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.
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
23 Dec 2024, 09:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
Patron 1's argument: Emphasizes the personal impact the policy has on individual patrons.
Patron 2's argument: Suggests the policy is a reasonable compromise given the library's constraints.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
65% (01:58) correct
35%
(02:10)
wrong
based on 446
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
12 Days of Christmas 2024 - 2025 Competition with $40,000 of Prizes
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.
|
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.
| Patron 1's argument | Patron 2's argument | |
| Draws an analogy to highlight the unfairness of the policy. | ||
| Counters the analogy with a different perspective. | ||
| Emphasizes the personal impact the policy has on individual patrons. | ||
| Suggests the policy is a reasonable compromise given the library's constraints. | ||
| Asserts the exception for students is not justified by their unique needs. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Patron 1's argument: Emphasizes the personal impact the policy has on individual patrons.
Patron 2's argument: Suggests the policy is a reasonable compromise given the library's constraints.
23 Dec 2024, 10:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
GMAT Club's Official Explanation:
Patron 1's Argument: Emphasizes the personal impact the policy has on individual patrons, arguing that the 5-book limit is unreasonable and insufficient to meet their reading needs.
Patron 2's Argument: Suggests the policy is a reasonable compromise given the library's constraints, asserting that the higher limit for students is justified by their unique academic requirements.
The correct answer is:
Patron 1's Argument: Emphasizes the personal impact the policy has on individual patrons.
Option 5 is incorrect because Patron 1's argument focuses on the unreasonableness of the overall 5-book limit, and the unfairness of discriminating based on academic status (the exception for university students). Patron 1 is not directly challenging the justification for the higher limit for students.
Patron 2's Argument: Suggests the policy is a reasonable compromise given the library's constraints
General Discussion
23 Dec 2024, 09:52
Kudos
Bookmarks
Patron 1's argument:
Emphasizes the personal impact the policy has on individual patrons.
Patron 1 focuses on how the new policy directly affects them and other library patrons. They argue that a limit of 5 books is insufficient for their reading needs, especially since they use the library to supplement their home collections. This reflects a personal impact on their ability to access books, which is a key part of their objection.
Patron 2's argument:
Suggests the policy is a reasonable compromise given the library's constraints.
Patron 2 acknowledges the frustration but argues that the policy is reasonable given the library’s limited resources. They suggest that the policy is a compromise, balancing the needs of all patrons while ensuring broader access to the library’s collection. This is a response to the concern raised by Patron 1, presenting a perspective that sees the policy as a reasonable solution considering the library's constraints.
Ans C, D
Emphasizes the personal impact the policy has on individual patrons.
Patron 1 focuses on how the new policy directly affects them and other library patrons. They argue that a limit of 5 books is insufficient for their reading needs, especially since they use the library to supplement their home collections. This reflects a personal impact on their ability to access books, which is a key part of their objection.
Patron 2's argument:
Suggests the policy is a reasonable compromise given the library's constraints.
Patron 2 acknowledges the frustration but argues that the policy is reasonable given the library’s limited resources. They suggest that the policy is a compromise, balancing the needs of all patrons while ensuring broader access to the library’s collection. This is a response to the concern raised by Patron 1, presenting a perspective that sees the policy as a reasonable solution considering the library's constraints.
Ans C, D
