Dean: Anything that hinders the students hinders the University.

­
Analysis: The Dean's argument is constructed on a chain of logical relationships between the well-being of students and the University. It concludes that because the Senator's proposal includes a provision that restricts the employment of new professors, it would hinder the students. This conclusion is based on a series of premises that link hindrances to students and the University directly. To understand the missing assumption, we need to find the assumption that directly connects the specific provision of the Senator's proposal to the argument's conclusion.

Let's evaluate the options:

A) The Senator's proposal was designed to hinder the University.
- This choice suggests an intention behind the Senator's proposal but does not necessarily connect to whether the specific action of restricting employment of new professors hinders the University (and therefore the students), which is the logical chain needed for the Dean's argument.

B) Most professors at the University support the Senator's proposal.
- This option provides information about the professors' stance on the proposal but does not address the logical link needed to connect the proposal's impact on the University and, by extension, the students.

C) The University will be unable to continue operation if the Senator's proposal is approved.
- This choice implies an extreme consequence of the Senator's proposal but is broader than necessary to support the specific logic of the Dean's argument regarding hindrance through the restriction on hiring new professors.

D) Educational institutions that are not universities also object to the Senator's proposal.
- The stance of other educational institutions is irrelevant to the Dean's argument, which is focused on the impact of the Senator's proposal on the University and its students.

E) Restricting the employment of new professors would hinder the University.
- This is the critical link needed for the Dean's argument. The assumption here directly connects the specific provision in the Senator's proposal (restricting the employment of new professors) with the premise that anything hindering the University, in turn, hinders the students. Without this assumption, the argument's conclusion that the Senator's proposal hinders students cannot be logically drawn from the premises provided.

Option E is the missing assumption on which the argument logically depends. It establishes the necessary connection between restricting the employment of new professors and the argument that such an action would hinder the University, which then, based on the Dean's premises, would hinder the students.