GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 23 Jul 2018, 08:48

Happening SOON:

How to craft the best MBA Application Resume - 9 AM PST

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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our

Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

VP
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1022
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)

Show Tags

21 Sep 2012, 20:58
9
45
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

43% (01:28) correct 57% (01:46) wrong based on 2229 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process. However, there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism; our decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the representative's argument depends?

(A) The agency's prior placements of babies with parents who were previously acquainted with its staff have not, in general, been more successful than those with parents unacquainted with the staff.

(B) Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

(C) For a time period equal in duration to that during which the data were collected, the average number of babies placed by the agency is close to ten.

(D) Most prospective parents who apply to adopt babies do not meet the agency's criteria for adoption.

(E) The agency will only place babies with parents who not only meet the legal and institutional criteria for adoption, but who in fact surpass those criteria.
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2561
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jan 2013, 19:15
9
6
Archit143 wrote:
Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process. However, there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism; our decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the representative's argument depends?

A. The agency's prior placements of babies with parents who were previously acquainted with its staff have not, in general, been more successful than those with parents unacquainted with the staff.
B.Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.
C.For a time period equal in duration to that during which the data were collected, the average number of babies placed by the agency is close to ten.
D.Most prospective parents who apply to adopt babies do not meet the agency's criteria for adoption.
E.The agency will only place babies with parents who not only meet the legal and institutional criteria for adoption, but who in fact surpass those criteria.

Hi folks,

Let me add my two cents to the discussion around option B.

Basically, an assumption can play either of the two roles: first, bridge the logical gap in the argument and second, defend against weakeners.

In our case, option B plays the second role i.e. it defends the argument against a weakener. What is that weakener? The weakener is that people acquainted with staff of the agency were allocated disproportionate number of babies.

In other words, the argument is saying that the decisions are guided solely by the best interest of children (and not whether the person is a personal acquaintance of staff member). So, for example, if it is shown that 100 personal acquaintances and 50 other people for the adoption process and more than 2/3rd of the children were placed with personal acquaintances, it would show a disproportionate allocation and weaken the argument that the process did not favor personal acquaintances.

We know from the passage that 8 of the last 10 babies have been placed with personal acquaintances, therefore in order to defend our argument of impartiality, we need to assume that around 80% of the people who applied for adoption were personal acquaintances. This is what is communicated by option statement B.

Hope this helps

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Director
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 808
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Operations
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.6
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

09 Jul 2013, 15:20
8
1
Archit143 wrote:
Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process. However, there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism; our decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the representative's argument depends?

A. The agency's prior placements of babies with parents who were previously acquainted with its staff have not, in general, been more successful than those with parents unacquainted with the staff.
B.Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.
C.For a time period equal in duration to that during which the data were collected, the average number of babies placed by the agency is close to ten.
D.Most prospective parents who apply to adopt babies do not meet the agency's criteria for adoption.
E.The agency will only place babies with parents who not only meet the legal and institutional criteria for adoption, but who in fact surpass those criteria.

here is OE

(1) Identify the Question Type
The word "assumption" in the question stem indicates that this is a Find the Assumption question.

(2) Deconstruct the Argument
According to the argument, the adoption agency has awarded the majority of its recent placements to parents who were personally acquainted with agency staff. The argument denies that this discrepancy is a sign of favoritism toward certain applicants, on the grounds that all ten placements were made with parents who surpassed the agency's (and the law's) criteria for adoption.

(3) State the Goal
On Find the Assumption questions, we're looking for something that the author must believe to be true in order to draw the given conclusion. The argument concludes that the agency did not engage in favoritism because all of the chosen parents surpassed the adoption criteria. However, the argument is also assuming that, among all well-qualified applicants, there was no favoritism toward individuals who were personally acquainted with the agency staff.

For example, suppose there were 100 fully qualified families and only 8 of them were personally acquainted with the staff; those 8 happened to be chosen, while only 2 of 92 qualified applicants who were not acquainted with staff were chosen. If that were true, it would undermine the author's claim that the agency did not show any favoritism. The author must be assuming that this is NOT the case.

(4) Work from Wrong to Right

(A) The argument is concerned only with whether a bias toward personally acquainted applicants is present or absent; it is not concerned with whether such a bias may, in fact, lead to placements that are more successful in the long term.

(B) CORRECT. For the argument to establish lack of bias toward certain applicants, the proportion of "previously acquainted" people among those applicants chosen for placement must reflect the corresponding proportion among all applicants. In other words, if eight out of the ten parents actually chosen were personally acquainted with the staff, then a similar majority of all applicants should have been similarly acquainted with the staff. Alternatively, use the negation test. If this statement is false, then the majority of qualified applicants were in fact unacquainted with agency staff – a situation in which the placement of eight of ten babies with personally acquainted applicants is a clear signal of bias. Since the negation of this statement defeats the argument, the original statement must be assumed.

(C) The argument is concerned only with determining whether a bias is demonstrated by the agency's ten most recent placements; it does not involve the idea of whether those placements were made at a typical rate.

(D) Applicants who do not meet the criteria are irrelevant; the argument is concerned with determining whether a bias exists among fully qualified applicants. Therefore, the relative proportion of unqualified candidates among all applicants does not affect the argument.

(E) Although all ten of the agency's most recent placements may indeed have been placed with parents who "far surpassed" the criteria, there is nothing in the argument to suggest that all successful applicants must substantially surpass those criteria (as opposed to simply meeting or fulfilling them).
_________________

When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe ...then you will be successfull....

GIVE VALUE TO OFFICIAL QUESTIONS...

learn AWA writing techniques while watching video : http://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat-analytical-writing-assessment

General Discussion
VP
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1022
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

22 Sep 2012, 14:37
pls help wid dis one i am finding it really difficult can any expert help on this
Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 510
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

24 Sep 2012, 22:44
2
Archit143 wrote:
pls help wid dis one i am finding it really difficult can any expert help on this

+1 B

Hi Archit

First of all, I am no expert.

Premise 1 – It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process.
Premise 2 – decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.

Conclusion – there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism

Assumption are made to connect the premise with conclusion

Now, if you think, option B fits well. It connects Premise 2 and the Conclusion. They have stated in the argument that the new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy and that they also knew 8 of them. In the end they have concluded that there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism only if the 8 selected parents were also surpassing the criteria.

_________________

First Attempt 710 - http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-attempt-141273.html

VP
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1022
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

27 Sep 2012, 15:12
Doesnt B tells about their bias as the staffs were knowing that those ppl are reach before hand
Senior Manager
Status: Gonna rock this time!!!
Joined: 22 Jul 2012
Posts: 478
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q43 V34
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Jan 2013, 05:45
I don't find the conclusion falling apart by negating the way I have done below:

Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, hardly anybody or none was personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

_________________

hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.

Who says you need a 700 ?Check this out : http://gmatclub.com/forum/who-says-you-need-a-149706.html#p1201595

My GMAT Journey : http://gmatclub.com/forum/end-of-my-gmat-journey-149328.html#p1197992

Senior Manager
Status: Final Lap
Joined: 25 Oct 2012
Posts: 263
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.54
WE: Project Management (Retail Banking)
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Jan 2013, 07:02
3
Sachin9 wrote:
I don't find the conclusion falling apart by negating the way I have done below:

Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, hardly anybody or none was personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process. However, there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism; our decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.

I think by the negating process :
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process , WHICH means that the blue part of the premise will not be valid at all :

Hence, B is the answer ..
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

Senior Manager
Status: Gonna rock this time!!!
Joined: 22 Jul 2012
Posts: 478
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q43 V34
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Jan 2013, 07:09
Rock750 wrote:
Sachin9 wrote:
I don't find the conclusion falling apart by negating the way I have done below:

Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, hardly anybody or none was personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process. However, there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism; our decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.

I think by the negating process :
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process , WHICH means that the blue part of the premise will not be valid at all :

Hence, B is the answer ..

you are right, but how do we decide what is to be negated?
_________________

hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.

Who says you need a 700 ?Check this out : http://gmatclub.com/forum/who-says-you-need-a-149706.html#p1201595

My GMAT Journey : http://gmatclub.com/forum/end-of-my-gmat-journey-149328.html#p1197992

Senior Manager
Status: Final Lap
Joined: 25 Oct 2012
Posts: 263
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.54
WE: Project Management (Retail Banking)
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Jan 2013, 07:15
you are right, but how do we decide what is to be negated?[/quote]

You should focus on the meaning rather than the negation technique itself ...
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

Director
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 825
Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
WE: Information Technology (Investment Banking)
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

13 Jan 2013, 07:35
Confused indeed.

"B" States that
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

Negate it:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

If most were not known to STAFF members then yes the conclusion holds strongly that there is no favoritism.Then isn't this option(After negation) supporting the conclusion despite weakening it.
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Senior Manager
Status: Final Lap
Joined: 25 Oct 2012
Posts: 263
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.54
WE: Project Management (Retail Banking)
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Jan 2013, 02:08
targetgmatchotu wrote:
Confused indeed.

"B" States that
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

Negate it:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

If most were not known to STAFF members then yes the conclusion holds strongly that there is no favoritism.Then isn't this option(After negation) supporting the conclusion despite weakening it.

Hi targetgmatchotu
We are looking here for what been assumed in this argument.
The argument stated that EIGHT/ TEN (Most Of them) last babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process.
After negation, B becomes : most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process... Is the argument still valid ?? No ..

Hope it's clear
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

Director
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 825
Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
WE: Information Technology (Investment Banking)
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Jan 2013, 20:48
Rock750 wrote:
targetgmatchotu wrote:
Confused indeed.

"B" States that
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

Negate it:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

If most were not known to STAFF members then yes the conclusion holds strongly that there is no favoritism.Then isn't this option(After negation) supporting the conclusion despite weakening it.

Hi targetgmatchotu
We are looking here for what been assumed in this argument.
The argument stated that EIGHT/ TEN (Most Of them) last babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process.
After negation, B becomes : most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process... Is the argument still valid ?? No ..

Hope it's clear

Conclusion – there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism

(B).most were personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process...
~(B).most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process...

If most were not ACQ with agency staff , doesn't it supports the conclusion as mentioned above that "there is no truth of the accusation of facoritism".

Plz tell where I am going wrong.

Rgds,
Saurabh
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Manager
Joined: 04 Jan 2013
Posts: 76
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jan 2013, 15:38
targetgmatchotu wrote:
Rock750 wrote:
targetgmatchotu wrote:
Confused indeed.

"B" States that
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

Negate it:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

If most were not known to STAFF members then yes the conclusion holds strongly that there is no favoritism.Then isn't this option(After negation) supporting the conclusion despite weakening it.

Hi targetgmatchotu
We are looking here for what been assumed in this argument.
The argument stated that EIGHT/ TEN (Most Of them) last babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process.
After negation, B becomes : most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process... Is the argument still valid ?? No ..

Hope it's clear

Conclusion – there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism

(B).most were personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process...
~(B).most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process...

If most were not ACQ with agency staff , doesn't it supports the conclusion as mentioned above that "there is no truth of the accusation of facoritism".

Plz tell where I am going wrong.

Rgds,
Saurabh

i personally agree with you @targetgmat option B only makes sense when negated..so i dont know why it is an option to the question when it is either negated or just as it is.

Posted from my mobile device
Senior Manager
Status: Final Lap
Joined: 25 Oct 2012
Posts: 263
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.54
WE: Project Management (Retail Banking)
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jan 2013, 17:49
targetgmatchotu wrote:
Rock750 wrote:
targetgmatchotu wrote:
Confused indeed.

"B" States that
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

Negate it:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

If most were not known to STAFF members then yes the conclusion holds strongly that there is no favoritism.Then isn't this option(After negation) supporting the conclusion despite weakening it.

Hi targetgmatchotu
We are looking here for what been assumed in this argument.
The argument stated that EIGHT/ TEN (Most Of them) last babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process.
After negation, B becomes : most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process... Is the argument still valid ?? No ..

Hope it's clear

Conclusion – there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism

(B).most were personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process...
~(B).most were NOT personally acquainted with agencey staff before begining the app process...

If most were not ACQ with agency staff , doesn't it supports the conclusion as mentioned above that "there is no truth of the accusation of facoritism".

Plz tell where I am going wrong.

Rgds,
Saurabh

This option , when negated, neither supports nor weakens the argument.
It just tell us that we need the option as an assumption to make the argument logically correct because negate it and you will destroy the argument. That's how the technique works, you need just to check if the argument is still ok when negating an option ..
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

Director
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 825
Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
WE: Information Technology (Investment Banking)
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jan 2013, 21:02
Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process. However, there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism; our decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.

Green: Conclusion
Blue: Supporting Premise
Red: Counter premise
B.Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

B: Supporting the counter premise by saying that of all those ten babies' parents most obey to counter premise,thereby weakening the conclusion.
Still unclear how can it be by any chance a assumption .
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Intern
Joined: 11 Jun 2012
Posts: 1
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

16 Jan 2013, 07:49
Negation of B : most were NOT personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

if most were not ACQNTed before, then the ACQntance must have happened during the adoption process .

if there is no favoritism in the process , then either ALL the parents would have got ACNqted or none . but only most parents did.
some sort of favoritism is thr.

So the argument doesnt hold true.. ans - B
Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 286
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

08 Oct 2013, 21:30
I don't understand. Isn't B simply restating the first sentence of the argument. How is it an assumption? Aren't '8/10' and 'most' synonymous?
Manager
Joined: 26 Feb 2013
Posts: 166
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

16 Nov 2013, 06:12
1
It took me about 10 mins to understand the question and the choices and why B is correct... I hope the real GMAT won't be as convoluted as this one!
Here's my understanding, hopefully it'll help others:

The adoption agency says that 8 out of the 10 last babies were placed with acquaintances. Now, the catch here is that we can say that 10 people applied, and 8 of those were acquaintances. Also, those 8 "exceeded the standards" of the adoption agency, hence it indeed server the children's best interest. Therefore the adoption agency cannot be accused of favoritism (they didn't have much choice anyway since 8/10 were acquaintances and ALSO surpassed the criteria!).
Manager
Status: folding sleeves up
Joined: 26 Apr 2013
Posts: 146
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GMAT 1: 530 Q39 V23
GMAT 2: 560 Q42 V26
GPA: 3.5
WE: Consulting (Computer Hardware)
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our  [#permalink]

Show Tags

18 Jan 2014, 03:55
Why not A when the conclusion also includes "guided solely by best interests of children". Choice A supports this conclusion.
Re: Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our &nbs [#permalink] 18 Jan 2014, 03:55

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 42 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Events & Promotions

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.