For-profit colleges serve far fewer students than either public or pri

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

The argument concludes that for-profit colleges enroll a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged students than do non-profit colleges. This conclusion is based on the fact that students at for-profit colleges draw a disproportionate share of federal and state financial aid. The argument assumes a link between the proportion of aid received and the proportion of financially disadvantaged students enrolled. In so doing, it assumes that there are not other possible reasons for the disproportionate aid distribution.

(A) The conclusion makes a claim about the differences between for-profit and non-profit colleges. Differences among non-profit colleges – such as public vs. private – are irrelevant to the argument.

(B) CORRECT. One alternative reason that might explain the disproportionate aid distribution is that for-profit colleges engaged in fraudulent practices to obtain unneeded financial assistance for their students. If this were true, then much of the aid was distributed based not on the actual financial situation of the students but on the ability of colleges to defraud federal and state governments. This answer choice asserts that this was NOT in fact the case, thereby eliminating this alternative explanation and highlighting a key assumption upon which the argument rests.

(C) The argument's claim is centered on proportions. The actual number of students receiving aid at for-profit vs. non-profit colleges is irrelevant to the conclusion.

(D) The relative educational quality of for-profit vs. non-profit colleges lies outside the scope of the argument, which is focused solely on differences in financial aid distribution.

(E) The issue addressed by the argument is the amount of financial aid distributed to students at two types of institutions. Whether students successfully repay their loans after college is immaterial to the claim made in the argument.

Dont you think this is a classic proportion question? The answer should be A. If the proportion of financially disadvantaged students is the same, and for-profit colleges draw a disproportionate share of federal and state financial aid, for their students, it would mean, that for-profit colleges should enroll a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged students than do non-profit colleges, which is the conclusion.

So, should'nt A be the assumption on which the conclusion is based.

Hi Ishan,

Please do read choice B one more time.

B. For-profit colleges do not engage in fraudulent practices in helping their students obtain unneeded federal and state financial aid.

If the funds are actually NOT needed by the students of these colleges, then can the author conclude that these students are from financially poor backgrounds? The answer is NO, right?

So, basically choice B tries to defend the argument against a situation that could break it.

Hope this helps!

Cheers!

Conclusion:- “for-profit colleges enroll a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged students than do non-profit colleges.”
Negating answer choice B:-
“For-profit colleges do not engage in fraudulent practices in helping their students obtain unneeded federal and state financial aid”.
As colleges are getting engaged in fraudulent practices to get financial aid this concludes that students are not financially disadvantaged contradicting the conclusion. Hence choice B is correct.

sidagar You're right that C strengthens the argument, but that's not what we're looking for. We're looking for an assumption, which means a missing piece that is required for the argument to work.

As a side note, notice that even with C inserted, the argument is still making the assumption described in B. We don't know whether a larger proportion of students receiving aid indicates that more students in those schools actually need aid.

I was confused between B and D and finally chose D for the reason: incase the quality of education in for-profit colleges is better, the bigger chunk of grant is anyways justified, so, enrolling a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged students... becomes unnecessary to justify higher grants.
So, the author must be assuming that the quality of education must be the same.
Could experts please help negate option D? Many thanks.

- DA

Hi DA,

I think there is a little confusion about tuition grants! Grants in this context aren't like research grants, where they are based on the merit of the work being done. Rather, tuition grants are a specific type of "financial aid," which is generally reserved for financially struggling students.

Does that help clarify?

Hi Experts,

Please share your thoughts on the quality of the question.

I marked B because that seemed like the best option to go with. However, Whether For profit college obtain funds in a fraudulent way or not has no bearing to the proportion of students who are at a financial disadvantage. It is a college's decision to use which method seems likely to get funds.

still have doubts about option c.
argument say for -profit sever far fewer students - suppose 10 vs 20 ( not for profit)
option c says: students receiving aid are more in for profit - suppose 5 vs 2( not for profit).We can conclude 5/10 > 2/20 i.e proportion is more for- profit than for non-profit
kindly clear where i am going wrong

What's the source of this question? This doesn't look like OG qn to me. It is a bad question. One problem is this - at no point does the argument say that disproportionate mean more (no disproportionately large in the prompt).

At the same time, relative to non-profit colleges, for-profit colleges draw a disproportionate share of federal and state financial aid, such as tuition grants and guaranteed loans, for their students.

For-profit colleges serve far fewer students than either public or private non-profit colleges. At the same time, relative to non-profit colleges, for-profit colleges draw a disproportionate share of federal and state financial aid, such as tuition grants and guaranteed loans, for their students. It must be, then, that for-profit colleges enroll a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged students than do non-profit colleges.

The conclusion above depends on which of the following assumptions?


A. Public non-profit colleges and private non-profit colleges enroll a similar proportion of financially disadvantaged students.

B. For-profit colleges do not engage in fraudulent practices in helping their students obtain unneeded federal and state financial aid.

C. The number of students receiving federal and state financial aid at for-profit colleges is greater than the number of students receiving federal and state financial aid at non-profit colleges.

D. For-profit colleges are of similar educational quality as non-profit colleges.

E. The majority of students at for-profit colleges do not default on repayment of their loans after they complete college.

Hi all! So I was stuck between B and C. Eventually picked C. Since, the conclusion "It must be, then, that for-profit colleges enroll a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged students than do non-profit colleges." cares about the number of the students, it must be true that the number of students who receives financial aid in for-profit colleges is greater than other colleges. Otherwise, the conclusion would not work out right? I know OA is B. But can someone please elaborate on why B is correct? I mean, when I negate answer B, I get that "ok, even if for-profit colleges involve in a fraudulent way of obtaining the funding, does that really break the conclusion? Say, even if these for-profit colleges obtain illegal funding for 2-3 students, there is a chance that there are still students who are not in a position to pay their tuition fees so that funding is obtained for them". And in conclusion, I eliminate B. So that's basically my thought process. If someone could help or correct me, I'd be more than grateful. Many thanks in advance.

According to the argument, for- profit colleges serve 'far fewer' students ; so let's say
total students in for- profit = 20
for profit financial aid students = 5
total students in non- profit = 100
non profit financial aid students = 10
So, 5/20 = 25% which is greater than 10/100 = 10%, so even if C is negated, the conclusion still holds.

According to B, if for profit engage in fraudulent practices , then the number of financial aid students in for profit would be much less than what they are showing, and thus the conclusion would not hold. You are making a mistake by considering that they are obtaining illegal funding for only 2-3 students but that's not the case. According to B, they 'do not engage' means they are not helping the students in general obtain funds illegally so if you negate the statement, they are helping the students in general to obtain the funds illegally, and not just a small minority.