It is currently 13 Dec 2017, 03:20

# Decision(s) Day!:

CHAT Rooms | Ross R1 | Kellogg R1 | Darden R1 | Tepper R1

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# and another CR

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 23 Apr 2007
Posts: 135

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

26 Jun 2007, 12:01
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

It’s time we stopped searching for new statistics to suggest that we are not spending enough on education. In fact, education spending increased 30 percent overall during the last decade.
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument above?
(A) Despite increased spending on education, enrollment in our elementary and secondary schools declined about 4 percent during the last ten years.
(B) Our spending on gasoline increased more than 100 percent during the last decade.
(C) When adjusted for inflation, our per-pupil expenditure on education this year is less than it was ten years ago.
(D) Eleven other economically developed nations spend more on education than we do.
(E) The achievement levels of our students have been declining steadily since 1960, and the last decade produced no reversal in this trend.

why not E?

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Posts: 254

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

26 Jun 2007, 13:48
I can rule out E, because if it were to weaken the sentence, it would require an assumption linking more spending to better education results. This assumption is not in the arguement.

C is the best answer b/c it directly attacks the authors only piece of evidence.

In these strengthen/weaken questions, you need to find the answer that totally proves/obliterates the arguement.

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 102

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

26 Jun 2007, 14:16
C it is.
The expenditure per pupil has decreased over the period.

There could be more reason for E to be true other than the education spending.

~sara

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 851

Kudos [?]: 144 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

26 Jun 2007, 22:40
Concur on C.

Kudos [?]: 144 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 174

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 0

Location: uk

### Show Tags

27 Jun 2007, 06:20
correct me if i'm wrong, but what's the conclusion ?
"we are not spending enough on education" . So how do we weaken it...
We have to prove that we are spending enough on the education.

(A) says "Despite increased spending on education". there could be other reasons why "enrollment in our elementary and secondary schools declined about 4 percent during the last ten years".
B) out of scope
C) strengthens the argument
D) strengthens the argument
E) out of scope, as reasons for declining standard could be anything.

my call A.

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 102

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

27 Jun 2007, 12:31
Argument says that its wrong to say we are not spending enough on education,as the spending has increased by 30 %.

So the author concludes by saying that the spending has increased .
We have to weaken it by giving justification that though the spending has increased , at the same time the enrollments have also increased and the average spending per pupil has decreased.

~sara

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2004
Posts: 467

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 0

Location: united states

### Show Tags

27 Jun 2007, 20:35
AugiTh wrote:
It’s time we stopped searching for new statistics to suggest that we are not spending enough on education. In fact, education spending increased 30 percent overall during the last decade.
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument above?
(A) Despite increased spending on education, enrollment in our elementary and secondary schools declined about 4 percent during the last ten years.
(B) Our spending on gasoline increased more than 100 percent during the last decade.
(C) When adjusted for inflation, our per-pupil expenditure on education this year is less than it was ten years ago.
(D) Eleven other economically developed nations spend more on education than we do.
(E) The achievement levels of our students have been declining steadily since 1960, and the last decade produced no reversal in this trend.

why not E?

Both A and C look good. The question is, what do we want to achieve from the spending?

A looks like it, but just because the enrollment declined doesn't necessarily mean the spending is not enough.

C tells us that the spending is less than what it was ten years ago. This is unambigous fact and hence most strongly weakens the argument above.
_________________

for every person who doesn't try because he is
afraid of loosing , there is another person who
keeps making mistakes and succeeds..

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 23 Apr 2007
Posts: 135

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

28 Jun 2007, 04:24
OA is 'C'

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 0

28 Jun 2007, 04:24
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# and another CR

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 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®.