Over the past seven years, private college tuition rates have increase

Here the "has more than offset" means increases in tuiton fees have been so great that decrease in students have not even mattered. for ex:
Production is estimated higher as an increase in the United States
more than offset a decrease in total foreign output

its (D)

To qhoc0010: This is a CR question and not SC. one should focus on the bottom line. I don't think ETS wants to trick anyone.

This was fairly easy - D no question. Some of the options had nothing to do with the question. Does anyone know what level this question is? 500? 600?

Thanks.

Of concern should be only three buckets - 700 and above, 600 - 700, sub 600. This question is sub 600 (I would say more towards 450 - 500).

I choose the correct answer by POE.

Argument evaluation: Over the last 7 years, private college tuition rates have increased => a large decrease in private college attendance
However, the Private college revenues have been still increasing each year.

There is only one explanation (to me). P (price) x N (number) = R (revenue)

P increase x N decrease = R still increase
=> the percentage of increasing P is over the percentage of decreasing N in term of balance point.

E.g: P old = 100
N old = 100
=> R old = 10.000

P new = 200
N new = 80
=> R new = 200 x 80 = 16.000

P increase 100%, N decrease 20% => choice D is the final choice.

Explanation for other wrong answers.

(A) Most private colleges increase tuition rates approximately once every two years.
The times of increase tuition rates in one or two years really does not relate to the increasing revenue's explanation. So, out of scope.
(B) Attendance at vocational schools generally exceeds attendance at private colleges in most cities.
Another out of scope answer
(C) The increase in tuition rates at private colleges has influenced many prospective students to seek a state scholarship to attend a public university.
Scholarship is still irrelevant answer
(E) Private colleges gain a larger percentage of their revenue from alumni contributions than do public universities.
The argument does not mention any comparison between the private colleges gain and public universities. Hence, out of scope

Argument is saying:

Last 7 years, Tuition Fee Increased --> Attendance decreased.

Author is saying, in upcoming years fees is going to increase.

Ideally, if Attendance is decreasing, colleges should decrease their fees but we need to find something that says, no matter what their fee is going to increase.

(A) Most private colleges increase tuition rates approximately once every two years. : So what? Not inline with what we want to find.
(B) Attendance at vocational schools generally exceeds attendance at private colleges in most cities. : Vocational is OFS here
(C) The increase in tuition rates at private colleges has influenced many prospective students to seek a state scholarship to attend a public university. Then?? Why are they going to increase further? No answer.
(D) The decrease in students attending private colleges over the last seven years has been more than offset by the increases in tuition. : Awesome. So, even if 10 goes, the money lost will be recovered by the remaining students fee. CORRECT
(E) Private colleges gain a larger percentage of their revenue from alumni contributions than do public universities. : They why are they increasing the fee?

Situation

1) Over the past seven years, private college tuition rates have increased
2) Private college attendance has gone down

But, Private college revenues increased in each of the seven years during this period
Researchers predict further increases in the years to come.

Which of the following, if true, offers the best explanation for the situation described above?

(A) Most private colleges increase tuition rates approximately once every two years.- But revenue has increased each of the seven years
(B) Attendance at vocational schools generally exceeds attendance at private colleges in most cities. - Irrevalent to the issue at hand
(C) The increase in tuition rates at private colleges has influenced many prospective students to seek a state scholarship to attend a public
university.- Considering scholarship leads to subsidized education, this doesn't explain the increase in revenue
(D) The decrease in students attending private colleges over the last seven years has been more than offset by the increases in tuition.- Correct. Increase in tuition rates >Decrease in Attendence => Revenue goes up
(E) Private colleges gain a larger percentage of their revenue from alumni contributions than do public universities.- Doesn't justify any future increases in revenue or a reason for this trend to continue

We want to know why colleges revenues have been increasing if number of students have been increasing.

Choice D says that decrease in attendence is MORE THAN OFFSET by tution fee.

example:
earlier 100 students and tution fee per student $50k. Hence total revenue = $5000k
Now only 70 students but tution fee per student $90k. Hence total revenue = $6300k

Profit in revenue = $1300k

Tuitions fees have gone up BUT attendance has gone down.
Regardless of the decrease in attendance, the revenues for private colleges has gone up progressively. And researchers say it'll happen for years to come.

A - Revenues increased yearly, and attendance dropped because of that, so tuition fees increasing every 2 years doesn't explain the situation. OUT
B - Irrelevant. OUT.
C - Irrelevant. OUT
D - Increase in tuition fees offsets any downsides of decrease in attendance. KEEP.
E - Irrelevant. OUT.

D is the answer.

researchers predict further increases in the years to come.

Here we are talking about increase in revenue, not about increase in fee, is that correct?
If I am correct, I proceeds this way.
rate* number= revenue.
Conclusion: Revenue of private colleges will increase although attendance at private colleges is decreasing.
Means this decrease in attendance is offset by increase in tuition rate.
D is close to above thought but I confused over "X has been more than offset by Y". X is attendance and Y is tuition rate.

Please explain where I am doing wrong.

KAPLAN OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Here we have a specific, and common kind of number question: an increase/decrease problem. The author discusses two simultaneous trends that might seem to contradict one another. Tuition has increased at private universities, leading to a decrease in enrollment—so far that's logical. However, revenue at these universities has continued to increase despite the decreased enrollment. The correct answer must offer some source of revenue that more than compensates for the decrease in revenues created by the lower enrollment. That's where (D), the correct answer, fits in: If the tuition hikes have brought in more revenue than the loss of enrollment has taken away, then it's easy to see how both trends discussed in the stimulus can simultaneously exist.

(A) The frequency with which private schools increase tuition doesn't begin to explain the revenue situation in the stimulus. The relevant fact is that tuitions are increasing, which triggers the rest of argument. In what specific manner they're increasing is irrelevant.

(B) offers an irrelevant distinction between vocational schools and private colleges that doesn't contribute any new information to the stimulus. Vocational schools are outside the scope, which focuses only on the situation related to the decrease in enrollment at private colleges.

(C) tells us what happens to some students who can no longer afford private universities. Their fate, sorry to say, doesn't matter, and again it doesn't add any new information to the scenario. We already know that enrollment decreased; this choice just gives us a human-interest story when we really want to know how it's possible under these circumstances for revenues to actually increase.

(E) is similar to (B) in that it provides another irrelevant distinction. It compares the role of alumni contributions at public and private colleges, while the stimulus does not express any interest in public universities or in alumni contributions. Even if private colleges do get a larger percentage of money from alumni, decreasing enrollment shrinks the number of alumni and would, if anything, seem to decrease revenue even further—thereby deepening the mystery rather than explaining it.

An 800 test taker knows that in an Explain question, the information provided in the stimulus remains true, and that the task is to reconcile, not to change, the presented facts.