TirthankarP wrote:
But if there are still 1% cases that go undetected then how D is the correct option?
TirthankarP-
Let me walk through the answer choices to see if that clarifies D in your mind as the correct answer. Before I do that, remember the goal on these "inference" questions in CR. You have to take the information provided by the argument and determine what most likely would be true.
A) The rate of default on government-guaranteed student loans will probably increase by 1 percent.
We can't make an inference on the overall government student loan default rate based on the actions of only grad schools.
B) The rate of default on government-guaranteed student loans will probably decrease.
Just because grad schools are not processing a portion of applications from "defaulted" applicant does not mean that we can be reasonably sure that the overall loan rate of default will decrease.
C) The number of applications received by graduate schools will decrease.
The applications are not impacted at all by this program. After the applications are RECEIVED, they are not processed if the applicant is in default.
D) The percentage of applications processed by graduate schools may decrease.
If grad schools implement a program whereby they stop processing some applications that would have been processed in the past, we can be relatively confident that the percentage of processed applications will decrease. -- Correct
E) The percentage of loan applications from students applying to graduate school is likely to increase.
Out of Scope. We are talking about grad school applications, not loan applications. (This is a common trap of the GMAT - watch out for these word shifts.)
D is the only answer choice that we could confidently say would happen based on the information in the argument.
KW
But from your explanation I understood that option D is inferred only from the 1st two sentences of the argument.
The next 2 sentences have no impact on option D i.e. "
".
So in inference questions, don't we need to choose an option that can be concluded from the whole argument and not just from a subset of the argument?