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

 It is currently 22 Sep 2018, 21:43

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

In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic

Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 636
Location: India

Show Tags

01 Feb 2013, 00:06
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
I disagree.

SravnaTestPrep wrote:
Let us analyze choice A. It says that the current student-teacher ratio is higher now at government funded schools than it was during the last recession. Let us assume the current period to be a period of stronger economy. A higher student-teacher ratio during the current period means that during the last recession period there were less students who attended the government funded schools. It cannot be more teachers because till now during recession, jobs were cut down.

We don't know what was the scenario during recession last time. Perhaps the demography was such that there were fewer kids leading to higher student-teacher ratios. Perhaps there were more teachers in the system and with declining demand, the number of teachers in the system has decreased which has increased the student-teacher ratio. There are n number of possibilities. Nothing is given that links last recession with the current scenario. What you are given is the current scenario and what you can expect in the next recession. So choice (A) is out of scope.

SravnaTestPrep wrote:
Choice B in my opinion is not as solid because it doesn't automatically imply that the students who were studying at private schools during stronger economy would join the government funded schools during recession because as mentioned above there are two factors that weigh in students decision, being quality of education and cost of education. So if the private schools were markedly higher in the quality of education that they offer we would see little number of students moving to government funded schools during recession.

So to me choice A appears to strengthen the argument better.

Again, quality of education is out of scope here. There are a dozen other factors parents weigh while selecting a school but none of the others are relevant to our argument. The argument only deals with cost and student-teacher ratio. Option B very clearly states that during strong times, many kids are attending private schools which charge substantial fees. Also, since it is given that jobs are harder to come by in recession, it is possible that some people might be forced to use free-of-cost govt schools.

Let us first agree that during recession the number of teachers is lower than during a period of strong economy. The argument is based on that fact. Let us also use the common sense logic that the number of kids going to school is not going to vary significantly from one year to another within a short period. So considering all the n number of possibilities we can reasonably reach the above conclusion. So there is the cost factor and n number of other factors. If during recession the n number of factors weighed more or equally in favor of the private schools as in a period of strong economy, then the cost factor is being overlooked and therefore there are enough well to do parents who can send their kids to private schools during recession. Your argument that since parents would be out of job and so don't send their kids to private schools is not strong. This is because during previous recession also as we can infer, the parents did not change their kids from private schools to government funded schools because of cost. So if the number of kids going to private schools is 25% during strong economy it was also about the same during the recession.

While choice B considers only the cost factor, choice A implies that the other factors are important and along with the cost factor will strengthen the argument even strongly. In fact in the case of choice B, cost factor may be pitted against the other factors.
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna Holistic Solutions
http://www.sravnatestprep.com

Holistic and Systematic Approach

e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2680
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

01 Feb 2013, 01:35
eybrj2 wrote:
In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic recession because many businesses cut back operations. However, any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools. This is because Vargonia has just introduced a legal requirement that education in government-funded schools be available, free of charge, to all Vargonian children regardless of the state of the economy, and that current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded.

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

A. The current student-teacher ratio at Vargonia’s government-funded schools is higher than it was during the most recent period of economic recession.

B. During recent periods when the Vargonian economy has been strong, almost 25 percent of Vargonian children have attended privately funded schools, many of which charge substantial fees.

C. Nearly 20 percent more teachers are currently employed in Vargonia’s government-funded schools than had been employed in those schools in the period before the last economic recession.

D. Teachers in Vargonia’s government-funded schools are well paid relative to teachers in most privately funded schools in Vargonia, many of which rely heavily on part-time teachers.

E. During the last economic recession in Vargonia, the government permanently closed a number of the schools that it had funded.

Hi,

As I see, already there are two experts active on this thread, I am not sure if I am going to add much value to the discussion. But let me try.

When I read this passage, one thing that struck me was the underlined part: "However, any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools". So, the conclusion is not talking about the next recession or one particular recession; it is about all recessions to come. Therefore, any option statement which only talks about just one or two recessions is not going to support the general trend predicted in the conclusion.

The correct option has to give pointers to all the future recessions or provide a trend that has been generally followed in the past, which we can assume to hold in the future also.

Eliminate options A, C and E right away

Therefore, when I went to the options with this understanding in mind, I could easily eliminate options A, C and E since these three options just compare two economic recession - I am looking for a trend.

Option D is so out of context.

Option B is what I am looking for. It talks about "recent periods", not one period but a number of periods. So, it is talking about a trend. Now, what is the trend? The trend is that in strong economic conditions, a large number of children study in private schools, which charge "substantial fees". So, we can easily assume that the number of students at public schools will not decrease; it should rather increase. Therefore, the job availability of teaching jobs will likely not reduce.

Hope this helps

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Director
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 636
Location: India
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

01 Feb 2013, 02:14
egmat wrote:
eybrj2 wrote:
In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic recession because many businesses cut back operations. However, any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools. This is because Vargonia has just introduced a legal requirement that education in government-funded schools be available, free of charge, to all Vargonian children regardless of the state of the economy, and that current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded.

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

A. The current student-teacher ratio at Vargonia’s government-funded schools is higher than it was during the most recent period of economic recession.

B. During recent periods when the Vargonian economy has been strong, almost 25 percent of Vargonian children have attended privately funded schools, many of which charge substantial fees.

C. Nearly 20 percent more teachers are currently employed in Vargonia’s government-funded schools than had been employed in those schools in the period before the last economic recession.

D. Teachers in Vargonia’s government-funded schools are well paid relative to teachers in most privately funded schools in Vargonia, many of which rely heavily on part-time teachers.

E. During the last economic recession in Vargonia, the government permanently closed a number of the schools that it had funded.

Hi,

As I see, already there are two experts active on this thread, I am not sure if I am going to add much value to the discussion. But let me try.

When I read this passage, one thing that struck me was the underlined part: "However, any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools". So, the conclusion is not talking about the next recession or one particular recession; it is about all recessions to come. Therefore, any option statement which only talks about just one or two recessions is not going to support the general trend predicted in the conclusion.

The correct option has to give pointers to all the future recessions or provide a trend that has been generally followed in the past, which we can assume to hold in the future also.

Eliminate options A, C and E right away

Therefore, when I went to the options with this understanding in mind, I could easily eliminate options A, C and E since these three options just compare two economic recession - I am looking for a trend.

Option D is so out of context.

Option B is what I am looking for. It talks about "recent periods", not one period but a number of periods. So, it is talking about a trend. Now, what is the trend? The trend is that in strong economic conditions, a large number of children study in private schools, which charge "substantial fees". So, we can easily assume that the number of students at public schools will not decrease; it should rather increase. Therefore, the job availability of teaching jobs will likely not reduce.

Hope this helps

Thanks,
Chiranjeev

Something that strengthens the argument should add useful additional knowledge other than what is common sense knowledge. In my opinion choice B offers no useful additional information because if there are private schools some parents would indeed send their children to the private schools and cost is indeed generally a factor. This is common sense knowledge just as the knowledge that public schools charge lower fees.

Anyway the fact that 25% of students in recent periods have always attended private schools during strong economic period may mean two things:

1) They never left the private school during recession
2) All who left during recession to the public schools returned to the private schools after recession.

In the second case, cost factor would have weighed in. In the first case, factors other than cost would have weighed in. How can you decide which one is stronger?
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna Holistic Solutions
http://www.sravnatestprep.com

Holistic and Systematic Approach

e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2680
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

01 Feb 2013, 02:58
SravnaTestPrep wrote:
Something that strengthens the argument should add useful additional knowledge other than what is common sense knowledge. In my opinion choice B offers no useful additional information because if there are private schools some parents would indeed send their children to the private schools and cost is indeed generally a factor. This is common sense knowledge just as the knowledge that public schools charge lower fees.

I think here we are moving in an area where a number of students have doubts. The area is "what is common sense knowledge". Well, I am not going into what is considered common sense in GMAT, generally; however, within the given context option B is certainly not a common sense knowledge.

Just because there are some private schools, would some parents always send their children to them, even if:
- the public education is completely free
-private schools charge substantial fees
-recession is going on

And again option B doesn't only say 'some' children go to private schools, it says "25%" of the children, which means 1 in every 4 children, which is substantial given that public education is free and private schools charge "substantial fees".

Can we consider above information as common sense? I think not.

SravnaTestPrep wrote:
Anyway the fact that 25% of students in recent periods have always attended private schools during strong economic period may mean two things:

1) They never left the private school during recession
2) All who left during recession to the public schools returned to the private schools after recession.

In the second case, cost factor would have weighed in. In the first case, factors other than cost would have weighed in. How can you decide which one is stronger?

I would say a case between these two extremes is more probable i.e. where some students move from private schools to govt. funded schools. You are right that it's hard to support one case over the other. The most probable case would be somewhere in between. This case would strengthen our conclusion - because for more students, more teachers would need to be hired.

Hope this helps.

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Director
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 636
Location: India
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

01 Feb 2013, 06:00
egmat wrote:
SravnaTestPrep wrote:
Something that strengthens the argument should add useful additional knowledge other than what is common sense knowledge. In my opinion choice B offers no useful additional information because if there are private schools some parents would indeed send their children to the private schools and cost is indeed generally a factor. This is common sense knowledge just as the knowledge that public schools charge lower fees.

I think here we are moving in an area where a number of students have doubts. The area is "what is common sense knowledge". Well, I am not going into what is considered common sense in GMAT, generally; however, within the given context option B is certainly not a common sense knowledge.

Just because there are some private schools, would some parents always send their children to them, even if:
- the public education is completely free
-private schools charge substantial fees
-recession is going on

And again option B doesn't only say 'some' children go to private schools, it says "25%" of the children, which means 1 in every 4 children, which is substantial given that public education is free and private schools charge "substantial fees".

Can we consider above information as common sense? I think not.

SravnaTestPrep wrote:
Anyway the fact that 25% of students in recent periods have always attended private schools during strong economic period may mean two things:

1) They never left the private school during recession
2) All who left during recession to the public schools returned to the private schools after recession.

In the second case, cost factor would have weighed in. In the first case, factors other than cost would have weighed in. How can you decide which one is stronger?

I would say a case between these two extremes is more probable i.e. where some students move from private schools to govt. funded schools. You are right that it's hard to support one case over the other. The most probable case would be somewhere in between. This case would strengthen our conclusion - because for more students, more teachers would need to be hired.

Hope this helps.

Thanks,
Chiranjeev

Dear Chiranjeev,

The reality is that parents do send their kids to private schools. We do know that private schools charge substantial fees. Also we are talking about a period when the economy is strong.

Regarding choice B, I mentioned the two scenarios because they fit the information given in that choice that each year about the same percentage of students go to the private schools during a strong economy. You cannot choose something in between because that would not be reflecting the truth given in choice B.

As a matter of fact the first case I mentioned in my previous post would actually weaken the argument.
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna Holistic Solutions
http://www.sravnatestprep.com

Holistic and Systematic Approach

Director
Status: Everyone is a leader. Just stop listening to others.
Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 841
Location: India
GPA: 3.51
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

06 Apr 2014, 11:28
OA is debatable and vulnerable to many assumptions.

We are just assuming that in recession because of financial burden people will move their kids to govt schools... and if I add further one more assumption that most of the poor parents wont be able to afford to send their kids to even govt schools during recession then in that case this student-teacher ratio may come down... overall we are just trying to fit option B in the shoe of OA..
_________________

Piyush K
-----------------------
Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is to try just one more time. ― Thomas A. Edison
Don't forget to press--> Kudos
My Articles: 1. WOULD: when to use? | 2. All GMATPrep RCs (New)
Tip: Before exam a week earlier don't forget to exhaust all gmatprep problems specially for "sentence correction".

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8288
Location: Pune, India
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

07 Apr 2014, 21:43
1
PiyushK wrote:
OA is debatable and vulnerable to many assumptions.

We are just assuming that in recession because of financial burden people will move their kids to govt schools... and if I add further one more assumption that most of the poor parents wont be able to afford to send their kids to even govt schools during recession then in that case this student-teacher ratio may come down... overall we are just trying to fit option B in the shoe of OA..

Not at all! OA is absolutely not debatable because it is an official question and the OA is official. This means it is useless to scorn at the OA. Instead, try to understand the logic they are giving since you will need to use it in GMAT questions.

We are not "assuming" that in recession people will move their kids to govt schools.

Legal requirement introduced just now: All kids have to receive free education in govt schools (irrespective of economy) and student teacher ratio has to be maintained.
It's a legal requirement brought in just now. Chances are that more students (who were not in school before) will enter govt schools since its required now. Even if all kids were already in school, the availability of teaching jobs will probably stay the same and not reduce.

Hence we conclude that: any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools.

Now how do we strengthen it further?

We are saying that currently economy is strong and 25% kids are in private schools which charge high fees. So it is highly unlikely that in recession, more people will shift their wards to private schools which charge high fees. It is far more likely that in recession, even some of these 25% kids might get shifted to free govt schools if parents feel that they are unable to afford the private school. Hence it is unlikely that many students from govt schools will shift to private schools (which are pricey) in time of recession and hence it is unlikely that teaching jobs will reduce.

This further strengthens our conclusion. Note that we don't have to "prove it beyond doubt". We just have to increase the probability.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

GMAT self-study has never been more personalized or more fun. Try ORION Free!

Director
Status: Everyone is a leader. Just stop listening to others.
Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 841
Location: India
GPA: 3.51
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

08 Apr 2014, 00:18
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
PiyushK wrote:
OA is debatable and vulnerable to many assumptions.

We are just assuming that in recession because of financial burden people will move their kids to govt schools... and if I add further one more assumption that most of the poor parents wont be able to afford to send their kids to even govt schools during recession then in that case this student-teacher ratio may come down... overall we are just trying to fit option B in the shoe of OA..

Not at all! OA is absolutely not debatable because it is an official question and the OA is official. This means it is useless to scorn at the OA. Instead, try to understand the logic they are giving since you will need to use it in GMAT questions.

We are not "assuming" that in recession people will move their kids to govt schools.

Legal requirement introduced just now: All kids have to receive free education in govt schools (irrespective of economy) and student teacher ratio has to be maintained.
It's a legal requirement brought in just now. Chances are that more students (who were not in school before) will enter govt schools since its required now. Even if all kids were already in school, the availability of teaching jobs will probably stay the same and not reduce.

Hence we conclude that: any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools.

Now how do we strengthen it further?

We are saying that currently economy is strong and 25% kids are in private schools which charge high fees. So it is highly unlikely that in recession, more people will shift their wards to private schools which charge high fees. It is far more likely that in recession, even some of these 25% kids might get shifted to free govt schools if parents feel that they are unable to afford the private school. Hence it is unlikely that many students from govt schools will shift to private schools (which are pricey) in time of recession and hence it is unlikely that teaching jobs will reduce.

This further strengthens our conclusion. Note that we don't have to "prove it beyond doubt". We just have to increase the probability.

Thanks Karishma. Now I got it. In my previous analysis I didn't consider that "Legal requirement part."
_________________

Piyush K
-----------------------
Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is to try just one more time. ― Thomas A. Edison
Don't forget to press--> Kudos
My Articles: 1. WOULD: when to use? | 2. All GMATPrep RCs (New)
Tip: Before exam a week earlier don't forget to exhaust all gmatprep problems specially for "sentence correction".

Manager
Joined: 28 Apr 2014
Posts: 232

Show Tags

17 Jun 2014, 03:40
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
eybrj2 wrote:
In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic recession because many businesses cut back operations. However, any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools. This is because Vargonia has just introduced a legal requirement that education in government-funded schools be available, free of charge, to all Vargonian children regardless of the state of the economy, and that current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded.

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

A. The current student-teacher ratio at Vargonia’s government-funded schools is higher than it was during the most recent period of economic recession.

B. During recent periods when the Vargonian economy has been strong, almost 25 percent of Vargonian children have attended privately funded schools, many of which charge substantial fees.

C. Nearly 20 percent more teachers are currently employed in Vargonia’s government-funded schools than had been employed in those schools in the period before the last economic recession.

D. Teachers in Vargonia’s government-funded schools are well paid relative to teachers in most privately funded schools in Vargonia, many of which rely heavily on part-time teachers.

E. During the last economic recession in Vargonia, the government permanently closed a number of the schools that it had funded.

Ok, there are a lot of words there so try to paraphrase and make sense of it in the first read itself. This is what the argument is saying:
Conclusion: A recession in the future will not hurt teaching jobs at government-funded schools.Why?
Premises:
1. Education has to be made available to all children in govt schools.
2. Student teacher ratio cannot be increased.

What will strengthen this conclusion?
Something which gives you further evidence that recession will not hurt teaching jobs at govt schools. If student-teacher ratio has to be maintained, what can lead to fewer jobs for teachers? Fewer students. So if we can establish that during recession, the number of students in govt schools will not reduce, we can establish that teaching jobs in govt schools are secure no matter the state of the economy.

(B) tells you that 25% students study in private schools which charge high fees. What do you think could happen in recession? Either nothing happens or people move their kids to govt schools. In either case, govt school teachers have a secure job. (There is actually a possibility of more demand of govt school teachers during recession.) Your argument is strengthened.

(C) tells you that more teachers are currently employed in govt schools than previously. How does it imply that their jobs are secure? If anything, it lends a shade of weakness to the argument, not strength - if there are too many teachers right now, some of them may need to leave during recession. Mind you, I am not saying that it is weakening the argument since there can be very valid reasons for extra teachers now (because education has to be made available to every child and probably the student teacher ratio required the govt schools to hire more teachers etc). Whatever the reasons, it certainly doesn't say that the job of the govt school teachers in future are more secure.

Presuming that education in pvt institute is preferred as compared to Govt institutes
Intern
Joined: 14 Jan 2013
Posts: 5
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

17 Jun 2014, 12:48
eybrj2 wrote:
In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic recession because many businesses cut back operations. However, any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools. This is because Vargonia has just introduced a legal requirement that education in government-funded schools be available, free of charge, to all Vargonian children regardless of the state of the economy, and that current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded.

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

A. The current student-teacher ratio at Vargonia’s government-funded schools is higher than it was during the most recent period of economic recession.

B. During recent periods when the Vargonian economy has been strong, almost 25 percent of Vargonian children have attended privately funded schools, many of which charge substantial fees.

C. Nearly 20 percent more teachers are currently employed in Vargonia’s government-funded schools than had been employed in those schools in the period before the last economic recession.

D. Teachers in Vargonia’s government-funded schools are well paid relative to teachers in most privately funded schools in Vargonia, many of which rely heavily on part-time teachers.

E. During the last economic recession in Vargonia, the government permanently closed a number of the schools that it had funded.

Conclusion: If the economy in Vargonia goes to hell, then you can either be a panhandler or start learning how to become a teacher since those will be the only jobs available.

Details: The mayor of Vargonia took his head out his butt and decided it would be a good idea to offer free education instead of taxing his citizens into indentured servitude. The mayor also decided that since a free education is worthless if it's of terrible quality, he ensured that the new legal requirement enforces student teacher ratio to be not terrible.

A) Who cares? We're talking about the future, and the rates are already going to be set as is due to the requirement.

B) So let me get this straight. If there were 100 kids in Vargonia's school system, Then 25 of these richy richs went to the private system and the rest of the paupers went to the government funded system. But if Vargonia's economy goes to hell, that means everyone essentially becomes paupers. So now we have a city full of paupers and panhandlers.
But hey! wait a second! don't go for the bottle yet! If you're a teacher then that means you have a get out of jail free card! Why? Because the parents of these 25 kids that went to the private system now have the option/privlege to send their rugrats to the prestigious government funded system they chose not to in the first place for the grand total price of zero dollars (thank you new legal requirement!). That means prior, if the ratio of teachers to rugrats at the gov system was set in stone, then adding more kids to the school system will result in having to add more teachers. So not only would teacher availability remain the same, but also new jobs would be created.

C) In other news, my dog had a bowel movement, just as relevant as this answer choice.
All this means is that there will be more competition for teaching jobs when the economy goes to hell because the pay is good enough to stop you from moon lighting.
Also more than anything this could potentially be a weakens statement. If during the last recession they closed schools then it would reduce the student population, and since the student/teacher ratio remains constant, then it wouldn't be far fetched to say that they would have to get rid of the excess teachers to keep the same rate.
Manager
Joined: 04 Apr 2015
Posts: 184
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

11 Oct 2016, 08:35
please tell me where i am thinking wrong
student : teacher ratio = 5 (20 students 4 teacher) in current scenario and the exceed limit is say 6
so at any cost i cannot reduce the denominator so no teaching jobs will be same
no if recession occurs we are at current scenario if there is an influx of students so the ratio will increase so we need to balance the ratio by adding more teachers there by creating more jobs

now option A says we are at highest student ratio then at other times means we are near the limit so its a strengthener
Board of Directors
Status: Stepping into my 10 years long dream
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3672
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

27 Mar 2017, 09:18
oishik2910 wrote:
please tell me where i am thinking wrong
student : teacher ratio = 5 (20 students 4 teacher) in current scenario and the exceed limit is say 6
so at any cost i cannot reduce the denominator so no teaching jobs will be same
no if recession occurs we are at current scenario if there is an influx of students so the ratio will increase so we need to balance the ratio by adding more teachers there by creating more jobs

now option A says we are at highest student ratio then at other times means we are near the limit so its a strengthener

Ok. So you tried to change the requirement. We are given that "As per legal requirement, the current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded. ". It means if it 5 at this moment, it should not increase from 5. So, as per the scenario you have taken, it is actually increasing to 6 from 5, an invalid/contradictory situation.

Now, as per the question if we assume that there will be an increase in the number of students, we must have a corresponding increase in teachers such that the ratio still remains 5.

Hence, option B clearly says that Students are increasing and this statement supports the conclusion that there will be no recession for teaching jobs.

I hope that makes sense.
_________________

My GMAT Story: From V21 to V40
My MBA Journey: My 10 years long MBA Dream
My Secret Hacks: Best way to use GMATClub | Importance of an Error Log!
Verbal Resources: All SC Resources at one place | All CR Resources at one place

GMAT Club Inbuilt Error Log Functionality - View More.
New Visa Forum - Ask all your Visa Related Questions - here.

Find a bug in the new email templates and get rewarded with 2 weeks of GMATClub Tests for free

Senior Manager
Joined: 24 Oct 2016
Posts: 285
Location: India
Schools: IIMB
GMAT 1: 550 Q42 V28
GPA: 3.96
WE: Human Resources (Retail Banking)
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

28 Mar 2017, 23:40
hello expert can you explain , how do we eliminate option D
Board of Directors
Status: Stepping into my 10 years long dream
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3672
In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

28 Mar 2017, 23:53
1
nks2611 wrote:
hello expert can you explain , how do we eliminate option D

Hey nks2611,

Notice that the conclusion says there won't be any recession in the number of teaching jobs. This conclusion is based on two facts:
1. Education in government-funded schools will be available, free of charge
2. current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded.

We need to strengthen this conclusion and state something that proves, there won't be any change/recession keeping our facts intact.

D is incorrect because it talks about the salary structure of Government Jobs and Private jobs for teachers. This statement no where tells us what would happen during the recession. Notice, we should not go with our own assumptions that teachers would be interested in joining government jobs. I would say salary structure makes this point OFS.

I hope that makes sense.
_________________

My GMAT Story: From V21 to V40
My MBA Journey: My 10 years long MBA Dream
My Secret Hacks: Best way to use GMATClub | Importance of an Error Log!
Verbal Resources: All SC Resources at one place | All CR Resources at one place

GMAT Club Inbuilt Error Log Functionality - View More.
New Visa Forum - Ask all your Visa Related Questions - here.

Find a bug in the new email templates and get rewarded with 2 weeks of GMATClub Tests for free

Manager
Joined: 22 Sep 2014
Posts: 66
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

29 Mar 2017, 23:24
the argument is : However, any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools

Premise : Vargonia has just introduced a legal requirement that education in government-funded schools be available, free of charge, to all Vargonian children regardless of the state of the economy, and that current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded.

because of the premise , in order to make the argument valid ,during recession, we just need to have same number of students as before (or more )to have same number of teachers (or more) ...since the ratio of student to teacher will stay same ..so there will be more teaching jobs if the school get more students than before . Choice B makes this possible ..when recession comes ,those 25% of students might need to go back to the funded school...even if not ..we will still have the same number of students and teachers ...logically, at least some of the 25% will go back to funded school . More teachers will be needed at the funded school
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2021
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

03 Apr 2017, 14:05
2
Top Contributor
Nks2611, I agree wholeheartedly with abhimahna here.

If it helps, here's another way of saying the same thing: the conclusion is that "any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools." I'd argue that the higher salaries mentioned in (D) are completely irrelevant to the availability of government teaching jobs -- and as abhimahna mentioned, there's no connection whatsoever to future recessions in (D).

I hope this helps!
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for \$29.99 | Time management on verbal

Manager
Joined: 29 Mar 2015
Posts: 51
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V28
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

01 Jul 2018, 07:27
i marked option C as the answer and rejected option B on the basis that
here we are considering that private school wont reduce the fees in any case but how can we be so sure about that because a person will be ready to reduce the fees rather than having a school with no students
what if private school also reduces their fees in case of recession than kids of the people who are affected wont have to change their school.
kindly guide me where i am wrong, whether i have missed a critical part of the premise
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2021
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

06 Jul 2018, 19:58
2
shubham2312 wrote:
i marked option C as the answer and rejected option B on the basis that
here we are considering that private school wont reduce the fees in any case but how can we be so sure about that because a person will be ready to reduce the fees rather than having a school with no students
what if private school also reduces their fees in case of recession than kids of the people who are affected wont have to change their school.
kindly guide me where i am wrong, whether i have missed a critical part of the premise

True, (B) does not PROVE that children will move from privately-funded schools to government-funded (G-F) schools. It is certainly possible that the private schools will lower their fees to prevent students from leaving.

So what? Even if no students move from private to G-F, that won't change the number of students who are already in G-F schools. Since G-F schools are free and since the G-F schools are not going to exceed current student-teacher ratios, the availability of teaching jobs at G-F schools should not change.

Given (B), one extreme case is that the distribution of students does not change at all. As just described, that would have no impact on availability of teaching jobs at G-F schools. On the other hand, some students might move to G-F, and that would only increase the availability of teaching jobs at G-F schools. Either way, the job availability is not likely to decrease.

Does (B) prove that students will move from private to G-F? No, but that doesn't matter. Does (B) prove that the teaching job availability at G-F schools will not decrease? No -- we could certainly come up with scenarios in which the availability would decrease, even if (B) is true. But we are simply looking for the answer that MOST STRENGTHENS the argument. We don't have to prove anything

_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for \$29.99 | Time management on verbal

Manager
Joined: 11 Mar 2014
Posts: 134
Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic  [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2018, 00:46
Hope your preparation is going well.
Let us try to understand the argument.
To attempt CR questions, one should follow the following steps.
1. Read the question stem- This is important as this gives clarity to understand what the question intends to ask. It is a strengthening question.
2. Work the argument, here the conclusion is any future recessions in Vargonia will not reduce the availability of the teaching jobs.
The premise of the argument is Vargonia has just introduced a legal requirement that education in government-funded schools is available, free of charge, to all Vargonian children regardless of the state of the economy and that current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded.
The correct answer will try to justify the claim that the jobs are not going to reduce in Vargonia. Since the student-teacher ratio should remain intact, jobs can only reduce if the number of students in government schools decreases. Any answer choice which is able to establish that the number of students will not decrease will help to support the claim.
4. The last step is to eliminate the incorrect choices and reach to the right answer.
A. The discussion of previous recession is out of scope.
B. Is the correct answer as per our prediction of what the answer should do.
C. Choice C does not help us to establish the fact that teachers in government schools will not be affected by the recession.
D. This answer choice is out of scope.
E. Again what happened during the last economic recession has nothing to do with this one. This answer choice is also out of scope.
Hope it helps. Consistency is the key to crack the exam.
All the best!!
PythaGURUS Faculty Team
_________________

Our GMAT Program- Creating 750+ Scores
Our MBA Consulting- Top Schools and significant Scholarships
PythaGURUS Education
http://www.pythagurus.in

Re: In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic &nbs [#permalink] 15 Jul 2018, 00:46

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 39 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic

Events & Promotions

 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®.