Last visit was: 01 May 2026, 14:00 It is currently 01 May 2026, 14:00
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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
anairamitch1804
Joined: 26 Oct 2016
Last visit: 20 Apr 2019
Posts: 502
Own Kudos:
3,606
 [12]
Given Kudos: 877
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, International Business
Schools: HBS '19
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 4
WE:Education (Education)
Schools: HBS '19
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
Posts: 502
Kudos: 3,606
 [12]
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
4
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
SidJainGMAT
Joined: 09 Nov 2016
Last visit: 26 Aug 2020
Posts: 28
Own Kudos:
50
 [2]
Given Kudos: 17
Location: India
Products:
Posts: 28
Kudos: 50
 [2]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 27 Apr 2026
Posts: 5,632
Own Kudos:
33,441
 [3]
Given Kudos: 707
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,632
Kudos: 33,441
 [3]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
gmatman1031
Joined: 27 Nov 2018
Last visit: 07 Mar 2019
Posts: 39
Own Kudos:
41
 [3]
Given Kudos: 204
Posts: 39
Kudos: 41
 [3]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
A. year toward the cost of higher education, previously paying $7 per year
anairamitch1804 has a good explanation for why this option is wrong. In this option, it seems that the students are protesting while they are also previously paying $7 per year. Actions can't happen simultaneously if one of those actions happened previously.

Also, it's not clear what they were previously paying $7 per year for. In other options its clear that the $7 per year is in place of the $330 per year.

Finally, some people have pointed out that "paying" could either be modifying "students" or "law". As demonstrated in this question, "paying" could modify either "students" or "law". However, this would introduce only slight ambiguity. So slight that I don't think that this ambiguity alone would be enough to rule out (A).

Quote:
B. year toward the cost of higher education, for which was previously paid $7 per year
This option is actually not grammatical. The relative which clause has no subject. The clause can be read like this:
For [the cost of higher education] (blank subject) was previously paid $7 per year
Or like this:
(Blank subject) was previously paid $7 per year for [the cost of higher education]

Quote:
C. year, compared to the previously $7 per year, toward the cost of higher education
"Compared to" is not the same as "instead of" or "as opposed to". Thus, "compared to" changes the meaning of the sentence and we don't know that the $330/yr has been substituted for the $7/yr. We only know that they are compared.

Also, "previously $7 per year" is grammatically correct but gives the sentence a different meaning than the one we intend. See my previous post for a more in-depth explanation.

Quote:
D. year toward the cost of higher education, instead of the $7 per year required previously
This sentence looks good

Quote:
E. year as opposed to the $7 per year required previously for the cost of higher education
I think this one is pretty close to the right answer, but it seems to be inferior to choice (D).

"toward" is a little more exact than "for", but I think only slightly. I personally wouldn't eliminate (E) on that alone.

I think the most important issue with this option is that "as opposed to the $7 per year required previously" is not set off with commas. This really feels like a non-essential fragment. It doesn't the clarify the meaning of "$330 a year" and so I think it needs to be set off with commas. Grammarly calls these situations interrupters. Wiki calls them non-restrictive clauses.
I think this option would be much better if it instead read:
year, as opposed to the $7 per year required previously, for the cost of higher education

Finally, I'd like the "for the cost of higher education" to come before the "as opposed to...". I think this makes the sentence easier to read. In comparisons, we use ellipses quite a bit and I think the ellipses work better at the end of a clause - just like I think pronouns with antecedents are easier to read than pronouns with postcedents. Though, I wouldn't eliminate an option based on this alone.
avatar
ballest127
Joined: 18 Aug 2017
Last visit: 27 Dec 2021
Posts: 104
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 599
Posts: 104
Kudos: 44
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi GMATNinja

Could you provide the explanation for this question?

Thank you.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 01 May 2026
Posts: 7,391
Own Kudos:
70,843
 [2]
Given Kudos: 2,133
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,391
Kudos: 70,843
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ballest127
Hi GMATNinja

Could you provide the explanation for this question?

Thank you.
There's a ton of discussion on this one already, including a short-but-sweet explanation from my long-lost brother @daagh, another really nice one right below it, and some thorough work from gmatman1031 right above your post. Let us know if those three don't resolve your doubts?
User avatar
thangvietnam
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Last visit: 04 Apr 2026
Posts: 743
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 2,198
Posts: 743
Kudos: 419
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I have a problem in choice D
"instead of" is a preposition, not a conjunction, which connect 2 similar thing.this means "instead of" can not connect 2 similar things

inhere, "instead of" connect 330 usd and 7 usd, the 2 similar things. so, choice D is wrong

pls, help explain. thank you
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 01 May 2026
Posts: 6,084
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 744
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 6,084
Kudos: 5,141
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
thangvietnam
I have a problem in choice D
"instead of" is a preposition, not a conjunction, which connect 2 similar thing.this means "instead of" can not connect 2 similar things

inhere, "instead of" connect 330 usd and 7 usd, the 2 similar things. so, choice D is wrong

pls, help explain. thank you
It could be more useful to look at instead of as acting as an adverb, but (about your question on prepositions in general) how do you define "connect"? For example, in the following phrase:

The page in the book... ← noun1, preposition (with its object, adjective for noun1), noun2 (object of the preposition)

We're not looking at a "connection" of the kind we'd get with something like and.

The page and the book... ← This one is different from the page in the book.

We really shouldn't be too concerned about seeing nouns on both sides of instead of. In general, after a preposition, it is perfectly normal for us to see a noun (or a gerund). This has very little to do with whether we see a noun before the instead of.

1. The notice was sent to his boss instead of his lawyer.
2. This summer, he will work at the local library instead of going on another overseas vacation.
3. This summer, he will work instead of going on another overseas vacation.
User avatar
thangvietnam
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Last visit: 04 Apr 2026
Posts: 743
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 2,198
Posts: 743
Kudos: 419
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AjiteshArun
thangvietnam
I have a problem in choice D
"instead of" is a preposition, not a conjunction, which connect 2 similar thing.this means "instead of" can not connect 2 similar things

inhere, "instead of" connect 330 usd and 7 usd, the 2 similar things. so, choice D is wrong

pls, help explain. thank you
It could be more useful to look at instead of as acting as an adverb, but (about your question on prepositions in general) how do you define "connect"? For example, in the following phrase:

The page in the book... ← noun1, preposition (with its object, adjective for noun1), noun2 (object of the preposition)

We're not looking at a "connection" of the kind we'd get with something like and.

The page and the book... ← This one is different from the page in the book.

We really shouldn't be too concerned about seeing nouns on both sides of instead of. In general, after a preposition, it is perfectly normal for us to see a noun (or a gerund). This has very little to do with whether we see a noun before the instead of.

1. The notice was sent to his boss instead of his lawyer.
2. This summer, he will work at the local library instead of going an another overseas vacation.
3. This summer, he will work instead of going an another overseas vacation.

thank you for reply
I want to say that "instead of" is a preposition not a conjunction. Preposition+noun/doing can work as an adverb. conjunction connect 2 similar things, 2 verbs, 2 nouns, 2 adjectives...

"instead of" can not connect 2 similar things. there are many questions on gmatprep which test the difference between rather than, a conjunction, and instead of, a preposition.

instead of leaning French, I learn gmat

this is correct sentence.

so, in our problem, instead of connect 2 similar things, 330 usd and 7 usd. this is wrong. i am sorry to be frank. or I need help. pls, explain
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 01 May 2026
Posts: 6,084
Own Kudos:
5,141
 [1]
Given Kudos: 744
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 6,084
Kudos: 5,141
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
thangvietnam
so, in our problem, instead of connect 2 similar things, 330 usd and 7 usd. this is wrong. i am sorry to be frank. or I need help. pls, explain
It's (usually) good to be frank. :)

The problem here is that it's hard to see what you mean by the word "connect". If you are looking for the kind of "connect" that a conjunction provides, you won't find it with an instead of.

If you feel that a structure that includes a "noun + instead of + noun" is always wrong, then you'll have to add that structure to your "whitelist".
User avatar
Brego
Joined: 09 Mar 2017
Last visit: 21 Aug 2019
Posts: 27
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 203
Posts: 27
Kudos: 6
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
EducationAisle

For option D, "instead of the 7$ required previously". I learned that after instead of there should be no clause or verbs - only nouns or gerunds.

Here is "required" a verb-ed modifier or a verb on its own? It seems on gmat I crossed out this option thinking that required is a verb for a subject "law".

Thank you
User avatar
EducationAisle
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 30 Apr 2026
Posts: 3,908
Own Kudos:
3,586
 [1]
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,908
Kudos: 3,586
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
By verb-ed modifier, I am assuming you mean Past Participle.

Yes, required is a past participle here.
User avatar
vanam52923
Joined: 17 Jul 2017
Last visit: 12 Jun 2025
Posts: 198
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 228
Posts: 198
Kudos: 103
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
daagh
A says that the higher education was previously paying $7

B The phrase - for which was previously paid $7 per year - is too awkward to consider
In C - previously $7 per year - is grammatically wrong. Previously is an adverb and can not modify the noun of $7

D has no flaws as such and is the best answer.

E -as opposed to -is not the right idiom to describe comparison, unless the arms of the comparison are positioned opposite to the others physically? In a weird way, E may also give the feeling that the students were in fact opposed to the $7 per year.
daagh
I was confused btwn c nd d nd rejected d
beacuse i thought
x instead of y is correct
Is X, instead of Y correct ?
Is comma correct after X in such idiom
User avatar
daagh
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Last visit: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 5,262
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 422
Status: enjoying
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,262
Kudos: 42,466
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Vanam

I feel the comma after before 'instead of' is just a break from the long sentence before it. There is no other issue about it. Can you please elaborate why the comma your have referred spoils the idiomatic legitimacy?
I would rather not get stuck at such unproven things, unless I have seen it to be wrong in some authentic sources such as Dictionaries.

The takeaway is that one might not see the wood for the tree.
avatar
mba757
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 15 Jun 2020
Last visit: 04 Aug 2022
Posts: 295
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 245
Location: United States
GPA: 3.3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi experts, MartyTargetTestPrep GMATNinja AjiteshArun

Quick question on (A): Isn't the -ing modifier modifying the law, NOT the "students" or the "cost of higher education"? An -ing modifier should modify the closest preceding clause's subject, which in this case is the relative clause---"that (a law) that requires them to contribute..."
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 27 Apr 2026
Posts: 5,632
Own Kudos:
33,441
 [1]
Given Kudos: 707
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,632
Kudos: 33,441
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
samgyupsal
Hi experts, MartyTargetTestPrep GMATNinja AjiteshArun

Quick question on (A): Isn't the -ing modifier modifying the law, NOT the "students" or the "cost of higher education"? An -ing modifier should modify the closest preceding clause's subject, which in this case is the relative clause---"that (a law) that requires them to contribute..."



Hello samgyupsal,

I will be glad to answer this one for you. :-)

Yes, your observation is correct. The modifier "previously paying..." acts as the comma + verb-ing action modifier and therefore, modifies the preceding action "requires...". This modifier not only presents illogical modification but also fails to connect logically with the subject of the modified action. In this case, that subject is "the law". The law did not pay anything previously.


Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
User avatar
EducationAisle
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 30 Apr 2026
Posts: 3,908
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,908
Kudos: 3,586
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
samgyupsal
Quick question on (A): Isn't the -ing modifier modifying the law, NOT the "students" or the "cost of higher education"? An -ing modifier should modify the closest preceding clause's subject, which in this case is the relative clause---"that (a law) that requires them to contribute..."
Hi samgyupsal, this tends to get tricky at times. There is a bit of a flexibility in terms of what such participial phrases can modify.

Let's look at a correct sentence:

Among lower-paid workers, union members are less likely than non union members to be enrolled in lower-end insurance plans that impose stricter limits on medical services and require doctors to see more patients, spending less time with each.

Notice that the present participial phrase (spending less time with each) does not modify the closest preceding clause's subject (insurance plans), but modifies the doer of the preceding action (doctors is the doer of preceding action to see).

Similarly, in the sentence under consideration, the present participial phrase (previously paying $7 per year) need not necessarily modify the closest preceding clause's subject (law), but can modify the doer of the preceding action (university students is the doer of preceding action to contribute).

A is incorrect because it is not depicting any contrast between what university students will be required to pay now vs what university students were paying earlier.
User avatar
ak2121
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 26 Jun 2021
Last visit: 19 May 2022
Posts: 50
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 89
Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q45 V35
GPA: 3.3
GMAT 1: 650 Q45 V35
Posts: 50
Kudos: 56
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
daagh
A says that the higher education was previously paying $7

B The phrase - for which was previously paid $7 per year - is too awkward to consider
In C - previously $7 per year - is grammatically wrong. Previously is an adverb and can not modify the noun of $7

D has no flaws as such and is the best answer.

E -as opposed to -is not the right idiom to describe comparison, unless the arms of the comparison are positioned opposite to the others physically? In a weird way, E may also give the feeling that the students were in fact opposed to the $7 per year.
Hi,
Just wanted to know that
is the usage of toward correct in these?
and what is it referring to for it to be a toward and not towards?
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 01 May 2026
Posts: 6,297
Own Kudos:
6,264
 [1]
Given Kudos: 45
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 6,297
Kudos: 6,264
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ak2121
daagh
A says that the higher education was previously paying $7

B The phrase - for which was previously paid $7 per year - is too awkward to consider
In C - previously $7 per year - is grammatically wrong. Previously is an adverb and can not modify the noun of $7

D has no flaws as such and is the best answer.

E -as opposed to -is not the right idiom to describe comparison, unless the arms of the comparison are positioned opposite to the others physically? In a weird way, E may also give the feeling that the students were in fact opposed to the $7 per year.
Hi,
Just wanted to know that
is the usage of toward correct in these?
and what is it referring to for it to be a toward and not towards?

Hello ak2121,

We hope this finds you well.

Having gone through the question and your query, we believe that we can help resolve your doubts. The use of "towards" is perfectly all right in this sentence; idiomatically speaking, "towards" can be used to metaphorically refer towards making a contribution to advance a goal or obligation. For example, "I took a big step towards my goals of losing weight." and "John contributed 500$ towards his mother's hospital bill."

Further, there is no difference whatsoever between "toward" and "towards"; they can be used interchangeably.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
ak2121
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 26 Jun 2021
Last visit: 19 May 2022
Posts: 50
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 89
Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q45 V35
GPA: 3.3
GMAT 1: 650 Q45 V35
Posts: 50
Kudos: 56
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ExpertsGlobal5
ak2121
daagh
A says that the higher education was previously paying $7

B The phrase - for which was previously paid $7 per year - is too awkward to consider
In C - previously $7 per year - is grammatically wrong. Previously is an adverb and can not modify the noun of $7

D has no flaws as such and is the best answer.

E -as opposed to -is not the right idiom to describe comparison, unless the arms of the comparison are positioned opposite to the others physically? In a weird way, E may also give the feeling that the students were in fact opposed to the $7 per year.
Hi,
Just wanted to know that
is the usage of toward correct in these?
and what is it referring to for it to be a toward and not towards?

Hello ak2121,

We hope this finds you well.

Having gone through the question and your query, we believe that we can help resolve your doubts. The use of "towards" is perfectly all right in this sentence; idiomatically speaking, "towards" can be used to metaphorically refer towards making a contribution to advance a goal or obligation. For example, "I took a big step towards my goals of losing weight." and "John contributed 500$ towards his mother's hospital bill."

Further, there is no difference whatsoever between "toward" and "towards"; they can be used interchangeably.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
Got it thanks. The only reason i chose e was bec of the toward towards confusion .

Posted from my mobile device
   1   2   3   4   5   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
513 posts
363 posts