For the past 13 years, high school guidance counselors nationwide have

I had an identical explanation but the OA is E...any thoughts??

No wonder percentage questions are tricky. I fell in the same trap. It's E for sure.

Well I had chosen A because it would have made sense had the number of HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES (Not the Numbers of People going to College) remained constant. The higher percentage of those going to college (15%) would have actually translated into MORE numbers.

But A is irrelevant here since it talks not of number of students graduating but those going to college.

E on the other hand hits the assumption - if the students despite going to colleges didn't prepare for college degree careers then the purpose of the program (hence the focus of the argument) would have been defeated.

E stands.

Phew...thats a tough one...can u explain a little...both A and E talk about graduates in general.

Premises 1: counselors nationwide have implemented an aggressive program to convince high school students to select careers requiring college degrees.
Premises 2:The government reported that the percentage of last year’s high school graduates who went on to college was 15 percent greater than the percentage of those who graduated 10 years ago and did so.

Conclusion:The counselors concluded from this report that the program had been successful.

assumption->Kids went to college to establish their careers.

A!

if percentage of graduate students were increaing in last year then this 15% increare didn't happen overnight.

Answer should be 'E'.

I think why 'A' is NOT CORRECT-

'A' says -The number of graduates who went on to college remained constant each year during the 10-year period.


Assuming this will not make the conclusion strong. As we don't know about the base number (high school graduates).

If the assumption were -
The number of high school graduates remained constant each year during the 10-year period.. This means that the percentage of the college goers is increased and the base number (high school graduates) remains constant. This would have helped the conclusion to be true.

Well after going through all the above explanation i am still confused why A is wrong. Can any one explain me why A is wrong.

Javed.

Cheers!

Also, in A it is not clear which 10 year period. Just last 10 years or 10 year s before last year?

I think the correct answer is E.
I chose it because it seems to be the most adequate as the aim of the high school guidance counselors is to convince high school students to select careers requiring college degrees which means that the reasoning depends on the fact that students go to college to to prepare for careers requiring college degrees and that are not other reasons for them.

Hope it's correct and clear, Please if I am wrong correct me!

A is wrong because it is talking about constant students ..
if we negate this choice

The number of graduates who went on to college remained variable each year during the 10-year period.

so it can be 1 student admitted or 1000 students per year we can't weaken the argument ...
because we just know the percentage of students ...

on this basis A can be easily eliminated.

Thanks
Rahul

For the past 13 years, high school guidance counselors nationwide have implemented an aggressive program to convince high school students to select careers requiring college degrees. The government reported that the percentage of last year's high school graduates who went on to college was 15 percent greater than the percentage of those who graduated 10 years ago and did so. The counselors concluded from this report that the program had been successful.

The guidance counselors' reasoning depends on which one of the following assumptions about high school graduates?
(A) The number of graduates who went on to college remained constant each year during the 10-year period. - The main purpose of program was to convince students to go for careers which require college degrees. Hmmm... So, lets say year 1 - 1000 graduates went to college and year 2 - 10000 graduates went to college but in both the years, only 20 students chose careers which required college degrees so this doesnt matter how many people went to college but how many went to college with that intention of choosing that career requiring college degrees.
(B) Any college courses that the graduates take will improve their career prospects. - Irrelevant to the conclusion, talks about career prospects rather than number of students actually opting that.
(C) Some of the graduates who went on to college never received guidance from a high school counselor. - this also weakens the argument.
(D) There has been a decrease in the number of graduates who go on to college without career plans. - The guidance counselor's reasoning cant depend on this statement. It weakens the argument.
(E) Many of last year's graduates who went on to college did so in order to prepare for careers requiring college degrees. - Guidance counselor would have to assume this for him to justify that the program is successful.

Please let me know if this reasoning seems right.

For the past 13 years, high school guidance counselors nationwide have implemented an aggressive program to convince high school students to select careers requiring college degrees. The government reported that the percentage of last year's high school graduates who went on to college was 15 percent greater than the percentage of those who graduated 10 years ago and did so. The counselors concluded from this report that the program had been successful.

National program = students select careers requiring college degrees.
Because of this, 15% hike in students graduating from college.
Hence, program is successful.

The guidance counselors' reasoning depends on which one of the following assumptions about high school graduates?


(A) The number of graduates who went on to college remained constant each year during the 10-year period.
Wrong. This strengthens the conclusion that the program was successful and not tells us about the assumption.

(B) Any college courses that the graduates take will improve their career prospects.
Wrong. "Any" is a very extreme word and not all degrees will increase their career prospect.

(C) Some of the graduates who went on to college never received guidance from a high school counselor.
Wrong. Whether they received guidance from high school counselor or not only tells us that the program is successful because now they are receiving the guidance.

(D) There has been a decrease in the number of graduates who go on to college without career plans.
Wrong. This weakens the conclusion.

(E) Many of last year's graduates who went on to college did so in order to prepare for careers requiring college degrees.
Right. Graduates only went to college to prepare for careers in requiring college degrees. No other aim.

Conclusion: The program had been successful. Successful in terms of WHAT? The program had been successful in CONVINCING high school students to select careers requiring college degrees.
Why?
Because the percentage of last year's high school graduates who went on to college was 15 percent greater than the percentage of those who graduated 10 years ago and did so.

If we negate (E), it becomes: NOT MANY of last year's graduates who went on to college DID SO IN ORDER TO PREPARE FOR careers requiring college degrees. This breaks Conclusion because it suggests that the program had been not successful in CONVINCING high school students to select careers requiring college degrees. (E) is the required assumption.

Premise 1: Program says choose careers which require college degrees
Premise 2: Increase in % of high school grads entering college
Conclusion: Program successful.

Pre-thinking
1. High school grads in with the objective of choosing careers requiring college degrees
2. No other factors such as lower fee, easing admission requirements, etc.

(A) The number of graduates who went on to college remained constant each year during the 10-year period.

Incorrect. The argument is about percentage and accordingly the number can be constant or decrease or increase. Since we're concerned about the proportion of high school graduates entering college.

(B) Any college courses that the graduates take will improve their career prospects.

Incorrect. This is just repeating the premise. Not a missing premise or a logical gap that the assumption answer would be expected to fill.

(C) Some of the graduates who went on to college never received guidance from a high school counselor.

Incorrect. This is a weakener. If some of the graduates never received guidance from HS counselor, the program cannot be said to be successful. Alternatively, negative this and this would actually strengthen the conclusion.

(D) There has been a decrease in the number of graduates who go on to college without career plans.

Incorrect. If you negate this, you get "there has not been a decrease in the no. of grads who go on to college w/o career plans". Now this doesn't necessarily destroy the conclusion. It could simply be possible that the number of grads coming with the purpose of getting into careers which require a college degree has increased sharply.

(E) Many of last year's graduates who went on to college did so in order to prepare for careers requiring college degrees.

Correct answer. Negate this and we get "Many of last year's grads... for careers not requiring college degrees" This absolutely destroys the conclusion in so far as we now know that most college goers are not there with the intent that is preached by the programme. Therefore, the programme has not worked. Correct answer.

we have to remove anything that can attack author's conclusion

We have to support author's conclusion through our assumption or defend his conclusion in someway "That program is successful to convince student , there is an increase in percentage of student who went to college that required college degree "