In 2001, a local high school implemented a new program designed to red

In 2001, a local high school implemented a new program designed to reduce the incidence of teenage pregnancy. The program, however, failed to produce the desired result. If the program had been successful, the dropout rate for female students would not have increased substantially in 2001.


Lets understand the Logic , X causes Y
Failure of program caused increase in teenage pregnancy

The argument in the passage depends on which of the following assumptions?

A. The number of teen pregnancies nationwide increased in 2001. Something other than X is causing Y , incorrect

B. The number of teen pregnancies in 2001 was greater than the number of teen pregnancies in 1991. We are not sure of that and if negated , doesn't affect my answer, incorrect

C. Teenage pregnancy is a leading reason that female students leave school. Correct ! X is causing Y , it supports my conclusion that since program failed , desired result which was lowering teenage pregnancy was not achieved

D. The program was mandatory for all female students. Negate it , "D. The program was [NOT] mandatory for all female students",here something other than X is causing Y ,incorrect

E. Most 2001 female dropouts were not pregnant at any time during the year. If they weren't pregnant , program did not fail this weakens my argument, incorrect­

­

KAPLAN OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

C

This stimulus begins with the conclusion that a 2001 school program to reduce teenage pregnancy was a failure. The evidence is that the female dropout rate increased during 2001. The assumption must be that pregnancy is an important reason for a female to drop out of school. (C) says this correctly.

(A) is out of scope; we're concerned only with the pregnancy numbers in one school, not the numbers nationwide. Though it might be true that an overall increase in nationwide teen pregnancy was somehow related to the failure of the program at this school, any such connection is outside the scope of this argument (B) is irrelevant: Comparing the number of pregnancies in 2001 to the number in 1991 might be one way of measuring the program's success or failure, but it has nothing to do with the argument that the increased female dropout rate in 2001 proves the program failed. (D) is out of scope because the argument concerns the dropout rate, not the number of students in the program. It could also be rejected on the grounds of "extreme language." (£) provides a reason to doubt the conclusion, as opposed to stating the argument's assumption.­

OE has a typo. Instead of option (E), a sterling pound symbol is displayed.  ­