Many of us use the library to supplement our home book collections, and a limit of 5 books is not enough to satisfy our reading needs. Even with the exception for university students, it doesn't seem fair to discriminate based on academic status."
Patron 2: "I understand the frustration, but the library likely implemented this policy to ensure broader access to their collection. With limited resources, they need to balance the needs of all patrons. The higher limit for students makes sense, as they often have more intensive reading requirements for their coursework."
In the first column, indicate a statement that describes how Patron 1 develops their objection to the library's policy. In the second column, indicate a statement that describes how Patron 2 responds to Patron 1's argument.
| [color=#000000]Patron 1's argument[/color] | [color=#000000]Patron 2's argument[/color] | |
| [color=#000000]Draws an analogy to highlight the unfairness of the policy.[/color] | ||
| [color=#000000]Counters the analogy with a different perspective.[/color] | ||
| [color=#000000]Emphasizes the personal impact the policy has on individual patrons.[/color] | ||
| [color=#000000]Suggests the policy is a reasonable compromise given the library's constraints.[/color] | ||
| [color=#000000]Asserts the exception for students is not justified by their unique needs.[/color] |
Here for Patron 1's argument only "Emphasized the personal impact..." makes sense.
For Patron 2's though, we need to understand that it does not draw any analagy, as it does not counter any previous analgy or is against the different threshold for stundents. Only "suggest the policy..." makes sense here.
