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

 It is currently 19 Oct 2018, 00:03

### 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

# Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2010
Posts: 73

### Show Tags

10 Aug 2010, 15:04
7
7
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

56% (01:45) correct 44% (01:48) wrong based on 850 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves with a variety of odd jobs that have little or nothing to do with the graduates’ artistic training. This has led to major doubts regarding how well the art schools are preparing their students for careers in art.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the author’s criticism of art schools?

A: The curricula of most art schools tend to reflect the needs of the art world.

B: There are some graduates of art schools who go on to careers within the art world.

C: The purpose of an art school education is to ensure that students will be able to secure jobs in their fields.

D: People who intend to earn their livings in the field of art choose to go to art school to increase the quality of their work.

E: Students attend art schools with the intention of earning their livings in the art field.

I'm still having problems with these if true questions. What's wrong with E? Is there a good shortcut to get them right like the negation test for assumptions?

THX!
Intern
Joined: 28 Apr 2010
Posts: 6
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Aug 2010, 18:29
You're looking for the statement, that if true would prove how poorly the schools are doing to prepare their students for careers in art.

A - The curricula reflects the needs of the art world.. doesn't really say anything about preparing students for a job and doesn't really prove much.

B - Some graduates have careers in the art world.. This actually disproves the article so this one isn't a good answer.

C - Purpose is to ensure that students will secure jobs.. If the purpose of the school is to allow students to secure a job in their field and the schools are doing a poor job of it, then this would be a fairly strong statement proving the author's criticism.

D - Go to school to increase quality of their work.. This statement doesn't really prove the schools are doing a poor job when the quality of work is subjective in itself and doesn't really have a bearing on getting jobs.

E - Students attend to earn a living.. This is a possible answer but it doesn't really prove the schools are doing a bad job because it doesn't state the purpose of the school, only their students. If the article said the students were doing a bad job with their careers this would be a good statement.

My analysis of the 5 answers with C being the correct one. Hope this helps.
Senior Manager
Status: Fighting on
Joined: 14 Mar 2010
Posts: 293
WE 1: SE - 1
WE 2: Engineer - 3
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Aug 2010, 18:52
A: The curricula of most art schools tend to reflect the needs of the art world.
<has not impact on the question>
B:There are some graduates of art schools who go on to careers within the art world.
<kind of weakens>
C:The purpose of an art school education is to ensure that students will be able to secure jobs in their fields.
<answer, fills in the void of whether the purpose of the school is to provide this type of eduction>
D:People who intend to earn their livings in the field of art choose to go to art school to increase the quality of their work. <there is not any mention of quality>

E:Students attend art schools with the intention of earning their livings in the art field.
<good contender, but we need to make sure that school is providing the right stuff to be successful as in question is the school/program>
Manager
Joined: 11 May 2010
Posts: 162
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Aug 2010, 21:00
I was distracted and picking E, but I fully understand what kind of answer I need. C is surely the correct one
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 1327
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Aug 2010, 23:41
3
As I interpret the question, C is not at all a good answer here. Where does the OA come from?

The conclusion is that art schools are not preparing students for careers in art. That is, the conclusion is about what art schools *actually achieve*. Whether art schools are *trying* to train people for careers in art is irrelevant to what they actually *do*; intentions and results need not have any relationship. If I simplify the wording of the question, and insert answer choice C, I get:

Art school graduates are not getting jobs in the arts. The purpose of art schools is to train students for jobs in the arts. Therefore art schools are not successfully training students for jobs in the arts.

Inserting the second sentence does not change the argument in any way; the argument is just as successful if it is removed. Answer choice C would be a good answer if the conclusion was that art schools are not serving their purpose - we'd then need information about their purpose. But C does not strengthen the conclusion about career training. Whether art schools are trying to prepare students to work in the arts or to play backgammon, the conclusion can be just as true.

I'd add that the conclusion of the argument is open to different interpretations here, so I don't care for the wording of the question. If instead you interpret the conclusion as a general indictment of art schools - that is, you interpret it to mean 'art schools aren't doing what they're supposed to be doing' - then C is a more reasonable choice. But that's not how I interpret the question.

E is a much better answer. When reading just the stem, there's a perfectly plausible scenario that needs to be considered: perhaps art schools *are* doing a great job of preparing students for careers in the arts, but the students don't want those careers; maybe they do art as a hobby and they all want to be accountants. That is, the schools might not be to blame for the fact that their students don't choose a career in the arts. If that were the case, the criticism in the argument would be unfounded. We need to know here that the students actually *want* jobs in the arts -- if we know that the students *want* careers in art, and still can't get them after going to art school, then the art schools are truly failing to prepare these students for their chosen career. By addressing this issue, E strengthens the argument.

I'd add that one should ignore inessential differences in wording between the stem and an answer choice - you can't rule out E because it says 'earning their living' instead of 'making their careers'. Those phrases are synonymous.
_________________

GMAT Tutor in Toronto

If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2010
Posts: 73
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Aug 2010, 03:36
The question is from Princeton Review online. I'd say IanStewart is correct and this answer choice C is just wrong to me.

However, if we look at the evidence:
Students willing to work in art + they don't find a job in the field --> the schools they go to are bad

That doesn't look very sound to me too. What if they are all untalented or the art industry is in a recession. Nevertheless, this counter argument also applies to C...
Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Nov 2005
Posts: 333
Location: Chicago, IL
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2010, 15:07
[quote="heyholetsgo"]Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves with a variety of odd jobs that have little or nothing to do with the graduates’ artistic training. This has led to major doubts regarding how well the art schools are preparing their students for careers in art.

Premise: Most of art schools grads have to do little jobs to support themselves. Jobs have nothing to do with art.
Conclusion: The quality of education at art schools is not up to the level.
Assumption: Professional employment is the only purpose of arts schools and the only standard to be used to judge the quality of education at art schools

A: The curricula of most art schools tend to reflect the needs of the art world.
Strengthens it.

B:There are some graduates of art schools who go on to careers within the art world.
Well, there are some good cases, but the majority, evidently, are bad cases, according to the stem .
Strengthens it.

C:The purpose of an art school education is to ensure that students will be able to secure jobs in their fields.
That's the assumption

D:People who intend to earn their livings in the field of art choose to go to art school to increase the quality of their work.
Correct. It introduces the new possible purpose of art schools, and an alternative measure of education quality that can be or should be used to judge art schools.

E:Students attend art schools with the intention of earning their livings in the art field.
Strengthens. It indirectly suggests that arts schools should be judged according to their graduate employment numbers in industry.
_________________

Hard work is the main determinant of success

Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Nov 2005
Posts: 333
Location: Chicago, IL
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2010, 15:31
Sorry, somehow, I thought it's a eaken argument question. C it is. C is the assumption of the argument.
_________________

Hard work is the main determinant of success

GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 1327
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2010, 16:49
1
rlevochkin wrote:
heyholetsgo wrote:
Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves with a variety of odd jobs that have little or nothing to do with the graduates’ artistic training. This has led to major doubts regarding how well the art schools are preparing their students for careers in art.

Premise: Most of art schools grads have to do little jobs to support themselves. Jobs have nothing to do with art.
Conclusion: The quality of education at art schools is not up to the level.
Assumption: Professional employment is the only purpose of arts schools and the only standard to be used to judge the quality of education at art schools

You've identified a conclusion here that I don't see in the stem. The stem never says that 'the quality of education' is poor at art schools. The stem says something far more specific: art schools are not 'preparing their students for careers in art'. Identifying the answer here hinges on correctly identifying the conclusion. I said above that I think it's a bad question, because you might reasonably interpret the conclusion in different ways. If, however, you take the conclusion to be that 'art schools are not preparing their students for careers in art', then E is the only answer which makes any logical sense. We have evidence: art school students aren't getting jobs in art. We have a conclusion: it's the schools' fault. That's not an airtight argument; it might be the students' fault. We need to know that the students actually want to get jobs in art, and not some other field. If all of the art school students only want to become astronauts or chefs, then the fact that they don't get jobs in art tells us nothing about how well art schools have prepared them for art careers; the students were never going to get jobs in art no matter how well the school did.

C is a perfectly good answer if instead you interpret the conclusion to be that generally 'art schools aren't doing a very good job'. That's just not how I interpret the conclusion here; the conclusion to my reading seems specifically about how well students are trained for careers, and not about how good art schools are in general.

I'd add further that there are other problems with the wording of this question. We're asked to 'strengthen the author’s criticism of art schools', but the author never makes any criticism of art schools. Instead the passage says that there are 'doubts' about art schools, but the passage never says who has those doubts - it certainly isn't clear whether the author shares those doubts, or whether the author is simply reporting doubts that other people have. All in all, it's a very poor question, and is even worse if the official answer is C.
_________________

GMAT Tutor in Toronto

If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

Manager
Joined: 09 Jan 2010
Posts: 84
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Aug 2010, 11:00
E makes much more sense to me...
Intern
Joined: 04 Sep 2010
Posts: 39
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Oct 2010, 22:28
Guys,
C makes sense..
as argument says ----"This has led to major doubts regarding how well the art schools are preparing their students for careers in art."

ans should favor this
c says "The purpose of an art school education is to ensure that students will be able to secure jobs in their fields."

here "their " does not point towards art..
Manager
Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Posts: 56
Schools: UNC Kenan-Flagler, IU Kelley, Emory GSB
WE 1: 5 yrs
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Oct 2010, 00:33
2
heyholetsgo wrote:
Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves with a variety of odd jobs that have little or nothing to do with the graduates’ artistic training. This has led to major doubts regarding how well the art schools are preparing their students for careers in art.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the author’s criticism of art schools?

A: The curricula of most art schools tend to reflect the needs of the art world.

B:There are some graduates of art schools who go on to careers within the art world.

C:The purpose of an art school education is to ensure that students will be able to secure jobs in their fields.

D:People who intend to earn their livings in the field of art choose to go to art school to increase the quality of their work.

E:Students attend art schools with the intention of earning their livings in the art field.

I'm still having problems with these if true questions. What's wrong with E? Is there a good shortcut to get them right like the negation test for assumptions?

THX!

I like the strengthen questions. You just have to separate the wheat (conclusion) from the chaff (premise) - and then find the underlying assumption and match it with the choices!

Here,
Premise:
Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves with a variety of odd jobs that have little or nothing to do with the graduates’ artistic training.
Conclusion:
This has led to major doubts regarding how well the art schools are preparing their students for careers in art.
Assumption:
How well an art school prepares its students can be judged by the number of students getting jobs relevant to their artistic training..

So the purpose of an art school must be help its students get jobs pertaining to art.

C is a direct pre-phrase of this assumption.

E is incorrect because it states the assumption from students point of view. The argument is about art schools, not students.

Hope this helps
_________________

The night is at its darkest just before the dawn... never, ever give up!

GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 1327
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2010, 17:36
yossarian84 wrote:

Here,
Premise:
Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves with a variety of odd jobs that have little or nothing to do with the graduates’ artistic training.
Conclusion:
This has led to major doubts regarding how well the art schools are preparing their students for careers in art.
Assumption:
How well an art school prepares its students can be judged by the number of students getting jobs relevant to their artistic training..

So the purpose of an art school must be help its students get jobs pertaining to art.

C is a direct pre-phrase of this assumption.

When you begin a sentence with 'so', 'thus' or 'therefore', you're stating a conclusion, not an assumption. You seem to have confused the two. I also don't know how you've reached, from the premises, the conclusion that 'the purpose of an art school must be help its students get jobs pertaining to art'. I can illustrate why this is not a logical deduction with a different example:

The average GMAT scores of undergraduate students in astrophysics are 100 points higher than the average GMAT score of all test takers. Therefore undergraduate astrophysics programs provide good GMAT preparation.

Could you conclude from this that the *purpose* of undergraduate astrophysics programs it to prepare people for the GMAT? Of course not. And what would we want to know to evaluate the argument? We'd clearly want to know something about the students. Perhaps they are already more intelligent than average, and that's the reason they do better on the GMAT; it may have nothing at all to do with what they learn in their astrophysics course. In the question above, you ruled out E:

yossarian84 wrote:
E is incorrect because it states the assumption from students point of view. The argument is about art schools, not students.

but the students are precisely what we want to know about in this question: are they trying to get jobs in art or not? If not, then of course they don't get jobs in art, no matter how well the school did training them. That's why the answer is E.

The question is based on what I call the intention/results fallacy, a logical fallacy that you often encounter in art criticism. When someone does something (teaches a course, makes a film, whatever), what he or she is *trying* to do (her 'purpose') need not have any relationship with what he or she *actually* achieves. To confuse someone's intentions with his or her results is a logical error. To give one example, we've all seen horror films that were so ridiculous they seemed more like comedies; that the filmmaker's purpose was to create a scary movie does not, logically, mean that the filmmaker actually *did* make a scary movie. The filmmaker's intentions are irrelevant; it's the result that matters. The art school question is entirely about results (students aren't getting jobs in art --> therefore the school failed to prepare them for jobs in art). Whether the school was *trying* to prepare them for jobs is logically irrelevant, so C is not a good answer. If the source claims C is the OA, then it's not a good question.
_________________

GMAT Tutor in Toronto

If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

Manager
Joined: 06 Aug 2010
Posts: 175
Location: Boston
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 20 Oct 2010, 04:27
1
E is definitely not the answer. It's a pretty easy C, IMO.

heyholetsgo wrote:
Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves with a variety of odd jobs that have little or nothing to do with the graduates’ artistic training. This has led to major doubts regarding how well the art schools are preparing their students for careers in art.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the author’s criticism of art schools?

The author states that people who graduate from art schools go on to work odd jobs that have nothing to do with what they studied in art school. The author thus concludes that art schools are not preparing their students for careers in art (because if the schools WERE preparing the students, then the students would have jobs that pertain to their training, rather than random odd jobs that have nothing to do with it). To strengthen that conclusion, we need an answer choice that shows that it's the schools failing to get the graduates jobs, rather than some other factor.

A: The curricula of most art schools tend to reflect the needs of the art world. This would weaken the conclusion, because if it were true, it would tend to imply that it's not the school's fault that the students aren't getting jobs

B:There are some graduates of art schools who go on to careers within the art world. Completely follows the passage, which states that MOST graduates work odd jobs - so clearly, SOME graduates work actual art jobs

C:The purpose of an art school education is to ensure that students will be able to secure jobs in their fields. Correct. Art school is supposed to guarantee ("ensure") a job in the chosen field. If the students are graduating from school and then not getting jobs in that field, the school must have failed.

D:People who intend to earn their livings in the field of art choose to go to art school to increase the quality of their work. Weakens the conclusion by showing that students don't necessarily go to school to get jobs, but instead to improve their work. If that's all the school is supposed to do, then it isn't failing its graduates by not getting them jobs.

E:Students attend art schools with the intention of earning their livings in the art field. Irrelevant, as it doesn't address whether it's the schools failing to adequately prepare the students, or if there's some other factor as to why they aren't getting jobs. Perhaps most art students just aren't good enough to cut it, regardless of whether they go to art school or not. Perhaps there just aren't enough jobs out there. In either case, it wouldn't be the school's fault that the students aren't getting art jobs.

I'm still having problems with these if true questions. What's wrong with E? Is there a good shortcut to get them right like the negation test for assumptions?

THX!

Originally posted by TehJay on 19 Oct 2010, 18:32.
Last edited by TehJay on 20 Oct 2010, 04:27, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Status: Can't give up
Joined: 20 Dec 2009
Posts: 242
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2010, 11:07
A: The curricula of most art schools tend to reflect the needs of the art world - no effect on QS

B:There are some graduates of art schools who go on to careers within the art world - this weakens the QS

C:The purpose of an art school education is to ensure that students will be able to secure jobs in their fields.
- the school is educating students to help them pursue in their respective (other) fields. This strengthens that yes, art schools are teaching students for other fields

D:People who intend to earn their livings in the field of art choose to go to art school to increase the quality of their work - no effect on QS

E:Students attend art schools with the intention of earning their livings in the art field - this again weakens, and is doing nothing to the criticism
Manager
Joined: 15 Sep 2009
Posts: 213
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jul 2012, 19:07
I understand why C looks like a good response to many respondents on this thread but that option contains an inherent leap in logic. Many reasons can account for students not getting jobs in art: based on that one premise in the stimulus, there is hardly anyway of putting the blame on that art schools just because they are not fulfilling their mandates of training students for art careers. Maybe the art schools are training students well, but the students bomb job interviews by showing up on interview day high as a kite

Might go with E. But overall, this is not a great CR question.

Cheers,
Der alte Fritz.

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

+1 Kudos me - I'm half Irish, half Prussian.

Intern
Joined: 02 Jul 2012
Posts: 9
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.7
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2012, 12:01
IanStewart wrote:
As I interpret the question, C is not at all a good answer here. Where does the OA come from?

The conclusion is that art schools are not preparing students for careers in art. That is, the conclusion is about what art schools *actually achieve*. Whether art schools are *trying* to train people for careers in art is irrelevant to what they actually *do*; intentions and results need not have any relationship. If I simplify the wording of the question, and insert answer choice C, I get:

Art school graduates are not getting jobs in the arts. The purpose of art schools is to train students for jobs in the arts. Therefore art schools are not successfully training students for jobs in the arts.

Inserting the second sentence does not change the argument in any way; the argument is just as successful if it is removed. Answer choice C would be a good answer if the conclusion was that art schools are not serving their purpose - we'd then need information about their purpose. But C does not strengthen the conclusion about career training. Whether art schools are trying to prepare students to work in the arts or to play backgammon, the conclusion can be just as true.

I'd add that the conclusion of the argument is open to different interpretations here, so I don't care for the wording of the question. If instead you interpret the conclusion as a general indictment of art schools - that is, you interpret it to mean 'art schools aren't doing what they're supposed to be doing' - then C is a more reasonable choice. But that's not how I interpret the question.

E is a much better answer. When reading just the stem, there's a perfectly plausible scenario that needs to be considered: perhaps art schools *are* doing a great job of preparing students for careers in the arts, but the students don't want those careers; maybe they do art as a hobby and they all want to be accountants. That is, the schools might not be to blame for the fact that their students don't choose a career in the arts. If that were the case, the criticism in the argument would be unfounded. We need to know here that the students actually *want* jobs in the arts -- if we know that the students *want* careers in art, and still can't get them after going to art school, then the art schools are truly failing to prepare these students for their chosen career. By addressing this issue, E strengthens the argument.

I'd add that one should ignore inessential differences in wording between the stem and an answer choice - you can't rule out E because it says 'earning their living' instead of 'making their careers'. Those phrases are synonymous.

If we think about E.. it could be that students want careers in art , art school does a good job , but the students are not good enough.

and

C is correct because

The purpose of art schools is to train students for jobs in the arts or have a career in arts. Art school graduates are not getting jobs in the arts. Therefore there is some serious doubt on how art schools are preparing students for a career in arts.
Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 179
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2012, 10:42
I'm not quite sure, but I think it is
_________________

Kudos if you like the post!

Failing to plan is planning to fail.

Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 179
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2012, 10:43
I'm not quite sure, but I think it is C.
_________________

Kudos if you like the post!

Failing to plan is planning to fail.

Manager
Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Posts: 114
Location: India
WE: Supply Chain Management (Consulting)
Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Dec 2013, 10:53
Premise: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves with a variety of odd jobs that have little or nothing to do with the graduates’ artistic training.

Conclusion: Art schools are not preparing their students well for careers in art.

In order to strengthen the conclusion, first look for any gaps between the stated premises and conclusion. Clearly, in the given argument, the so called gap is whether it is the job of art education system to make sure that the graduates of art field secure jobs in the same field. Otherwise, the education system cannot be criticized for graduates shifting to other fields to make their career. Now, the answer choice that strengthens the argument is the one that closes this gap. Choice C best meets our requirement.

If you look at choice E, it talks about the students' intention of earning their livings in the art field before attending schools. This choice tells nothing about the art education system and if the choice has anything to do, it weakens the argument. If the art education system is strong enough to provide jobs to graduates in art field, then there could be other reasons for students no longer having the intention of securing a job in art field and hence the art schools cannot be blamed.

Hope I made some sense. Thanks.
_________________

+1 KUDOS is the best way to say thanks

"Pay attention to every detail"

Re: Most graduates of art schools go on to support themselves &nbs [#permalink] 01 Dec 2013, 10:53

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 25 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by