Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
14 Sep 2021, 11:24
Kudos
Bookmarks
What a beautiful question.
This question is an example of why, in hard CR questions, it is essential to use process of elimination.
In tough Strengthen/Weaken questions, the correct answer is not going to be very convincing -- it may even be a choice we eliminated earlier.
In these situations, it's easier to eliminate four answer choices than to choose the correct answer. Once we eliminate four choices, what remains must be the correct choice.
This question is an example of why, in hard CR questions, it is essential to use process of elimination.
In tough Strengthen/Weaken questions, the correct answer is not going to be very convincing -- it may even be a choice we eliminated earlier.
In these situations, it's easier to eliminate four answer choices than to choose the correct answer. Once we eliminate four choices, what remains must be the correct choice.
13 Feb 2022, 22:29
Kudos
Bookmarks
krndatta
Hi krndatta,
We need to strengthen this: "any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools", so the number of teaching jobs at those schools should either increase or remain the same. Further, we're told that current student-teacher ratios at government-funded schools can't be exceeded (this is a a legal requirement).
1. If the number of students decreases, the ratio will decrease. Government-funded schools could fire some teachers to get back to the same ratio, but, for all we know, they could also end up hiring more teachers. This is because there's no legal requirement to stay at the previous ratio. That is, government-funded schools are not legally required to reduce the number of teachers.
2. But if the number of students increases, government-funded schools are legally required to increase the number of teachers, which will increase the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools.
3. If the number of students remains the same, we expect either an increase or no change in the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools. Again, this is because there's no legal restriction against reducing the ratio. All we know is that the current ratio can't be (legally) exceeded.
Effectively, the question tells us that there's no legal requirement to reduce the number of teachers at government-funded schools, but there is a legal requirement to increase the number of teachers at government-funded schools if the number of students at government-funded schools goes up. Option B tells us "almost 25 percent of Vargonian children have attended privately funded schools, many of which charge substantial fees" when the economy was strong (and therefore not in a recession). We know from the question that jobs are harder to get during recessions and that government-funded schools are now free, so we have some reason to think that some children may move from privately funded schools to government-funded schools, especially during future recessions. This would be situation (2). Even if no children switch, that's situation (3).
The only "fail case" with option B is the unlikely scenario where students make the opposite switch AND government-funded schools do something about the ratio. That is, students move from (now free) government-funded schools to (possibly expensive) privately funded schools (this is completely unexpected) AND government-funded schools decide to reduce the number of teachers even though they aren't legally required to do so.
