It is currently 14 Dec 2017, 05:27

Decision(s) Day!:

CHAT Rooms | Wharton R1 | Stanford R1 | Tuck R1 | Ross R1 | Haas 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

Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 241

Kudos [?]: 285 [0], given: 8

Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents [#permalink]

Show Tags

21 Jul 2011, 17:03
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

26% (00:29) correct 74% (00:49) wrong based on 39 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents earned doctorates are more likely to earn a doctorate than children whose parents did not earn doctorates.

Hart: But consider this: over 70 percent of all doctorate holders do not have a parent that also holds a doctorate.

Which of the following would explain how both Hart and Choi could be correct in their assertions?

Most doctorates who don't have a parent that also holds a doctorate have an aunt or uncle that holds a doctorate.
Parental education is rarely the overriding factor in determining whether a person earns a doctorate or not.
Both Hart and Choi fail to produce sufficient evidence to prove their cases.
One man uses raw numbers while the other uses percents.
Hart does not dispute Choi, but rather attempts to support his argument with additional evidence.

Kudos [?]: 285 [0], given: 8

Senior Manager
Joined: 24 Mar 2011
Posts: 428

Kudos [?]: 223 [0], given: 20

Location: Texas
Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

21 Jul 2011, 18:12
bschool83 wrote:
Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents earned doctorates are more likely to earn a doctorate than children whose parents did not earn doctorates.

Hart: But consider this: over 70 percent of all doctorate holders do not have a parent that also holds a doctorate.

Which of the following would explain how both Hart and Choi could be correct in their assertions?

Most doctorates who don't have a parent that also holds a doctorate have an aunt or uncle that holds a doctorate.
Parental education is rarely the overriding factor in determining whether a person earns a doctorate or not.
Both Hart and Choi fail to produce sufficient evidence to prove their cases.
One man uses raw numbers while the other uses percents.
Hart does not dispute Choi, but rather attempts to support his argument with additional evidence.

i will go with B.

when i read all choices & start eliminating, i am left with B.
A doesnt support any of the guys' statement..
C i would not choose because their statements are sufficient enough..
D i would not choose because the first guy makes a generic statement, he doesnt choose #s.
E could be a choice because in a way... 2nd guy is supporting 1st.. explanation of which is 2nd guy says 70% of doctorate holders do not have a parent holding doctorate... meaning 30% has... and 1st the guy is in sync with this. But the use of 'but' in hart's statement... made me not consider this choice.

Kudos [?]: 223 [0], given: 20

Status: How can I crack Verbal
Joined: 12 May 2011
Posts: 205

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 33

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT 1: 700 Q51 V32
GPA: 3
Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

22 Jul 2011, 03:44
bschool83 wrote:
Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents earned doctorates are more likely to earn a doctorate than children whose parents did not earn doctorates.

Hart: But consider this: over 70 percent of all doctorate holders do not have a parent that also holds a doctorate.

Which of the following would explain how both Hart and Choi could be correct in their assertions?

Most doctorates who don't have a parent that also holds a doctorate have an aunt or uncle that holds a doctorate.-Incorrect,Aunt or Uncle are brought into to consideration,hence irrelevant Parental education is rarely the overriding factor in determining whether a person earns a doctorate or not.- Too strong statement Both Hart and Choi fail to produce sufficient evidence to prove their cases.-Incorrect, as the question stem says that both the statements are true One man uses raw numbers while the other uses percents.
Hart does not dispute Choi, but rather attempts to support his argument with additional evidence.

Stuck b/w D and E, but chose D because D points out a major factor used to differentiate the two statements (percents and Numbers)

What is the OA?

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 33

Manager
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 241

Kudos [?]: 285 [1], given: 8

Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

22 Jul 2011, 04:40
1
KUDOS
LifeChanger,

It seems that your interpretation of the question stem is incorrect.

Here the question does not ask to point out differences between the two arguments. Instead asks to explain how both Hart and Choi could be correct in their assertions. Consider the conclusions by Hart and Choi as true.

Let's analyze the assertions. Clearly, they are contradicting each other. Hart says that children are more likely to earn doctorates if their parents have a doctorate. But Choi presents a counter evidence that there are in fact fewer doctorates with parents who have a doctorate.

This may mean that it is incorrect to conclude that "parental phd degree" is the determining factor. Or in other words, it is unlikely that parental doctorate degree causes the children to earn a phd degree. Answer choice B summarizes this point well.

Kudos [?]: 285 [1], given: 8

Status: How can I crack Verbal
Joined: 12 May 2011
Posts: 205

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 33

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT 1: 700 Q51 V32
GPA: 3
Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

23 Jul 2011, 01:00
bschool83 wrote:
LifeChanger,

It seems that your interpretation of the question stem is incorrect.

Here the question does not ask to point out differences between the two arguments. Instead asks to explain how both Hart and Choi could be correct in their assertions. Consider the conclusions by Hart and Choi as true.

Let's analyze the assertions. Clearly, they are contradicting each other. Hart says that children are more likely to earn doctorates if their parents have a doctorate. But Choi presents a counter evidence that there are in fact fewer doctorates with parents who have a doctorate.

This may mean that it is incorrect to conclude that "parental phd degree" is the determining factor. Or in other words, it is unlikely that parental doctorate degree causes the children to earn a phd degree. Answer choice B summarizes this point well.

I didn't think of finding a difference between the two statements. I have understood what u r trying to explain..Thanks for your effort

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 33

Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Apr 2011
Posts: 264

Kudos [?]: 689 [0], given: 13

Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

23 Jul 2011, 12:38
I think the answer is B. What is OA?
_________________

Powerscore CR Bible Full Chapter Notes | Easily Extend Vocabulary List with Google Dictionary

Please kudo me if you found my post useful. Thanks!!!

Kudos [?]: 689 [0], given: 13

Manager
Joined: 14 Feb 2010
Posts: 158

Kudos [?]: 117 [0], given: 8

Location: Banaglore
Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

23 Jul 2011, 20:49
IMO E. What is the OA?

Kudos [?]: 117 [0], given: 8

Intern
Joined: 06 Jul 2011
Posts: 28

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

25 Jul 2011, 07:51
What's the OA?

To vent a bit:
As a group, do we feel we benefit more from an immediate OA or a delayed OA?
_________________

GMAT Day: Nov. 19, 2011

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jul 2011
Posts: 315

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 3

Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 620 Q39 V35
GMAT 2: 620 Q43 V33
GMAT 3: 730 Q50 V40
Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

25 Jul 2011, 20:26
The questions asks : Which of the following would explain how both Hart and Choi could be correct in their assertions?
If we choose B , wouldn't it support Hart more than Choi?
_________________

My GMAT Debrief : http://gmatclub.com/forum/third-time-s-a-charm-142800.html#p1145912
Quant Concept Videos : http://gmatlife.blogspot.com/2012/07/gmat-quant-videos.html
My GMAT Blog : http://gmatlife.blogspot.com/

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 3

Retired Moderator
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1626

Kudos [?]: 1139 [0], given: 109

Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

26 Jul 2011, 02:54
+1 B
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 1139 [0], given: 109

Intern
Joined: 25 Jul 2011
Posts: 46

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 7

Location: United Kingdom
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
Schools: Schulich (A)
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.13
Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

26 Jul 2011, 03:47
bschool83 wrote:
LifeChanger,

It seems that your interpretation of the question stem is incorrect.

Here the question does not ask to point out differences between the two arguments. Instead asks to explain how both Hart and Choi could be correct in their assertions. Consider the conclusions by Hart and Choi as true.

Let's analyze the assertions. Clearly, they are contradicting each other. Hart says that children are more likely to earn doctorates if their parents have a doctorate. But Choi presents a counter evidence that there are in fact fewer doctorates with parents who have a doctorate.

This may mean that it is incorrect to conclude that "parental phd degree" is the determining factor. Or in other words, it is unlikely that parental doctorate degree causes the children to earn a phd degree. Answer choice B summarizes this point well.

But if we are saying that it is unlikely that a parental degree causes the children to earn a phd degree then won't this statement prove that Choi is wrong?

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 7

Manager
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 241

Kudos [?]: 285 [0], given: 8

Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

26 Jul 2011, 04:54
No, Hart's assertion does not counter Choi's assertion. He just provides numbers that conclude that majority of phds have parents without a doctorate degree. It doesn't mean that none of the children have parents with a doctorate (but it is a small number). Therefore the word, rarely fits in well here.
Hope this helps you.

Kudos [?]: 285 [0], given: 8

Manager
Joined: 29 Sep 2008
Posts: 139

Kudos [?]: 131 [0], given: 1

Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

26 Jul 2011, 21:36
B

Kudos [?]: 131 [0], given: 1

Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2011
Posts: 51

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 6

Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

27 Jul 2011, 05:36
I would go for C)

Consider this if out of 100 parents - 60 are non doctorate and 40 are doctorate

According to Choi % of children out of 40 becoming doctorates is greater than that of those out of 60 non doctorates

The sum of total doctorates can be say 40% of 40 and 30% of 60 = 34 ( of which 47% are doctorates children and 53 % are not) - This makes Hart right as well.

For both of them to be right they should have presented more evidence to support.

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 6

Manager
Joined: 02 Mar 2011
Posts: 80

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 42

Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

27 Jul 2011, 16:41
let us analyse this question by taking a case
suppose there are 15 parents who hold doctorates and they have 30 children and all of them have earned doctorates as well
also suppose there are 100 parents without doctorate degree who have 200 children and out of these 70 hold doctorate degrees and 130 dont

every child of a doctorate parent is a doctorate in this case, same cannot be said about non doctorate parents- chois criteria fulfilled
in the above case there are total 100 doctorate children out of which 70 dont have doctorate parent- harts criteria fulfilled
Choi is talking probability while Hart is talking in pure percentages.
so i picked D

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 42

Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Apr 2011
Posts: 264

Kudos [?]: 689 [0], given: 13

Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

28 Jul 2011, 06:49
Zynga wrote:
The questions asks : Which of the following would explain how both Hart and Choi could be correct in their assertions?
If we choose B , wouldn't it support Hart more than Choi?

Even if it supports one more than the other, the point is that it still does support both.
_________________

Powerscore CR Bible Full Chapter Notes | Easily Extend Vocabulary List with Google Dictionary

Please kudo me if you found my post useful. Thanks!!!

Kudos [?]: 689 [0], given: 13

Manager
Joined: 26 Sep 2010
Posts: 107

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 0

GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.65
Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate [#permalink]

Show Tags

07 Aug 2011, 02:11
C for me

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 0

Re: CR- Explain - Doctorate   [#permalink] 07 Aug 2011, 02:11
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents

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®.