It is currently 17 Oct 2017, 17:27

### 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

# CR - campus education

Author Message
Senior Manager
Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Posts: 272

Kudos [?]: 46 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2007, 10:40
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Guys this is Kaplan CR
Attachments

CR-school.JPG [ 36.96 KiB | Viewed 1057 times ]

_________________

AimHigher

Kudos [?]: 46 [0], given: 0

 Kaplan GMAT Prep Discount Codes Manhattan GMAT Discount Codes EMPOWERgmat Discount Codes
Manager
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 169

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2007, 10:52

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 910

Kudos [?]: 278 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2007, 10:57
answer D will weaken the argument most since it only shows that freshmen and sophomore responded so the results are skewed.

Kudos [?]: 278 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
Posts: 1098

Kudos [?]: 141 [0], given: 0

Location: London
Re: CR - campus education [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2007, 11:21
AimHigher wrote:
Guys this is Kaplan CR

Premise: Survey; increase in attendance in religious services

Conclusion: reduction in cheating.

it is the same as: A guy is religious, so he does not lie

It should be C, as it weakens the inference. since the switch to physical checks made 15 years ago. its gradual effect lead to a 50 % decrease.

but any ideas?

Kudos [?]: 141 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 910

Kudos [?]: 278 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - campus education [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2007, 11:35
Ravshonbek wrote:
AimHigher wrote:
Guys this is Kaplan CR

Premise: Survey; increase in attendance in religious services

Conclusion: reduction in cheating.

it is the same as: A guy is religious, so he does not lie

It should be C, as it weakens the inference. since the switch to physical checks made 15 years ago. its gradual effect lead to a 50 % decrease.

but any ideas?

I would have picked C as well but if the switch was made 15 years ago, it does not explain why there is a recent decrease in incidents. Also, it never says there is a 50% decrease in cheating incidents but that there is a 50% increase in religious service attendance - TWO different/separate things.

the reason why I picked D was to weaken the validity of the survey. If the survey is not representative of the whole school then the increased "religiosity" (what kind of word is that??) is in question so it cannot be a reason why cheating has decreased.

Edit Whoops my answer is D

Last edited by beckee529 on 12 Aug 2007, 11:43, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 278 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
Posts: 1098

Kudos [?]: 141 [0], given: 0

Location: London
Re: CR - campus education [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2007, 11:41
beckee529 wrote:
Ravshonbek wrote:
AimHigher wrote:
Guys this is Kaplan CR

Premise: Survey; increase in attendance in religious services

Conclusion: reduction in cheating.

it is the same as: A guy is religious, so he does not lie

It should be C, as it weakens the inference. since the switch to physical checks made 15 years ago. its gradual effect lead to a 50 % decrease.

but any ideas?

I would have picked C as well but if the switch was made 15 years ago, it does not explain why there is a recent decrease in incidents. Also, it never says there is a 50% decrease in cheating incidents but that there is a 50% increase in religious service attendance - TWO different/separate things.

the reason why I picked B was to weaken the validity of the survey. If the survey is not representative of the whole school then the increased "religiosity" (what kind of word is that??) is in question so it cannot be a reason why cheating has decreased.

Beckee.. sorry for my careless writing. 50% actually is an increase in attendance.
ur reasoning sounds good.
I think i vote for C.

Kudos [?]: 141 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 852

Kudos [?]: 141 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2007, 12:35
Only D makes sense to me...no wonder this is from kaplan

Kudos [?]: 141 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 1545

Kudos [?]: 178 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2007, 12:53
why not A ?

if students are only attending those religious services for social reasons, then it wouldnt have to do with the decrease in cheating

Kudos [?]: 178 [0], given: 2

Director
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 574

Kudos [?]: 80 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2007, 22:21
Ughm this is a straight A!!!!!!!!!!!

Argument is as follows:

Students who attend church do so for religious reasons (increase of religiousness is the inference).

Increase of religiousness -> reduced cheating.

Take away the increase of religiousness, and the argument falls apart.

B strengthens the argument.
C/D/E are useless and have nothing to do with the argument.

Kudos [?]: 80 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 20 Nov 2006
Posts: 213

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2007, 22:34

If students are attending social activities only for the sake of attending, there there will be no effect of religious activities on the students. So the claim that there is a recent reduction in cheating, cannot be due to the increased interest in religious activities. This obviously weakens the inference.

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 852

Kudos [?]: 141 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2007, 11:12
The conclusion says that increased religiosity causes reduction in cheating cases.
We are not concerned why the religiosity has increased...A seems out of scope to me...any thoughts??

Kudos [?]: 141 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 910

Kudos [?]: 278 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2007, 11:18
vineetgupta wrote:
The conclusion says that increased religiosity causes reduction in cheating cases.
We are not concerned why the religiosity has increased...A seems out of scope to me...any thoughts??

exactly my thoughts too.. I think discrediting the survey would weaken the the conclusion more.

Kudos [?]: 278 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 08 Jun 2007
Posts: 575

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

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2007, 11:27
vay wrote:

B only strengthens the conclusion.
On the D-day I will pick A.

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

Intern
Joined: 06 Aug 2007
Posts: 46

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2007, 11:53
vineetgupta wrote:
The conclusion says that increased religiosity causes reduction in cheating cases.
We are not concerned why the religiosity has increased...A seems out of scope to me...any thoughts??

It's straight A for me; it's weakened by finding an alternative explanation for the phenomemnon, that more students are attending the services for social purposes, not due to increased religiosity.

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Current Student
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 3351

Kudos [?]: 319 [0], given: 2

Location: New York City
Schools: Wharton'11 HBS'12

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2007, 11:58
I will go with A..on this..

it says students attend "religous" events not because of religon but for social reasons...this weakens the premise which is "religoisity is decreasing cheating"..A basically says students arent religous

Kudos [?]: 319 [0], given: 2

Director
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 736

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2007, 12:36
POE to rescue...

B supports the conclusion so out.
C, D are out of scope. So, is E as it does not matter whether it was a major problem or not, it has declined.

I would have picked A on the G day but I'm not sure if I can prove it if that is an answer.

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 574

Kudos [?]: 80 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2007, 15:02
Read the question guys.... the conclusion is an inference, which we're trying to weaken. It's not fact.

Kudos [?]: 80 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 318

Kudos [?]: 148 [0], given: 0

Location: Orange County, CA

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2007, 15:28
Vote: C

Given:
P1: Survey reveals the number of students attending religious service has increased 50% from the figure 10 years ago
A1:
C1: Increased participation in religious service has led to massive reduction in incidences in cheating on exams.

What weakens the inference?

Attack the assumption. The assumption is that if students are more religious, then they would not cheat anymore.

What would weaken this argument? First thing I look for is an answer that tells me that cheating did not decrease, it just has been monitored differently. That way, the religious effect didn't do it, but something else did.

(A) Social attendance is not in scope for the discussion (Eliminate)
(B) Campus Champlains are never mentioned (Eliminate)
(C) Exams used to be honor based, now are proctored; (Keep)
(D) No reference to pool of participants; does not attack incidences of cheating (Eliminate)
(E) Contradicts the given statement (Eliminate)

If exams were honor based, there would naturally be higher incidences of cheating. Once these exams became proctored, THIS reduced the number of cheating incidences (NOT increased religious attendance).

Follows the argument that if X --> Y but we find out that W --> Y, W weakens the argument for X.

Kudos [?]: 148 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 318

Kudos [?]: 148 [0], given: 0

Location: Orange County, CA

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2007, 16:13
Just re-read the statement and saw that the cheating incidences were "recent" so that throws off the premise of my argument.

Next choice? ummmm B?

Kudos [?]: 148 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 855

Kudos [?]: 487 [0], given: 7

### Show Tags

16 Aug 2007, 03:45
misterJJ2u wrote:
Follows the argument that if X --> Y but we find out that W --> Y, W weakens the argument for X.

this by itself is enough to answer the question - it is a causality question!

Kudos [?]: 487 [0], given: 7

16 Aug 2007, 03:45

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 27 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by