Last visit was: 20 Nov 2025, 08:04 It is currently 20 Nov 2025, 08:04
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
 1   2   
655-705 Level|   Weaken|      
User avatar
suyashjhawar
User avatar
Joined: 18 Feb 2008
Last visit: 04 Jun 2013
Posts: 325
Own Kudos:
265
 [20]
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Kolkata
Posts: 325
Kudos: 265
 [20]
Many high schools send students to special courses to 16 Sep 2010, 11:17
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
17
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
00:00
Start Timer
Pause Timer
Resume Timer
Show Answer
Hide
Show
History
A
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:

66% (02:02) correct 34% (02:09) wrong based on 1705 sessions

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Many high schools send students to special courses to prepare them for language exams. Some language teachers criticize these courses and point out that high schools which do not send their students to special courses have reported a higher average score than those which do since 1995. The language teachers say that the courses are a waste of time and money.

Which of the following, if true, is the MOST effective challenge to this argument.

A) Those schools which do not send students to the courses have better knowledge of the exams since they are the only schools which participated in the exams prior to 1995.

b) Schools that have sent students to the courses since 1995 have experienced a greater drop in their scores than they had prior to 1995.

c) The cost of these courses run by outside teachers has risen dramatically since 1995.

d) The poor design of courses to prepare students for the language exams is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.

e) Since 1995, the number of students who passed the language exams has risen by twenty percent.
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
A
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 20 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
77,005
 [9]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 77,005
 [9]
Many high schools send students to special courses to Updated on: 05 Oct 2022, 23:00
Originally posted by KarishmaB on 15 Nov 2012, 19:54.
Last edited by KarishmaB on 05 Oct 2022, 23:00, edited 1 time in total.
6
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Vineetk
Many high schools send students to special courses to prepare them for language exams. Some language teachers criticize these courses and point out that high schools which do not send their students to special courses have reported a higher average score than those which do since 1995. The language teachers say that the courses are a waste of time and money.

Which of the following, if true, is the most effective challenge to this argument?

A. Those schools which do not send students to the courses have better knowledge of the exams since they are the only schools which participated in the exams prior to 1995.
B. Schools that have sent students to courses since 1995 have experienced a greater drop in their scores than they had prior to 1995.
C. The cost of these courses run by outside teachers has risen dramatically since 1995.
D. The poor design of courses to prepare students for the language exams is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.
E. Since 1995, the number of students who passed the language exams has risen by 20%.

Please explain your answer.
Show more

Conclusion: Language courses are a waste of time and money.

Weaken the conclusion.

A - Some schools do not send students to language courses. They have better knowledge of the exam since they have been participating for a long time. Some schools send students to language courses. They do not have as much knowledge since they have not been participating for long. Hence language courses for these schools may not be a waste of time and money.

The only confusion could be with E. Notice that E talks about the 'number of students' who passed. The total number of students appearing for the test could have increased which would have increased the number of students who passed even if the passing rates remained the same. Until and unless we have some more numbers, we cannot say that E weakens the conclusion.
General Discussion
User avatar
ezhilkumarank
User avatar
Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Last visit: 08 May 2014
Posts: 271
Own Kudos:
748
 [1]
Given Kudos: 50
Status:Time to step up the tempo
Location: Milky way
Concentration: International Business, Marketing
Schools:ISB, Tepper - CMU, Chicago Booth, LSB
Posts: 271
Kudos: 748
 [1]
Many high schools send students to special courses to 16 Sep 2010, 19:43
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
suyashjhawar
Many high schools send students to special courses to prepare them for language exams. Some language teachers criticize these courses and point out that high schools which do not send their students to special courses have reported a higher average score than those which do since 1995. The language teachers say that the courses are a waste of time and money.

Which of the following, if true, is the MOST effective challenge to this argument.

A ) Those schools which do not send students to the courses have better knowledge of the exams since they are the only schools which participated in the exams prior to 1995.
b) Schools that have sent students to the courses since 1995 have experienced a greater drop in their scores than they had prior to 1995.
c) The cost of these courses run by outside teachers has risen dramatically since 1995.
d) The poor design of courses to prepare students for the language exams is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.
e) Since 1995, the number of students who passed the language exams has risen by twenty percent.
Show more

I am confused with the OA given here.

Option A - Seems to corroborate with the argument.
Option B - Corroborates with the argument.
Option C - Irrelevant.
Option D - Irrelevant.

Option E - Although it is not very convincing, it is the best bet of all the options.

Any other thoughts???
User avatar
siyer
User avatar
Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Last visit: 18 Oct 2017
Posts: 112
Own Kudos:
194
 [3]
Given Kudos: 25
Posts: 112
Kudos: 194
 [3]
Many high schools send students to special courses to 16 Sep 2010, 20:17
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
We need to find a fact which would weaken the language teachers argument that the courses are a waste of time and money.

b) Schools that have sent students to the courses since 1995 have experienced a greater drop in their scores than they had prior to 1995.
c) The cost of these courses run by outside teachers has risen dramatically since 1995.
d) The poor design of courses to prepare students for the language exams is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.
These do not weaken the argument.

e) Since 1995, the number of students who passed the language exams has risen by twenty percent.
This does not explicitly mention that the increase in passing was due to the special courses.

A ) Those schools which do not send students to the courses have better knowledge of the exams since they are the only schools which participated in the exams prior to 1995.
Since the schools which do not send students to special courses were the only ones who participated in the exams prior to 1995 they had better knowledge of the exams and hence had a higher average score. This weakens the argument. So A is the correct answer.
User avatar
ezhilkumarank
User avatar
Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Last visit: 08 May 2014
Posts: 271
Own Kudos:
748
Given Kudos: 50
Status:Time to step up the tempo
Location: Milky way
Concentration: International Business, Marketing
Schools:ISB, Tepper - CMU, Chicago Booth, LSB
Posts: 271
Kudos: 748
Many high schools send students to special courses to 16 Sep 2010, 20:49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
siyer
We need to find a fact which would weaken the language teachers argument that the courses are a waste of time and money.

b) Schools that have sent students to the courses since 1995 have experienced a greater drop in their scores than they had prior to 1995.
c) The cost of these courses run by outside teachers has risen dramatically since 1995.
d) The poor design of courses to prepare students for the language exams is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.
These do not weaken the argument.

e) Since 1995, the number of students who passed the language exams has risen by twenty percent.
This does not explicitly mention that the increase in passing was due to the special courses.

A ) Those schools which do not send students to the courses have better knowledge of the exams since they are the only schools which participated in the exams prior to 1995.
Since the schools which do not send students to special courses were the only ones who participated in the exams prior to 1995 they had better knowledge of the exams and hence had a higher average score. This weakens the argument. So A is the correct answer.
Show more

I am still confused. :? Help me understand this clearly.

The argument notes that a) language courses are a waste of time. b) high schools which do not send their students to special courses have reported a higher average score than those which do [highlight]since 1995[/highlight]. The highlighted text - [highlight]since 1995[/highlight] means on or after 1995.

Now option A talks of prior to 1995 and also talks of students not attending the courses but still having better knowledge of the exams thus supporting the argument that the courses are a waste of time. Isn't option A just supporting whatever is presented in the stimulus???
User avatar
siyer
User avatar
Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Last visit: 18 Oct 2017
Posts: 112
Own Kudos:
194
Given Kudos: 25
Posts: 112
Kudos: 194
Many high schools send students to special courses to 16 Sep 2010, 23:58
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
The argument notes that a) language courses are a waste of time. b) high schools which do not send their students to special courses have reported a higher average score than those which do since 1995. The highlighted text - since 1995 means on or after 1995.

Now option A talks of prior to 1995 and also talks of students not attending the courses but still having better knowledge of the exams thus supporting the argument that the courses are a waste of time. Isn't option A just supporting whatever is presented in the stimulus???
Show more

The students who do not attend the special courses are in the schools who have prior knowledge of the exams. So the schools help them with their exams whereas students from the other schools do not have that advantage and hence attend special courses.

So the special courses would be a waste of time only for the students of those schools who had participated in the exams prior to 1995. For the students of other schools, it would not be a waste of time.
User avatar
Dreamy
User avatar
Joined: 30 Jun 2010
Last visit: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 262
Own Kudos:
31
 [1]
Given Kudos: 6
Status:Upset about the verbal score - SC, CR and RC are going to be my friend
Posts: 262
Kudos: 31
 [1]
Many high schools send students to special courses to 17 Sep 2010, 06:55
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ezhilkumarank
siyer
We need to find a fact which would weaken the language teachers argument that the courses are a waste of time and money.

b) Schools that have sent students to the courses since 1995 have experienced a greater drop in their scores than they had prior to 1995.
c) The cost of these courses run by outside teachers has risen dramatically since 1995.
d) The poor design of courses to prepare students for the language exams is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.
These do not weaken the argument.

e) Since 1995, the number of students who passed the language exams has risen by twenty percent.
This does not explicitly mention that the increase in passing was due to the special courses.

A ) Those schools which do not send students to the courses have better knowledge of the exams since they are the only schools which participated in the exams prior to 1995.
Since the schools which do not send students to special courses were the only ones who participated in the exams prior to 1995 they had better knowledge of the exams and hence had a higher average score. This weakens the argument. So A is the correct answer.

I am still confused. :? Help me understand this clearly.

The argument notes that a) language courses are a waste of time. b) high schools which do not send their students to special courses have reported a higher average score than those which do [highlight]since 1995[/highlight]. The highlighted text - [highlight]since 1995[/highlight] means on or after 1995.

Now option A talks of prior to 1995 and also talks of students not attending the courses but still having better knowledge of the exams thus supporting the argument that the courses are a waste of time. Isn't option A just supporting whatever is presented in the stimulus???
Show more

A for me too.

This answer weakens by saying the schools, which did not send students for special courses already has knowledge on the exam to prepare the students well.
avatar
gsothee
avatar
Joined: 04 May 2010
Last visit: 05 Sep 2013
Posts: 22
Own Kudos:
32
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2
Affiliations: NCC,SAE,YHIA
Location: Mumbai , India
Concentration: International Business
GPA: -
WE 1: 3 years international sales & mktg-projects
Schools: Desautels '15 (S)
Posts: 22
Kudos: 32
 [1]
Many high schools send students to special courses to 19 Sep 2010, 00:55
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
In this weaken question we have to contest the conclusion that special courses are waste of time and money.

Option that provides information about the benefits of the course is winner.

A ) Those schools which do not send students to the courses have better knowledge of the exams since they are the only schools which participated in the exams prior to 1995.

Hence the schools who report better scores without sending the students to special courses had benefited from the courses earlier, therefore other schools that are sending the students to the special courses now will benefit from the courses.
User avatar
geturdream
User avatar
Joined: 22 Aug 2008
Last visit: 04 Nov 2011
Posts: 86
Own Kudos:
190
Given Kudos: 11
Posts: 86
Kudos: 190
Many high schools send students to special courses to 27 Sep 2010, 03:13
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
had to go with A as other options do not weaken the argument at all.
A talks about before 1995 when the schools which do not send the students to the courses are the only one which participated in the exams, but it does not have any reference to post 1995

But the other options are irrelevant. So picked A
User avatar
Vineetk
User avatar
AGSM Thread Master
Joined: 19 Jul 2012
Last visit: 27 Apr 2022
Posts: 113
Own Kudos:
799
 [2]
Given Kudos: 30
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, International Business
Schools: Tuck '16 NUS AGSM Ivey Goizueta '14 Kelley '14 UBC
GMAT 1: 630 Q49 V28
GPA: 3.3
Schools: Tuck '16 NUS AGSM Ivey Goizueta '14 Kelley '14 UBC
GMAT 1: 630 Q49 V28
Posts: 113
Kudos: 799
 [2]
Many high schools send students to special courses to 14 Nov 2012, 06:12
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Many high schools send students to special courses to prepare them for language exams. Some language teachers criticize these courses and point out that high schools which do not send their students to special courses have reported a higher average score than those which do since 1995. The language teachers say that the courses are a waste of time and money.

Which of the following, if true, is the most effective challenge to this argument?

A. Those schools which do not send students to the courses have better knowledge of the exams since they are the only schools which participated in the exams prior to 1995.
B. Schools that have sent students to courses since 1995 have experienced a greater drop in their scores than they had prior to 1995.
C. The cost of these courses run by outside teachers has risen dramatically since 1995.
D. The poor design of courses to prepare students for the language exams is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.
E. Since 1995, the number of students who passed the language exams has risen by 20%.

Please explain your answer.
User avatar
Vips0000
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Last visit: 02 Feb 2016
Posts: 521
Own Kudos:
1,291
 [1]
Given Kudos: 23
Status:Done with formalities.. and back..
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: Olin - Wash U - Class of 2015
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Olin - Wash U - Class of 2015
Posts: 521
Kudos: 1,291
 [1]
Many high schools send students to special courses to 14 Nov 2012, 08:18
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Vineetk
Many high schools send students to special courses to prepare them for language exams. Some language teachers criticize these courses and point out that high schools which do not send their students to special courses have reported a higher average score than those which do since 1995. The language teachers say that the courses are a waste of time and money.

Which of the following, if true, is the most effective challenge to this argument?

A. Those schools which do not send students to the courses have better knowledge of the exams since they are the only schools which participated in the exams prior to 1995.
B. Schools that have sent students to courses since 1995 have experienced a greater drop in their scores than they had prior to 1995.
C. The cost of these courses run by outside teachers has risen dramatically since 1995.
D. The poor design of courses to prepare students for the language exams is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.
E. Since 1995, the number of students who passed the language exams has risen by 20%.

Please explain your answer.
Show more
Basically we want an answer choice that weakens the argument. Only option A is the contender. If a school has better knowledge of exam or expertise in the particular area, it doesnt need to send its students to language school and also would be able to better provide the education. Thus the results. However, other schools still need to send students for such courses

Ans A it is.
User avatar
ankur1901
User avatar
Joined: 23 May 2013
Last visit: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 74
Own Kudos:
289
Given Kudos: 109
Posts: 74
Kudos: 289
Many high schools send students to special courses to 06 Nov 2013, 06:37
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasPrepKarishma
Vineetk
Many high schools send students to special courses to prepare them for language exams. Some language teachers criticize these courses and point out that high schools which do not send their students to special courses have reported a higher average score than those which do since 1995. The language teachers say that the courses are a waste of time and money.

Which of the following, if true, is the most effective challenge to this argument?

A. Those schools which do not send students to the courses have better knowledge of the exams since they are the only schools which participated in the exams prior to 1995.
B. Schools that have sent students to courses since 1995 have experienced a greater drop in their scores than they had prior to 1995.
C. The cost of these courses run by outside teachers has risen dramatically since 1995.
D. The poor design of courses to prepare students for the language exams is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.
E. Since 1995, the number of students who passed the language exams has risen by 20%.

Please explain your answer.

Conclusion: Language courses are a waste of time and money.

Weaken the conclusion.

A - Some schools do not send students to language courses. They have better knowledge of the exam since they have been participating for a long time. Some schools send students to language courses. They do not have as much knowledge since they have not been participating for long. Hence language courses for these schools may not be a waste of time and money.

The only confusion could be with E. Notice that E talks about the 'number of students' who passed. The total number of students appearing for the test could have increased which would have increased the number of students who passed even if the passing rates remained the same. Until and unless we have some more numbers, we cannot say that E weakens the conclusion.

For more, check out this strengthen/weaken video: an-architect-s-look-at-critical-reasoning-by-veritas-prep-142434.html#p1143539
Show more

Sorry i am still not clear as to why is E incorrect. Why do you say that it talks about number? It says that number of students increased by 20%. so if usually there were 100 students passing the exam after 1995 after attending the language course the pass % increased to 120. Its still % and not absolute numbers.
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 20 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
77,005
 [3]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 77,005
 [3]
Many high schools send students to special courses to 06 Nov 2013, 07:10
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ankur1901
VeritasPrepKarishma
Vineetk
Many high schools send students to special courses to prepare them for language exams. Some language teachers criticize these courses and point out that high schools which do not send their students to special courses have reported a higher average score than those which do since 1995. The language teachers say that the courses are a waste of time and money.

Which of the following, if true, is the most effective challenge to this argument?

A. Those schools which do not send students to the courses have better knowledge of the exams since they are the only schools which participated in the exams prior to 1995.
B. Schools that have sent students to courses since 1995 have experienced a greater drop in their scores than they had prior to 1995.
C. The cost of these courses run by outside teachers has risen dramatically since 1995.
D. The poor design of courses to prepare students for the language exams is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.
E. Since 1995, the number of students who passed the language exams has risen by 20%.

Please explain your answer.

Conclusion: Language courses are a waste of time and money.

Weaken the conclusion.

A - Some schools do not send students to language courses. They have better knowledge of the exam since they have been participating for a long time. Some schools send students to language courses. They do not have as much knowledge since they have not been participating for long. Hence language courses for these schools may not be a waste of time and money.

The only confusion could be with E. Notice that E talks about the 'number of students' who passed. The total number of students appearing for the test could have increased which would have increased the number of students who passed even if the passing rates remained the same. Until and unless we have some more numbers, we cannot say that E weakens the conclusion.

For more, check out this strengthen/weaken video: an-architect-s-look-at-critical-reasoning-by-veritas-prep-142434.html#p1143539

Sorry i am still not clear as to why is E incorrect. Why do you say that it talks about number? It says that number of students increased by 20%. so if usually there were 100 students passing the exam after 1995 after attending the language course the pass % increased to 120. Its still % and not absolute numbers.
Show more

(E) says that "the number of students who passed the language exams has risen by 20%". The number of students who passed implies nothing about number of students who appeared since we don't know how the passing rates have changed.
Say prior to 1995, 200 students used to appear for the exam and 50% i.e. 100 used to pass. Now say 240 appear and still 50% i.e. 120 pass. The 'number of students who passed' has increased from 100 to 120 (i.e. by 20%) but that doesn't imply that students are performing better now. They are performing the same as before since the pass percentage is the same (in very restricted terms).
User avatar
Sidhrt
User avatar
Joined: 09 Nov 2013
Last visit: 12 Sep 2022
Posts: 48
Own Kudos:
33
Given Kudos: 32
Posts: 48
Kudos: 33
Many high schools send students to special courses to 01 Dec 2013, 08:59
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi Ankur1901

you right, Well the conclusion is whether the language course is waste of time and money or not.And option A only affects the premise" --that high schools which do not send their students to special courses have reported a higher average score than those which do since 1995--" without affecting the conclusion.

how people who support option B will prove that that the course is waste of time for another school ( in fact for all other schools as the tone of conclusion says). Moreover, the question is about language exam score ( which E clearly indicates) not overall score.Hence E suits better.


Even if , E says that the 20% rise is due to increase in number of students then in itself it infers that more people are joining this course.
thanks
Sid
User avatar
mvictor
User avatar
Board of Directors
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Last visit: 14 Jul 2021
Posts: 2,124
Own Kudos:
1,263
Given Kudos: 236
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: Stanford '20 (WD)
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.92
WE:General Management (Transportation)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Stanford '20 (WD)
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
Posts: 2,124
Kudos: 1,263
Many high schools send students to special courses to 08 Jan 2016, 19:58
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
picked E, because the argument says MANY. nevertheless, many might be a small portion overall. Thus, the only one that actually works is A. if schools who do not send, know better the exam, the teachers of these school know better how to prepare the students.
avatar
gmatser1
avatar
Joined: 07 Feb 2015
Last visit: 16 Jan 2016
Posts: 45
Own Kudos:
85
Given Kudos: 28
Posts: 45
Kudos: 85
Many high schools send students to special courses to 09 Jan 2016, 07:17
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I originally thought E, read A again, got lazy and picked E.

Don't get lazy! When you've narrowed it down take the 30 more seconds to really refine your answer!
User avatar
chesstitans
User avatar
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Last visit: 20 Nov 2019
Posts: 987
Own Kudos:
1,923
Given Kudos: 2,562
Location: United States
Schools: Stanford '19 Carroll '19 LBS '19
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
Schools: Stanford '19 Carroll '19 LBS '19
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
Posts: 987
Kudos: 1,923
Many high schools send students to special courses to 28 Jun 2017, 01:37
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
E is wrong because we know nothing about the comparison between 2 types of school.
User avatar
arvind910619
User avatar
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Last visit: 18 Oct 2024
Posts: 845
Own Kudos:
607
Given Kudos: 755
Status:Learning
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE:Engineering (Manufacturing)
Products:
My Reviews
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: Q157 V157
Posts: 845
Kudos: 607
Many high schools send students to special courses to 28 Jun 2017, 02:00
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Imo A
The argument can be understood by taking sets A and B
A =does not send students to prepare
B=Send students to prepare
Those schools which do not send students to the courses have better knowledge of the exams since they are the only schools which participated in the exams prior to 1995.
If A does not send its students outside to prepare for the exam ,it does not mean that the quality of the program is not good .
Because there are other colleges which might use it for good .
User avatar
TheGriffin
User avatar
Joined: 28 Dec 2016
Last visit: 29 Jan 2024
Posts: 93
Own Kudos:
28
 [1]
Given Kudos: 56
Schools: Rotman '24
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GMAT 2: 600 Q46 V25
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Rotman '24
GMAT 2: 600 Q46 V25
Posts: 93
Kudos: 28
 [1]
Many high schools send students to special courses to 10 Jun 2023, 15:15
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB
Vineetk
Many high schools send students to special courses to prepare them for language exams. Some language teachers criticize these courses and point out that high schools which do not send their students to special courses have reported a higher average score than those which do since 1995. The language teachers say that the courses are a waste of time and money.

Which of the following, if true, is the most effective challenge to this argument?

A. Those schools which do not send students to the courses have better knowledge of the exams since they are the only schools which participated in the exams prior to 1995.
B. Schools that have sent students to courses since 1995 have experienced a greater drop in their scores than they had prior to 1995.
C. The cost of these courses run by outside teachers has risen dramatically since 1995.
D. The poor design of courses to prepare students for the language exams is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.
E. Since 1995, the number of students who passed the language exams has risen by 20%.

Please explain your answer.

Conclusion: Language courses are a waste of time and money.

Weaken the conclusion.

A - Some schools do not send students to language courses. They have better knowledge of the exam since they have been participating for a long time. Some schools send students to language courses. They do not have as much knowledge since they have not been participating for long. Hence language courses for these schools may not be a waste of time and money.

The only confusion could be with E. Notice that E talks about the 'number of students' who passed. The total number of students appearing for the test could have increased which would have increased the number of students who passed even if the passing rates remained the same. Until and unless we have some more numbers, we cannot say that E weakens the conclusion.
Show more


also KarishmaB we don't know -these students belong to which school, one which sent them to language courses or the one which does not send them .
User avatar
Jayraj10110
User avatar
Joined: 27 May 2024
Last visit: 26 Oct 2025
Posts: 2
Given Kudos: 62
Posts: 2
Kudos: 0
Many high schools send students to special courses to 25 Jun 2024, 23:29
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
E is not an option because it talks about increase in % of students passed and it could consist of students who did not opt for external courses as if you carefully read the argument it states that many schools send their students to coaching and not all so some them might study from the school itself. therefore it does not imply anything as to whether the increase is due to the courses only.

correct me if i am wrong :)
 1   2   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
189 posts