A recent passed law requires all places of public accommodation to eliminate discrimination against persons with disabilities by removing all physical barriers to accessibility. Private schools, therefore, are legally obligated to make their campuses physically accessible to persons with disabilities.
ALL places of public accommodation -> required by law to [accommodate ppl w/disabilities]
Private School -> Required by law to [accommodate pple w/ disabilities]
Rephrased the argument this way, we can clearly see the jump here: Public Accommodation = Private school <= This is not explicitly mentioned.
This is very similar to basis logic example:
All men are mortal
Therefore, Socrates is mortal
--------------------------
How is Socrates mortal? He must be a man right? Gap: Socrates _____ Man
The conclusion above follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
Quote:
(A) No private school can legally deny admission to a person with a disability.
The conclusion stated that Private School must make it accessible for ppl with disabilities. It does not eliminate the case that the school can deny admission. Perhaps that person with a disability is not qualified because his GMAT is low? For that reason, (A) is out.
Quote:
(B) Private schools have historically been resistant to changes in government policy on discrimination.
This choice, if anything, weakens the argument. (B) is out
Quote:
(C) Private schools, like public schools, are places of public accommodation.
This matches out thought. Hang on to this.
Quote:
(D) Private schools have enough funds to make their campuses barrier-free.
We are not concerned about funds here. Even if this is true, it does not bridge the gap whether private school is considered a public accommodation. (D) is out.
Quote:
(E) Private property is often considered to be public space by groups that have historically been subjects of discrimination.
Private property is different to Private school. This choice is irrelevant. (E) is out.
B is the correct answer.