It is currently 23 Jun 2017, 00:36

### 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

# anti-smoking education program

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 08 May 2008
Posts: 15

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 09:13
sanjay_gmat wrote:
prasannar wrote:
undisputed B

C has nothing to do with Smoking, it allows students to go off NOT NECESSARILY for smoking.

I agree. This is another assumption everyone here is making and unnecessarily getting confused. DO NOT ASSUME anything in CR. B clearly defeats the argument.

B should be the answer. Enough discussed. What's the OA?

the OA is C.

This question was discussed in the past too. I couldn't see any compelling reason to choose C; even now, I haven't found any reason to choose C.

the discussion is not over yet, but thanks everyone for chiming in.

Yeah Ok, the discussion is not over.
But B looked more compelling. I guess that's what GMAT is all about...
_________________

http://pulyanithinks.blogspot.com

Manager
Joined: 19 May 2008
Posts: 51

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 09:17
The original post says the OA is C, and I agree.

The purpose of the anti-smoking program was to reduce smoking in the school premises.
The program would therefore be a success if indeed students smoked less in school as a consequence to the launch of the program.

B) says that because of the program, students are no longer smoking in school but outside, which is the purpose of the program. B then strengthens the argument.

C) says that the program is not the only responsible for students smoking outside the school; another change in policy is also contributing to the trend, which weakens the argument stating that the program is the only reason smoking has decreased.

C is hence the correct answer.
Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 274

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 10:11
The original post says the OA is C, and I agree.

The purpose of the anti-smoking program was to reduce smoking in the school premises.
The program would therefore be a success if indeed students smoked less in school as a consequence to the launch of the program.

B) says that because of the program, students are no longer smoking in school but outside, which is the purpose of the program. B then strengthens the argument.

C) says that the program is not the only responsible for students smoking outside the school; another change in policy is also contributing to the trend, which weakens the argument stating that the program is the only reason smoking has decreased.

C is hence the correct answer.

Well, I am not sure if the anti-smoking program was designed just to stop kids from smoking in school (premises). Where did you get this clue from?
Manager
Joined: 19 May 2008
Posts: 51

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 10:56
sanjay_gmat wrote:
The original post says the OA is C, and I agree.

The purpose of the anti-smoking program was to reduce smoking in the school premises.
The program would therefore be a success if indeed students smoked less in school as a consequence to the launch of the program.

B) says that because of the program, students are no longer smoking in school but outside, which is the purpose of the program. B then strengthens the argument.

C) says that the program is not the only responsible for students smoking outside the school; another change in policy is also contributing to the trend, which weakens the argument stating that the program is the only reason smoking has decreased.

C is hence the correct answer.

Well, I am not sure if the anti-smoking program was designed just to stop kids from smoking in school (premises). Where did you get this clue from?

It is the statement that says smoking in school premises decreased by 70% that tells us the program is targeted at decreasing smoking in schools.

I do however find that the sentence is unclear afterall.
Could someone please cite the source material it was extracted from?
Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2008
Posts: 131

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 11:02
Sanjay, what is the source of this question?
CEO
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 3583
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Other
Schools: Chicago (Booth) - Class of 2011
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V40

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 11:21
I still think that it is GMAT question and B cannot be a correct answer.

I slightly modified the argument.

1. [premise] A system-wide county school anti-smoking education program was instituted last year.
2. [premise] Last year,the incidence of students smoking on school premises decreased by over 70%.
3. [assumption] There is only one reason why the incidence decreased - students reduced smoking at school.
4. [Conclusion]The program was clearly a success.

B) Most students who smoke stopped smoking on school premises last year (this is an empty statement as it repeats premise 2)
but continued to smoke when away from school. (Actually it says that smoking reduced not by 70% but by less percentage)
B says that the program had success but not 70% and therefore, it strengthens the conclusion (the program was successful).

C) Last year, another policy change made it much easier for students to leave and return to school grounds during the school day. - C says that there may be another reason that the incidence decreased by over 70% and this new reason is not connected with smoking.
_________________

HOT! GMAT TOOLKIT 2 (iOS) / GMAT TOOLKIT (Android) - The OFFICIAL GMAT CLUB PREP APP, a must-have app especially if you aim at 700+ | PrepGame

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 274

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 12:52
walker wrote:
I still think that it is GMAT question and B cannot be a correct answer.

I slightly modified the argument.

1. [premise] A system-wide county school anti-smoking education program was instituted last year.
2. [premise] Last year,the incidence of students smoking on school premises decreased by over 70%.
3. [assumption] There is only one reason why the incidence decreased - students reduced smoking at school.
4. [Conclusion]The program was clearly a success.

B) Most students who smoke stopped smoking on school premises last year (this is an empty statement as it repeats premise 2)
but continued to smoke when away from school. (Actually it says that smoking reduced not by 70% but by less percentage)
B says that the program had success but not 70% and therefore, it strengthens the conclusion (the program was successful).

I found this question while browsing through the gmatclub forum. Since I couldn't convince myself about the OA, I thought of posting it again (I explained it at the start of this post).

C) Last year, another policy change made it much easier for students to leave and return to school grounds during the school day. - C says that there may be another reason that the incidence decreased by over 70% and this new reason is not connected with smoking.
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Posts: 316

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 13:56
sanjay_gmat wrote:
prasannar wrote:
undisputed B

C has nothing to do with Smoking, it allows students to go off NOT NECESSARILY for smoking.

I agree. This is another assumption everyone here is making and unnecessarily getting confused. DO NOT ASSUME anything in CR. B clearly defeats the argument.

B should be the answer. Enough discussed. What's the OA?

the OA is C.

This question was discussed in the past too. I couldn't see any compelling reason to choose C; even now, I haven't found any reason to choose C.

the discussion is not over yet, but thanks everyone for chiming in.

I haven't read all the way to know if someone has pointed this out but in my opinion C is better because it weakens this conclusion

"Last year,the incidence of students smoking on school premises decreased by over 70%."

So , smoking on school premises is decreased doesn't mean smoking in general has decreased and C supports that conclusion . Students can still go out and smoke during school hour and C is giving another cause of smoking being reduced on school premises . B does not point to any cause for any altenate explanation .
Manager
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 128

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 18:54
Argument assumes that anti smoking program is a success if students smoke less on school premises. We are assuming that - students who dont smoke on school premises, quit smoking.

sanjay_gmat wrote:
Guys, the following question has been discussed a few times in the past. However, I am yet to find a very conclusive answer. I hope we can discuss it out here.

A system-wide county school anti-smoking education program was instituted last year. The program was clearly a success. Last year,the incidence of students smoking on school premises decreased by over 70%.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument above?

A) The author of the statement is a school system official hoping to generate good publicity about the program.

B) Most students who smoke stopped smoking on school premises last year but continued to smoke when away from school.

C) Last year, another policy change made it much easier for students to leave and return to school grounds during the school day.

D) The school system spent more on anti-smoking education programs last year than it did in all previous years.

E) The amount of time students spent in anti-smoking education programs last year resulted in a reduction of time available for sports.
SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1894
Schools: CBS, Kellogg

### Show Tags

19 May 2008, 19:15
walker wrote:
I still think that it is GMAT question and B cannot be a correct answer.

I slightly modified the argument.

1. [premise] A system-wide county school anti-smoking education program was instituted last year.
2. [premise] Last year,the incidence of students smoking on school premises decreased by over 70%.
3. [assumption] There is only one reason why the incidence decreased - students reduced smoking at school.
4. [Conclusion]The program was clearly a success.

B) Most students who smoke stopped smoking on school premises last year (this is an empty statement as it repeats premise 2)
but continued to smoke when away from school. (Actually it says that smoking reduced not by 70% but by less percentage)
B says that the program had success but not 70% and therefore, it strengthens the conclusion (the program was successful).

C) Last year, another policy change made it much easier for students to leave and return to school grounds during the school day. - C says that there may be another reason that the incidence decreased by over 70% and this new reason is not connected with smoking.

Your reasoning is good! Honestly, at first B is choice. And I am thinking about it 2 days.! Thanks!
_________________
Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2008
Posts: 131

### Show Tags

20 May 2008, 08:35
Your reasoning is not very convincing. If I used your logic pattern, I would find that C doesn't fit the bill either.

C also strengthens the 2nd premise because when students leave school to smoke, the conclusion that on-campus smoking is reduced is still valid.

In my opinion, the only way to really weaken this argument is something like "students found a place on campus where they can smoke undetected".

walker wrote:
I still think that it is GMAT question and B cannot be a correct answer.

I slightly modified the argument.

1. [premise] A system-wide county school anti-smoking education program was instituted last year.
2. [premise] Last year,the incidence of students smoking on school premises decreased by over 70%.
3. [assumption] There is only one reason why the incidence decreased - students reduced smoking at school.
4. [Conclusion]The program was clearly a success.

B) Most students who smoke stopped smoking on school premises last year (this is an empty statement as it repeats premise 2)
but continued to smoke when away from school. (Actually it says that smoking reduced not by 70% but by less percentage)
B says that the program had success but not 70% and therefore, it strengthens the conclusion (the program was successful).

C) Last year, another policy change made it much easier for students to leave and return to school grounds during the school day. - C says that there may be another reason that the incidence decreased by over 70% and this new reason is not connected with smoking.
CEO
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 3583
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Other
Schools: Chicago (Booth) - Class of 2011
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V40

### Show Tags

20 May 2008, 08:48
zhenmaster wrote:
C also strengthens the 2nd premise because when students leave school to smoke, the conclusion that on-campus smoking is reduced is still valid.

the program is anti-smoking and dedicates to reduce smoking in general not at campus. Moreover, It would be unusual if C were not in agreement with premises.
_________________

HOT! GMAT TOOLKIT 2 (iOS) / GMAT TOOLKIT (Android) - The OFFICIAL GMAT CLUB PREP APP, a must-have app especially if you aim at 700+ | PrepGame

Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2008
Posts: 131

### Show Tags

20 May 2008, 09:53
Then by this logic, B would work perfectly fine because smoking was not stopped in general.

walker wrote:
zhenmaster wrote:
C also strengthens the 2nd premise because when students leave school to smoke, the conclusion that on-campus smoking is reduced is still valid.

the program is anti-smoking and dedicates to reduce smoking in general not at campus. Moreover, It would be unusual if C were not in agreement with premises.
CEO
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 3583
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Other
Schools: Chicago (Booth) - Class of 2011
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V40

### Show Tags

20 May 2008, 10:36
zhenmaster wrote:
Then by this logic, B would work perfectly fine because smoking was not stopped in general.

But B says that smoking is reduced in general. And therefore, B supports the conclusion.
On the other hand, C gives a chance to destroy relation between 70% reduction as a base for the conclusion and the conclusion and to say that the students did not reduce smoking in general.
_________________

HOT! GMAT TOOLKIT 2 (iOS) / GMAT TOOLKIT (Android) - The OFFICIAL GMAT CLUB PREP APP, a must-have app especially if you aim at 700+ | PrepGame

Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2008
Posts: 131

### Show Tags

20 May 2008, 11:22
I don't think B supports the conclusion in any way. It's saying students didn't really stopped smoking - they only stopped on campus. Similarly, C is saying students are stepping away from school to smoke.

Personally I think B is the better out of the 2 because there is an assumption gap in C where readers have to assume students step away to smoke.

walker wrote:
But B says that smoking is reduced in general. And therefore, B supports the conclusion.
On the other hand, C gives a chance to destroy relation between 70% reduction as a base for the conclusion and the conclusion and to say that the students did not reduce smoking in general.
Re: anti-smoking education program   [#permalink] 20 May 2008, 11:22

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 35 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
A recent study confirms educators’ worst fears: 3 01 May 2015, 05:36
Best area to make an educated guess 3 18 Mar 2013, 06:16
gmat educated guesing+timing strategy 1 07 Jul 2011, 08:11
24 The Sports Medicine Programs of the Olympic Training Center, 50 13 Feb 2017, 14:26
education poll 12 02 Oct 2007, 22:09
Display posts from previous: Sort by