GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 19 Oct 2018, 15:58

### 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

# For years, the debate over public education reform has

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 19 Mar 2015
Posts: 7
Re: For years, the debate over public education reform has  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Mar 2015, 06:19
Identify conclusion of the text (keep in mind conclusion is not always at the end of the stimuli):

"the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches".

We now have to weaken that argument. E clearly does it, as is says that:

"high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests".

@Which is clearly not the intended way the author wants us to think here, so it weakens the argument by strenghtening its adverse argument.
Intern
Joined: 17 Sep 2013
Posts: 29
For years, the debate over public education reform has  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2015, 18:40
The argument concludes that: the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches (improve student performance)
It is based on the premises that:
- Today the schools are organized to benefit their adult employees rather than the students
- Pouring more money into the public schools will NOT improve student performance
We should attack the assumptions made by the author.
A - This does not have impacts on the conclusion.
B - Irrelevant.
C - Irrelevant.
D - This tries to attack the conclusion of fixing school systems directly. Unfortunately, what the schools say is just what is said, not the fact. Thus. This cannot impact the conclusion.
E - This somehow indicates that financial spending does have positive impacts on the student performance, thus, weakens the author's assumption that pouring more money into the public schools will NOT improve student performance.
So E is CORRECT.
Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
Posts: 1131
Location: India
Re: For years, the debate over public education reform has  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Nov 2015, 07:42
However, the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?

(A) Schools that have instituted “new approaches” attract the best performing students.......favors conclusion
(B) Schools without outside playgrounds have lower levels of student performance than schools that do..........slightly deviated from intended conclusion weakener even if we assume playground involves investment.
(C) Studies show that student performance corresponded most directly with the education of the students’ families...........completely out of scope
(D) School employees, by an overwhelming margin, said that the system performed well............employee satisfaction out of scope
(E) Researchers in education have shown that students from school districts with high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests.........weakens the conclusion. Better than B.
Intern
Joined: 03 Jul 2015
Posts: 48
Concentration: Marketing, Finance
Re: For years, the debate over public education reform has  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2016, 19:15
rlevochkin wrote:
C and E are the best contesntants out of all. However, I go with E because this choice way more directly attacks the conclusion than does C. So, E is the outright winner

Still confused between C and E.
Both are weakening the argument. Not sure how you picked E over C.
Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Jan 2010
Posts: 252
Re: For years, the debate over public education reform has  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2016, 23:18
chiragr wrote:
For years, the debate over public education reform has centered on financing. Many claim that pouring more money into the public schools will improve student performance. However, the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches. Today the schools are organized to benefit their adult employees rather than the students.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?

(A) Schools that have instituted “new approaches” attract the best performing students.
(B) Schools without outside playgrounds have lower levels of student performance than schools that do.
(C) Studies show that student performance corresponded most directly with the education of the students’ families.
(D) School employees, by an overwhelming margin, said that the system performed well.
(E) Researchers in education have shown that students from school districts with high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests.

(A) Actually strengthens the argument. OUT
(B) Passage does not discuss physical activity / playground issues. Irrelevant. OUT
(C) Passage has no connection with education of students' families.
(D) This actually supports the passage.
(E) The only option that weaken the passage. This is the answer
Choice E infact says that spending more money actually has a positive impact. This is counter to the argument. If this statement is true it certainly weakens the argument
Manager
Joined: 03 May 2015
Posts: 219
Location: South Africa
GPA: 3.49
WE: Web Development (Insurance)
Re: For years, the debate over public education reform has  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2016, 23:27
chiragr wrote:
For years, the debate over public education reform has centered on financing. Many claim that pouring more money into the public schools will improve student performance. However, the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches. Today the schools are organized to benefit their adult employees rather than the students.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?

(A) Schools that have instituted “new approaches” attract the best performing students.
(B) Schools without outside playgrounds have lower levels of student performance than schools that do.
(C) Studies show that student performance corresponded most directly with the education of the students’ families.
(D) School employees, by an overwhelming margin, said that the system performed well.
(E) Researchers in education have shown that students from school districts with high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests.

This is a bottoms- up type question, can be solved only by going up from bottom :

Conclusion : Money won't lead to improvement in public school
Premise : Schools are organised to benefit employees rather than students.

There is not evidence or fact, just opinions, so we need to attack the conclusion directly. We need some proof that \$ -> better schooling

Only E fits.

C is strengthening. It shows some factor other than money is involved. Leading to strengthening the author's argument.
_________________

Kudos if I helped

Director
Joined: 04 Jun 2016
Posts: 569
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V43
For years, the debate over public education reform has  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jun 2016, 06:02
Although it takes the liberty of unwarranted assumption, the correct answer choice is E. Mostly by process of elimination

The conclusion of the argument is "The ONLY WAY TO FIX school system is to pour new idea and new approach."

For years, the debate over public education reform has centered on financing. Many claim that pouring more money into the public schools will improve student performance. However, the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches. Today the schools are organized to benefit their adult employees rather than the students.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?

(A) Schools that have instituted “new approaches” attract the best performing students.
Wrong:- It actually kind of strengthen the argument

(B) Schools without outside playgrounds have lower levels of student performance than schools that do.
Wrong :- Irrelevant. We cannot simply assume that having a outside playground is some sort of new approach.

(C) Studies show that student performance corresponded most directly with the education of the students’ families.
Wrong:- Students and parents are not at trial here. The school system and ways to improve it are. So out of scope

(D) School employees, by an overwhelming margin, said that the system performed well.
Wrong:- For years there is debate about school reform (mentioned in passage) so there is a problem in the school system. It does not works well as school employees are claiming.

(E) Researchers in education have shown that students from school districts with high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests.
Right :- Just because this is the only viable option left
I am not entirely happy with this option but on test day I will still take it over other options.
This option makes a lot of assumptions. Higher score on test means better schools. Where are these better school located- In district with high income. What can be inferred assumed- more money is spend on schools in these districts. Hence it can be shown that spending more money on the school system can actually improve school standards and performance. And hence it is proved that injecting new ideas is NOT THE ONLY WAY TO IMPROVE

ALL SAID AND DONE, NOT A VERY GOOD QUESTION.
_________________

Posting an answer without an explanation is "GOD COMPLEX". The world doesn't need any more gods. Please explain you answers properly.
FINAL GOODBYE :- 17th SEPTEMBER 2016. .. 16 March 2017 - I am back but for all purposes please consider me semi-retired.

Intern
Joined: 27 Feb 2015
Posts: 48
Concentration: General Management, Economics
GMAT 1: 630 Q42 V34
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Re: For years, the debate over public education reform has  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jun 2016, 09:31
For years, the debate over public education reform has centered on financing. Many claim that pouring more money into the public schools will improve student performance. However, the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches. Today the schools are organized to benefit their adult employees rather than the students.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?

(A) Schools that have instituted “new approaches” attract the best performing students.
(B) Schools without outside playgrounds have lower levels of student performance than schools that do.
(C) Studies show that student performance corresponded most directly with the education of the students’ families.
(D) School employees, by an overwhelming margin, said that the system performed well.
(E) Researchers in education have shown that students from school districts with high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests.
------------------------
Here's how I marked E.
Conclusion :the only way to fix our school systems( benefiting the students) is to inject new ideas and new approaches..
weaken Q, objective : any other way to fix the school ( note : fixing the school system means system where students are benefited)

(A) Schools that have instituted “new approaches” attract the best performing students.
--- if anything, it is strengthening. wrong
(B) Schools without outside playgrounds have lower levels of student performance than schools that do.
--- playgrounds??? irrelevant!
(C) Studies show that student performance corresponded most directly with the education of the students’ families.
--- so this is giving me other reason for students performance, but has it improved??? not meeting the objective . wrong
(D) School employees, by an overwhelming margin, said that the system performed well.
--- ofcourse employees will say that because it is benefiting them..wat about students?? has it improved? not meeting objective. wrong!
(E) Researchers in education have shown that students from school districts with high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests.
--- ok! school districts with high per capita spending means they must receive high funding. and students from this highly financed school gets high scores ( so student is benefited)
author was saying the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches but actually financing school does fix the system ( benefiting student) . correct
Director
Joined: 26 Oct 2016
Posts: 642
Location: United States
Schools: HBS '19
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 4
WE: Education (Education)
Re: For years, the debate over public education reform has  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2017, 13:13
Re-structuring the argument first :-
today the schools are organized to benefit their adult employees rather than the students
THEREFORE the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches

Conclusion :- "the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches"
Weaken :- "the only way to fix our school systems is not to inject new ideas and new approaches".{ It means there is something else as well apart from new ideas and approaches}.

Choice D states that school employees are generally pleased with the school system. This does not address the core of the argument: that money does not improve student performance.

Choice E states that students from schools that spend more money tend to perform better on standardized tests. This suggests that the claim that money does not improve performance may be wrong. Correct
_________________

Thanks & Regards,
Anaira Mitch

Intern
Joined: 24 Oct 2016
Posts: 43
Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.61
Re: For years, the debate over public education reform has  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2017, 01:53
Hi, I may have analysed the question in the wrong way but what is wrong with Choice A? I agree E is the best answer but I am unable to find a strong reason to eliminate A. Here is my reasoning: Conclusion: ONLY way to fix schools is new ideas(and not money)
A: I thought that conclusion is ???New Approaches cause the school to perform better??? so to weaken this I use reversal ???Best Performing students join schools with these approaches??? indicating that it's the students and not the new approaches that improve performance

Please let me know if I am thinking correctly.
Current Student
Joined: 22 Sep 2016
Posts: 181
Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V35
GPA: 4
Re: For years, the debate over public education reform has  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jun 2017, 08:58
chiragr wrote:
For years, the debate over public education reform has centered on financing. Many claim that pouring more money into the public schools will improve student performance. However, the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches. Today the schools are organized to benefit their adult employees rather than the students.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?

(A) Schools that have instituted “new approaches” attract the best performing students.
(B) Schools without outside playgrounds have lower levels of student performance than schools that do.
(C) Studies show that student performance corresponded most directly with the education of the students’ families.
(D) School employees, by an overwhelming margin, said that the system performed well.
(E) Researchers in education have shown that students from school districts with high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests.

Although I chose E, but I am not very convinced with the options. Who said anything about standardized tests? And how do we know, if the standardized tests are the criteria to judge improvement in education systems.
My reason for choosing E was that all the other options were quite out of scope.
_________________

Desperately need 'KUDOS' !!

VP
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1126
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Engineering (Manufacturing)
Re: For years, the debate over public education reform has  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jun 2017, 10:51
Imo E
only E weakens the argument . It gives us additional fact that the students of school with high spending performed well .
_________________

Manager
Joined: 30 Aug 2017
Posts: 88
Location: Korea, Republic of
GMAT 1: 700 Q51 V31
GPA: 3.68
For years, the debate over public education reform has  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Oct 2017, 18:04
Most of people tend to just ignore (a)

But as we can infer in (E) ( Receive higher scores on standardized test = improve student performance ), we can infer that what we try to fix is a certain problem related with "improving Student performance"

In (A) If they merely attract the best performing student then It not only doesn`t have positive effects on improving performance but also can weaken the argument.

Please let me know if there`s a logical problem.

Thanks.
For years, the debate over public education reform has &nbs [#permalink] 24 Oct 2017, 18:04

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 53 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# For years, the debate over public education reform has

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.