Even though the official explanation focuses on the assumption, the ultimate goal is to weaken the conclusion. One way to weaken a conclusion is to focus on the assumptions made and point out how they MIGHT be wrong ——> the correct AC will do this by providing some fact or information that make it a “little less likely” that the Conclusion could be true.
In other words, after we read the fact in the answer choice, we don’t believe the conclusion as much as we did before and the facts don’t support the conclusion as well as they did before.
You’re right, we do not know whether the students who are not in the bottom 10% will DEFINITELY improve their scores or not.
But, if these students who are not in the bottom 10% now do study harder, it gives us a reason to believe that the the overall scores could still go up (even though those students the plan is directed at do not have time to participate).
It’s about making that connection: if they study more ———-> gives us a reason to believe that the scores COULD still go up, in spite of what the school board thinks. After all, generally speaking, students “motivated” to study harder will usually end up scoring higher.
The question then becomes how far do we go with these “common sense, real world” type connections without coming up with an unsupported story or something the author doesn’t say.
I think it just comes down to practice and spotting the general patterns. The weakening/strengthening correct answers are never going to be “airtight”.
Focusing on the exact conclusion is the number 1 step. After that, practice.....
I still look at some of the correct answers and say “how can this be true? What about this that and this?”
But I started focusing on finding solid reasons to eliminate the other choices, rather than focusing on why 1 was correct. It’s definitely helped.....
The key to eliminating C is to realize that the premises (facts given) are definitive. We can’t argue with them.
We are told that these students have responsibilities such that they have little time to study. We have to accept that as true. Whether they put the classes at different times or not it shouldn’t matter: these bottom 10% kids just don’t have the time to study (or very little).
Given that fact, all C tells us is what would happen if they actually did have more time (or what the students think would happen if they had more time).
These students think the plan would help them, but since they don’t really have the time to take advantage of the services, it doesn’t really give us a reason to question what the school board says.
Hopefully something helped
My head always hurts after analyzing these questions in-depth lol
RohitSaluja wrote:
EMPOWERgmatVerbal wrote:
Official Explanation:
In order to improve its state ranking, a high school is planning to offer free tutoring to the students whose test scores are in the bottom 10% of its freshman and sophomore class. According to a report made by the school board, however, this is unlikely to have much effect on the school’s rank, since the students in the bottom 10% have relatively low scores because of jobs and other responsibilities that afford these students little study time.
Which of the following would most effectively counter the conclusion made in the report made by the school board?
(A) The rank that the state gives to a high school depends on a number of factors, of which test scores is only one.
(B) The same offer of free tutoring is being made available to several schools throughout the state.
(C) Every student in the bottom 10% has said that more tutoring would help their test scores.
(D) The implementation of the free tutoring will motivate students not currently in the bottom 10% to study harder so that they won’t fall into that category.
(E) The school board has expressed reservations about the free tutoring program because the money to pay for it would be taken out of other programs that the board has supported.
Question Type: Weaken
Boil It Down: High school wants to offer free tutoring for bottom 10% of students. Report says tutoring won’t work because the bottom 10% are there due to non-academic factors that tutoring can’t help with.
Goal: Find the missing assumption that will weaken the argument made in the school board’s report.
Analysis:
This question asks you to weaken the conclusion found in the report made by the school board. Here’s the board’s argument.
Premise: The students scoring at the bottom do so because of jobs, etc.
Conclusion: Free tutoring won’t help improve the school’s rank.
You might have noticed that this argument assumes that the free tutoring won’t help students with jobs and other responsibilities. Questions like this one that ask you to weaken a conclusion usually attack an assumption, and if an answer choice attacked this assumption it would be effective. However, no choice does that. Let’s consider another assumption. The conclusion assumes that the tutoring program would not help students not directly impacted. But if the program motivates students NOT in the bottom 10% to do better, then their scores will improve, and the school’s rank would likely improve as well. This is what (D) states.
(A) The rank that the state gives to a high school depends on a number of factors, of which test scores is only one.
This is background information that does not bear directly on the effectiveness of the free tutoring program in raising the school’s rank.
(B) The same offer of free tutoring is being made available to several schools throughout the state.
What other schools do has no known effect on the argument. One cannot assume what the effect is on these other schools.
(C) Every student in the bottom 10% has said that more tutoring would help their test scores.
This implies that there is a need for the program, but will the students offered the tutoring be able to find the time to take advantage of it? Will it work? We can’t say from this statement alone.
(D) The implementation of the free tutoring will motivate students not currently in the bottom 10% to study harder so that they won’t fall into that category.
This is the correct choice.
(E) The school board has expressed reservations about the free tutoring program because the money to pay for it would be taken out of other programs that the board has supported.
This implies that the board might have reasons other than those given in the report to disapprove of the free tutoring, but it does not tell us whether the tutoring will help with the school’s rank if it is implemented, and that’s all we care about.
Don’t study for the GMAT. Train for it.
With option D, you have made an assumption that students who are not in the bottom 10% will improve their score, what is their score does not improve and rather remains the same i.e. the motivation to study harder only enables them to maintain their grades and rather not improve? in that case, the plan is still not a success, but with option C, we can say that due to extra classes students who were unable to focus on studies due to existing responsibilities(external factors) will not at-least be forced to do so by taking extra classes, which might be conducted early in the morning or late at night
close
Updated on: 07 Sep 2020, 15:03
53%
(02:01)
wrong 
