In Kravonia, the average salary for jobs requiring a college degree ha

Let’s look at the stimulus given-

In Kravonia, the average salary for jobs requiring a college degree has always been higher than the average salary for jobs that do not require a degree. Over the last few years, the number of Kravonians enrolled in college has been growing steadily.

Conclusion- Therefore, the number of Kravonians entering the job market who have at least the qualification of a college degree will eventually be significantly higher than it has been over the last few years.

The number of Kravonians enrolled in college has been growing steadily. Therefore, the number of Kravonians entering the job market who have at least the qualification of a college degree will eventually be significantly higher than it has been over the last few years.


We have to weaken the conclusion that the number of Kravonians entering the job market who have at least the qualification of a college degree will eventually be significantly higher than it has been over the last few years.


Let’s look at the answer choices-

(A) Kravonians with more than one college degree earn little more, on average, than do Kravonians with only one college degree
The conclusion is about the number of Kravonians entering the job market who have at least the qualification of a college degree. How much they earn is beyond the scope of the conclusion. Eliminate.

(B) The average number of years Kravonian college students remain enrolled before completing a degree has been increasing over the past several years.
Even though the premise states that the number of students enrolled in college has been growing steadily, option B says that the average number of Kravonian college students who remain enrolled before completing a degree has been increasing. In that case, we cannot say that the number of Kravoanians entering the job market with a college degree will eventually be significantly higher than it has been- the number of students enrolled has been increasing but the number of students who remain enrolled before completing a degree has also been increasing. Option B weakens the conclusion and is hence correct.

(C) Despite the increase in the number of Kravonians attending college, the percentage of the population attending college is lower in Kravonia than in most other countries.
C compares the percentage of the population attending college in Kravonia and in other countries. Irrelevant. Eliminate.

(D) In recent years, employers have been requiring college degrees for workers in jobs that were previously performed successfully by Kravonians who did not have college degrees.
What we have to weaken is the conclusion that the number of Kravoanians entering the job market with a college degree will eventually be significantly higher. Irrelevant. Eliminate.

(E) For many years, employers in Kravonia have had difficulty finding enough college graduates to fill the high-paying jobs that were available.
Irrelevant. Eliminate.

VP

By POE, I am left with option 'B'.

Conclusion is that the no. of Kravonians entering the job market with a college degree, would be higher than it was over the last years. We need to find a statement that weakens it.

A. Kravonians with more than one college degree earn little more, on average, than do Kravonians with only one college degree. Irrelevant.
B. The average number of years Kravonian college students remain enrolled before completing a degree has been increasing over the past several of years.
C. Despite the increase in the number of Kravonians attending college, the percentage of the population attending college is lower in Kravonia than in most other countries. Comparison with other countries is irrelevant .
D. In recent years, employers have been requiring college degrees for workers in jobs that were previously performed successfully by Kravonians who did not have college degrees. It supports the conclusion.
E. For many years, employers in Kravonia have had difficulty finding enough college graduates to fill the high-paying jobs that were available. Irrelevant

Graduates earn more than Not-graduates. More and more people go to college.
Conclusion: Therefore, there will eventually be more graduates entering the job market than in the past.

To weaken this conclusion, we need to find a reason why the graduates would not enter (or enter at a lowered rate) the job market.

A. Kravonians with more than one college degree earn little more, on average, than do Kravonians with only one college degree
The distinction between single and double majors is out of scope.
B. The average number of years Kravonian college students remain enrolled before completing a degree has been increasing over the past several of years.
This is the OA. Yet, I am not in love with it, for the AC reads that "the average number of years" has been extended, while the argument reads that the number of graduates entering the market "will eventually be significantly higher". No matter how the college period has been extended, it cannot last forever, thus the graduates will eventually enter the market in significantly increased number. Please have your say on that.
C. Despite the increase in the number of Kravonians attending college, the percentage of the population attending college is lower in Kravonia than in most other countries.
Both the percentage and the comparison are irrelevant.
D. In recent years, empoyers have been requiring college degrees for workers in jobs that were previously performed successfully by Kravonians who did not have college degrees.
This was my answer. I've conjectured that the increased number of enrollments is a result of higher requirements for the current working force. The graduates would then not enter the job market as they would not have left it at all. True, this is based on the assumption that the employers demand that the workers go to college. However, this assumption seemed to me just to be drawn on this AC, so I've fallen into it. Please discuss.
E. For many years, employers in Kravonia have had difficulty finding enough college graduates to fill the high-paying jobs that were available.
This does not influence the fact that the new graduates will be entering the job market.


I bumped on this question in my mock test and marked it incorrectly. After longer consideration I am still not convinced with the OA. Experts, I would be glad to hear your explanation of this problem.

Hi experts:

The conclusion states that the job market for who have at least a college degree will **eventually** increase significantly.

I rejected B because it says that students stay in college longer than before until graduation. How does this weaken the conclusion? The students are still going to graduate. It does not say that the students never graduate. Hence, there will be an increased number of students with college degree and by definition the number of students with a college degree will be higher than it has been over the past few years (the conclusion).

I chose D because my thought process was as such:
Employers have been requiring college degrees for jobs performed by workers without these degrees; hence, these workers will either go back to college and earn the degree, or current degree holders will do this job. This doesn't mean that the # of students will be higher. I can see the viewpoint that if the current non-degree people go and get degrees for these jobs, then they will add to the population of degree-holders; thus, this could be viewed as a strengthening choice, but still seemed better than B.

Any advice on how to tackle issues like this on test day?

GMATNinja
Hi GMATNinja,

Although your explanations have always helped me a lot, I was not able to digest this one.
How is # of people Enrolling in a college is different from those entering the college.(unless they get rejected in an exam,which is out of scope here)

I’m happy to follow up and clarify, pratik521992.

My point is not that the act of enrolling in college is different from the act of entering college. My point is that, for any given year, counting the number of students newly enrolled is quite different from counting the number of students who have already entered, and therefore remain enrolled.


Choice (B) clearly refers to students already enrolled and tells us that these students remain in college longer than in previous years. Absent any other new information, this means that the overall graduation rate is not going to increase significantly, because with each year that passes we will see fewer students, on average, reaching the end of their coursework.

If we were also told that graduation rates are rising, or that the rate of students entering Kravonian college is rising, then this wouldn’t be such a clear weakener. But we are given no other information. Because (B) changes a single variable — the amount of time existing students remain in school before graduating — it weakens the argument in a very targeted way.

I hope this is a helpful follow-up!

KarishmaB broall GMATNinjaTwo nightblade354
Can you please explain why OA A is out of scope?
If more people are enrolled because they are going for multi degree so no increase in the number of Kravonians entering the job market who have at least the qualification of a college degree.
Since at least the qualification of a college degree is mentioned we can think of more than one degree.

If in my explanation of a question I resort to the Poe technique, then somewhere there is some thing that I don't yet get about that question. Poe is a result of a process of analysis, usually one that leads to a contradiction. It is not the analysis itself.

Furthermore, it is hardly possible to eliminate an answer by labeling it irrelevant. How do we establish the relevance of an answer? If we do not disclose the basis for our judgment, then others cannot possibly evaluate our argument, save by saying it rests upon certain assumptions.

If I consider option A, then I can weigh its relevance by considering whether its meaning-content is damaging to the conclusion. If option A is a weakener, then its meaning-content would have to dispel a key assumption of the argument. Therefore we can reverse the content and ask, If Kravonian double-degree graduates earned significant more or significantly less, or as much as - would the conclusion be more plausible? If so, then option A is likely a weakener.

In this particular case, few perhaps were the people to go for option A. But still, it is technique that counts. My own naive intuition also says to instantly dismiss A, but in a real exam environment, option A would have been pitched right at my then-maximum difficulty tolerance. When facing an adaptive opponent, it becomes necessary to apply solid technical skill, or the analysis will suffer.

As they say in Amsterdam,
SUCCESS!

In Kravonia, the average salary for jobs requiring a college degree has always been higher than the average salary for jobs that do not require a degree. Over the last few years, the number of Kravonians enrolled in college has been growing steadily. Therefore, the number of Kravonians entering the job market who have at least the qualification of a college degree will eventually be significantly higher than it has been over the last few years.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Kravonians with more than one college degree earn little more, on average, than do Kravonians with only one college degree

(B) The average number of years Kravonian college students remain enrolled before completing a degree has been increasing over the past several years.

(C) Despite the increase in the number of Kravonians attending college, the percentage of the population attending college is lower in Kravonia than in most other countries.

(D) In recent years, employers have been requiring college degrees for workers in jobs that were previously performed successfully by Kravonians who did not have college degrees.

(E) For many years, employers in Kravonia have had difficulty finding enough college graduates to fill the high-paying jobs that were available.

teaserbae and OmerPelman

Let's break the argument down:

In Kravonia, the average salary for jobs requiring a college degree has always been higher than the average salary for jobs that do not require a degree. Over the last few years, the number of Kravonians enrolled in college has been growing steadily. Therefore, the number of Kravonians entering the job market who have at least the qualification of a college degree will eventually be significantly higher than it has been over the last few years.

Background is in blue
Premise is in pink
Conclusion is in green

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

-- We have established that C - E are incorrect, so no need to review them in your case.

(A) Kravonians with more than one college degree earn little more, on average, than do Kravonians with only one college degree -- So we are talking about wages vs. college degrees. How does this weaken our conclusion that more qualified people will not enter the market? It doesn't. In the conclusion, it says "at least", so this implies more than one degree. Further, it does not help counter WHY qualified people will not enter the workforce. In addition, we are told that they are already in college, so they will graduate at some point, unless stated otherwise (which would be a weakener!).

(B) The average number of years Kravonian college students remain enrolled before completing a degree has been increasing over the past several years. -- Interesting. Our conclusion noted "in a few years" and our answer here says "several years". We are also told that students are going to be staying longer in school, thus pushing their graduation date back, thus reducing the number of students in the workforce. Based on the answers, this is by far the best one!


It seems both of you were caught up on the premise and not the conclusion. Use the conclusion to guide you to the correct answer.

-- Does this help?

I got this answer via process of elimination, however I am not that happy with it. I find the word play "in a few" / "several" a little to open for interpretation.

However, my complains aside, option B is the only one that weakens the statement.

Arro44, my thoughts exactly. The ambiguity caused by using them as synonyms hurt the cause. The number will go up at some point, but to use two different words to state that made this far more difficult to explain than it should have been. Either way, the answer is truly the only one that weakens it.

Premises:
The average salary for jobs requiring a college degree is higher than the average salary for jobs that do not require a degree.
Over the last few years, the number of Kravonians enrolled in college has been growing steadily.

Conclusion:
The number of Kravonians entering the job market who have at least the qualification of a college degree will eventually be significantly higher than it has been over the last few years.

Note a few things here: The first sentence of the argument "average salary etc" is irrelevant to the argument. The argument could very well have omitted it and it would still be the same. It just gives a possible reason why more people are enrolling in college. The conclusion is that people who have college degrees will become significantly higher.

We need to weaken the argument.

(A) Kravonians with more than one college degree earn little more, on average, than do Kravonians with only one college degree

One college degree vs multiple degrees is certainly a promising premise but here is the problem - this option doesn't say that more people are enrolling for 2nd/3rd degrees or something like that. It says people with more degrees don't get more money. That has nothing to do with our argument. We are concerned about how many people are there who have at least one college degree - who gets more money who gets less is not relevant to the argument. Even if people with multiple degrees were getting much more money, we cannot assume that more people must be enrolling for multiple degrees. Hence, this option is irrelevant.

(B) The average number of years Kravonian college students remain enrolled before completing a degree has been increasing over the past several years.

More people have been enrolling in college, but on average the time they are spending in college is also increasing. If they keep spending more and more time as the years go by, it is unlikely that we will have "significantly higher" number entering the job market. More people will enrol year after year steadily but they will also keep spending more and more time there so the "significantly higher" number may not happen. The number of people entering job market with college degrees may also keep increasing steadily.

(C) Despite the increase in the number of Kravonians attending college, the percentage of the population attending college is lower in Kravonia than in most other countries.

Other countries' numbers are irrelevant.

(D) In recent years, employers have been requiring college degrees for workers in jobs that were previously performed successfully by Kravonians who did not have college degrees.

Again irrelevant. The demand for college degree workforce is increasing. It doesn't weaken the conclusion that there will be a significantly higher college educated workforce.

(E) For many years, employers in Kravonia have had difficulty finding enough college graduates to fill the high-paying jobs that were available.

Irrelevant. As discussed, what the job market wants is irrelevant to our argument.

Answer (B)

Very good question.

The conclusion is based on the past few years data that more students are enrolled. So the conclusion would be true if only more students are enrolling. . But if the increase in the number of enrolled students is because of students remaining enrolled for a longer and longer time, then the increase in students enrolled is not because of more students entering.

That is what B says. The increase in number enrolled is not because of more students entering but because of longer time students take to graduate.

Hi VeritasKarishma GMATNinja

I got option 'B' using POE, but I am not very happy with it because the argument says "the number of Kravonians entering the job market who have at least the qualification of a college degree will eventually be significantly higher than it has been over the last few years"

And the word 'eventually' is my point of concern and the reason why at first skipped option 'B' for a better answer. Option 'B' says "the number of students will remained enrolled before completing a degree has been increasing over the past several years". Yes, this will lead to a decrease in no. of students finishing the college degree in the foreseeable future, but an increasing part of the students, in comparison to the numbers in the previous, will complete the degree and here is where the 'eventually' word comes into play. Won't the number of college degree students 'eventually' be higher than the previous year's numbers ?

Hope I was bale to make my point clear.



Thanks
Saurabh

Option (B) gives you an alternative explanation that could be responsible for an increase in the number of "Kravonians enrolled in college".

Say, I check right now on the number of "Kravonians enrolled in college" and find that all courses are 3 year courses with a class of 100 each so there are 300 students enrolled in college right now.
Let's say, the number of years needed to complete the degree becomes 4 now. So next year, I will find 400 students enrolled in college though only 100 will step out in the job market.
Say the year after that, the courses need 5 yrs to complete. Then there will be 500 students enrolled though still, every year, only 100 will join the job market.
So the increase may not be because more people are joining college but perhaps because people are spending more time in college. If out of 1000 new people who join the job market every year, 100 step out of college, still the same fraction is being maintained and will be maintained year after year because only 100 students are enrolling in college in first year.

Hi VeritasKarishma,
I understood the argument but while making a decision for choice B, I felt that although they will be taking more years to complete the course, the numbers will eventually be significantly higher.
As the conclusion doesn't really establish a timeline by when the numbers should increase, maybe in the near or distance future, i.e. the conclusion is open to the possibility that the numbers might increase later if not sooner.
If maybe the choice gave some thing like more people are failing to get degrees in the process, would have been much clearer.

Weirdly enough I picked E, thinking that why would they enter the job market if there are already vacant jobs. I interpreted market akin to job search. Though I was sure I am going wrong here.

Yes, I have taken this issue with numbers in this post:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-kravonia- ... l#p2482539

Note that "Over the last few years, the number of Kravonians enrolled in college has been growing steadily." means that number of people enrolled in college at any given moment is increasing. It doesn't necessarily mean that number of people entering college in first year is increasing.