Concerned Parent: While I love the facilities and community

the key to success on cr is ability to critizice the argument. there are many suggestions in which argument can be attacked. causal passage is attack by showing another cause. representative passage is attack by showing the evidence is not typical. scope shift passage is attacked by showing that there is a new idea in conclusion.

the new idea in this is "unqualified". this is the place we can attack. is that unqualified is caused by no cetification.

bingo.

VERITAS PREP OFFICIAL SOLUTION:

In this Assumption question, notice the wording gap between the two sentences. The first sentence says that 75% of teachers are certified (meaning that 25% are not certified), and the second changes "not certified" to "unqualified." Are certified and qualified necessarily the same thing?

If you see this gap, you should be ready for answer choice (A), which links certification to qualification by saying that anyone who is not certified is also not qualified. Note that if you hold (A) up to the Assumption Negation Technique, the opposite of (A) weakens the argument by showing, essentially, that some teachers who are not certified are still qualified. (A) is therefore correct.

Notice that none of the other answer choices deal with this gap, which is the major flaw in the argument. Among the other answer choices: (B) isn't a necessary assumption, as the department of education doesn't need to be the best organization at determining teacher qualification - as long as it can do so capably, then the argument doesn't fall apart. Choice (D) is similar: whether or not the school has the most unqualified teachers doesn't change the reason for the parent's skepticism. Choice (C) adds a wording gap of its own by bringing in a new term "effective" that doesn't exist within the argument. And choice (E) isn't directly applicable, as you do not know how long the certification process takes (is "in the process" something that would help the parent's daughter anytime soon?) or whether just one teacher is in the process (how much would that change the percentages that the parent is concerned about?).
_________________

+1 for option A.

This question involves clever interplay of words. Pl note how the premise talks of certified while conclusion talks about conclusion !!

Option E can be discarded because we don't know of the time frame for certification.
_________________

can some one pls explain why C is wrong

Let me try.

So the conclusion the parent is making is that there is a 25% chance that their daughter will be taught by someone unqualified. Recall, how a couple sentences ago there was mention of uncertified, not unqualified. So the parent is clearly assuming that being "uncertified" is "unqualified". The question asks what is the parent assuming in making this conclusion?

Option C seems like a good contender but it goes off in a tangent about "effectiveness". Notice again that the parent did not conclude anything about "effectiveness" of the teachers. This is why option C is incorrect. Does that help?

Concerned Parent: While I love the facilities and community that you have created at your school, I am troubled by the fact that only 75% of your teachers are certified by the department of education. I just cannot take the risk of a 25% likelihood my daughter will be taught by someone who is unqualified.

Clever word play!

(P) 75% certified
(C) 25% unQUALIFIED

Certified does not necessarily imply qualified. Hence, this is likely the gap in the logic. It seems like a "supporter" question type.
So the correct answer should link this gap, connecting "certified" to "qualified".

Which of the following is an assumption of the parent's argument?


Just as what we are looking for: This is saying that 25% of those who are not certified are unqualified. Therefore, It is reasonably to draw the conclusion "25% likelihood my daughter will be taught by someone who is unqualified." Hang on to this.

This leaves a possibility that, even though 75% of the teachers are certified, 30% of them are, in fact, not qualified — we don't know whether someone who is certified is qualified or not. Hence the % of unqualified teachers is likely higher than 25%. (B) is out.

This might be true in the real world. However, the argument neither address nor imply this. What if unqualified teachers are more effective than qualified teachers in a certain criteria and it happens that that criteria is at the moment important to the school? Answer choice that leaves possibilities is incorrect. (C) is out.

This again does not address whether the teachers are qualified. (D) is out

So this is saying that 25% of the teachers who are currently uncertified are not in the process of becoming certified. But are they qualified though? Do we know? (E) is out.

Only A is left. A is the correct answer choice.
_________________