Forum Home > GMAT > Quantitative > Problem Solving (PS)
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.
Dec 1310:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Have you ever wondered how to score a PERFECT 805 on the GMAT? Meet Julia, a banking professional who used the Target Test Prep course to achieve this incredible feat. Julia's story is nothing short of an inspiration.
Dec 1410:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Think a 100% GMAT Verbal score is out of your reach? Target Test Prep will make you think again! Our course uses techniques such as topical study and spaced repetition to maximize knowledge retention and make studying simple and fun.
Dec 1411:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to learn how to Deconstruct arguments, Pre-Think Author’s Assumptions, and apply Negation Test.- Dec 15
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. 
Dec 1608:00 AM PST
-11:59 PM PST
GMAT Club 12 Days of Christmas is a 4th Annual GMAT Club Winter Competition based on solving questions. This is the Winter GMAT competition on GMAT Club with an amazing opportunity to win over $40,000 worth of prizes!- Dec 17
09:00 AM PST
-10:00 AM PST
Join Manhattan Prep instructor Whitney Garner for a fun—and thorough—review of logic-based (non-math) problems, with a particular emphasis on Data Sufficiency and Two-Parts. - Dec 18
10:00 AM PST
-11:00 AM PST
Here is the essential guide to securing scholarships as an MBA student! In this video, we explore the various types of scholarships available, including need-based and merit-based options.
kvazar
Joined: 13 May 2011
Last visit: 28 Dec 2018
Posts: 170
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 93
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Schools: Kellogg '18 (A) Booth '18 (M$) Stanford '18 (D) Wharton '18 (D) Haas '18 (D) Duke '18 (WD) Tuck '18 (A) Sloan '18 (D) Anderson '18 (A)
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.2
WE:Accounting (Consulting)
Products:
Schools: Kellogg '18 (A) Booth '18 (M$) Stanford '18 (D) Wharton '18 (D) Haas '18 (D) Duke '18 (WD) Tuck '18 (A) Sloan '18 (D) Anderson '18 (A)
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
Posts: 170
Kudos:
180
15 Jun 2015, 04:56
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
60% (02:02) correct
40%
(02:07)
wrong
based on 740
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
The question is from Kaplan CAT, avoid if you didn't finish them all.
In response to concerns that professors at many prestigious universities spend too much time publishing and not enough time educating their students, some of these schools are propagating rules that set strict limits on the amount of material that a full-time professor may publish over a certain time period. This policy will come back to haunt these schools because, faced with the loss of any outside income, many excellent prospective candidates will opt not to accept fulltime positions, which will lead to a shortage of qualified full-time professors.
The author's conclusion logically depends on which of the following?
The reason I decided to post this is because:
In response to concerns that professors at many prestigious universities spend too much time publishing and not enough time educating their students, some of these schools are propagating rules that set strict limits on the amount of material that a full-time professor may publish over a certain time period. This policy will come back to haunt these schools because, faced with the loss of any outside income, many excellent prospective candidates will opt not to accept fulltime positions, which will lead to a shortage of qualified full-time professors.
The author's conclusion logically depends on which of the following?
- A Universities generally receive a large percentage of the royalties from works published by their full-time professors.
B Most professors do not allow their outside work to infringe on time that should be spent on classroom preparation and teaching.
C Restrictions on outside publishing do not apply to part-time or adjunct professors.
D Publishing is the significant source of outside income for full-time professors.
E All professors at prestigious universities currently publish more material than is permitted under the new rules.
The reason I decided to post this is because:
OA is D, but "SIGNIFICANT" in D and "ANY" in question stem do not match. Even if publishing is not significant source of outside income, professors will still opt not to accept fulltime positions because the loss of ANY outside income will affect them, even if it was insignificant in the first place. Please advise
vishwaprakash
Queens MBA Thread Master
Joined: 24 Oct 2012
Last visit: 22 Aug 2017
Posts: 141
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 45
Concentration: Leadership, General Management
Schools: Rotman '18 (WL) ISB '17
15 Jun 2015, 05:59
Kudos
Bookmarks
Publication -> Less time for teaching
Hence restrict number of publication,
Restriction -> Les income -> less professor
Possible assumption (Pre thinking)
1. Publication has major share in so called outside income.
A Universities generally receive a large percentage of the royalties from works published by their full-time professors.
Analysis : It talks about universities earning, not professor. It does not matter to professor how much uni earns, Hence Out of scope.
B Most professors do not allow their outside work to infringe on time that should be spent on classroom preparation and teaching.
Analysis : This does not seems to support argument at all. Basis of argument is, Outside work results into less time. This talks entirely opposite.
Wrong option
C Restrictions on outside publishing do not apply to part-time or adjunct professors.
Analysis : It talks about partimers not full time professor. Argument is mainly concerned about full time positions. Can be marked out of scope.
D Publishing is the significant source of outside income for full-time professors.
Analysis : Matches Pre thought assumption : Let's negate, "Publishing is not the significant" Hence restriction won't be big demotivating factor for full time position. Breaks the argument.
E All professors at prestigious universities currently publish more material than is permitted under the new rules.
Analysis : Fact, nice to know. It may happen that not all professor publish more than permitted but 99% publish more than permitted. So negation does not break my argument. Hence cannot be correct.
Answer : Option D
Hence restrict number of publication,
Restriction -> Les income -> less professor
Possible assumption (Pre thinking)
1. Publication has major share in so called outside income.
A Universities generally receive a large percentage of the royalties from works published by their full-time professors.
Analysis : It talks about universities earning, not professor. It does not matter to professor how much uni earns, Hence Out of scope.
B Most professors do not allow their outside work to infringe on time that should be spent on classroom preparation and teaching.
Analysis : This does not seems to support argument at all. Basis of argument is, Outside work results into less time. This talks entirely opposite.
Wrong option
C Restrictions on outside publishing do not apply to part-time or adjunct professors.
Analysis : It talks about partimers not full time professor. Argument is mainly concerned about full time positions. Can be marked out of scope.
D Publishing is the significant source of outside income for full-time professors.
Analysis : Matches Pre thought assumption : Let's negate, "Publishing is not the significant" Hence restriction won't be big demotivating factor for full time position. Breaks the argument.
E All professors at prestigious universities currently publish more material than is permitted under the new rules.
Analysis : Fact, nice to know. It may happen that not all professor publish more than permitted but 99% publish more than permitted. So negation does not break my argument. Hence cannot be correct.
Answer : Option D
25 Aug 2015, 08:23
Kudos
Bookmarks
professors at many prestigious universities spend too much time publishing and not enough time educating their students
Assumption1 of school: If the professors are told to reduce the amount of publishing material, then they will spend enough time for student education.
Assumption2 of school: The professors may not go against the schools.
Therefore for action, some schools are propagating rules to set strict limits on the amount of material that a full-time professor may publish over a certain time period.
But this policy will harm these schools because,
professors will lose the outside income and refuse to accept full-time positions.
(The Income is so high that they reject their full time jobs. Otherwise it wont make sense.)
This action will lead to a shortage of qualified full-time professors as university will lose good professors.
The author's conclusion logically depends on which of the following?
Now coming to you, vishwaprakash
Yes, you are right. But if the any income is not big enough, will they lose their jobs of prestigious school salaries. If they are not bothered about money and focused on their research and publishing , then that will weaken the conclusion.
I hope this helps
Assumption1 of school: If the professors are told to reduce the amount of publishing material, then they will spend enough time for student education.
Assumption2 of school: The professors may not go against the schools.
Therefore for action, some schools are propagating rules to set strict limits on the amount of material that a full-time professor may publish over a certain time period.
But this policy will harm these schools because,
professors will lose the outside income and refuse to accept full-time positions.
(The Income is so high that they reject their full time jobs. Otherwise it wont make sense.)
This action will lead to a shortage of qualified full-time professors as university will lose good professors.
The author's conclusion logically depends on which of the following?
- A Universities generally receive a large percentage of the royalties from works published by their full-time professors.
Even whether universities will or will not receive, they can still imply the restriction for the sake of reputation of school and professors may or may not quit. This gives no info that can be assumed.)
B Most professors do not allow their outside work to infringe on time that should be spent on classroom preparation and teaching. This is opposite of conclusion.
C Restrictions on outside publishing do not apply to part-time or adjunct professors.(Out of scope. I selected this answer both the times I have gone through it. But now I realize that professors refuse to accept full-time positions and Nowhere he says that if they don't accept full time then they will accept part time jobs.)
D Publishing is the significant source of outside income for full-time professors.
(This is inline with our reasoning above and is the reason professors are ready to even leave the jobs for publishing their work.)
E All professors at prestigious universities currently publish more material than is permitted under the new rules.
Now coming to you, vishwaprakash
Quote:
The reason I decided to post this is because:
OA is D, but "SIGNIFICANT" in D and "ANY" in question stem do not match. Even if publishing is not significant source of outside income, professors will still opt not to accept full-time positions because the loss of ANY outside income will affect them, even if it was insignificant in the first place. Please advise.
OA is D, but "SIGNIFICANT" in D and "ANY" in question stem do not match. Even if publishing is not significant source of outside income, professors will still opt not to accept full-time positions because the loss of ANY outside income will affect them, even if it was insignificant in the first place. Please advise.
Yes, you are right. But if the any income is not big enough, will they lose their jobs of prestigious school salaries. If they are not bothered about money and focused on their research and publishing , then that will weaken the conclusion.
I hope this helps
