The kinds of hand and wrist injuries that result from extended

Solution
passage analysis                                                             
The kinds of hand and wrist injuries that result from extended use of a computer while maintaining an incorrect posture are common among schoolchildren in Harnville
In Harnville, it is common to find a particular type of injury among the school children caused by extensive use of computers. These injuries are caused to the hands and wrists, if the posture of the children is incorrect while using computers.

Computers are important to the school curriculum there, so instead of reducing the amount their students use computers,
The use of computers cannot be diminished since they are vital for the school curriculum. So, the teachers have come up with a plan that won’t require reducing the usage of computers.

 teachers plan to bring about a sharp reduction in the number of these injuries by carefully monitoring their students' posture when using computers in the classroom.
They plan to sharply reduce the number of such injuries by carefully supervising their students’ posture when they are using computers in the classroom.
Conclusion:
If the teachers at Harnville schools pay close attention to their students' posture when the latter are using computers in the classroom, then they will be able to bring about a sharp reduction in the number of hand and wrist injuries caused due to extensive computer usage and bad posture while doing so.


pre-thinking                                                                 

Falsification question

In what scenario will the teachers not be able to bring about a sharp reduction in the number of hand and wrist injuries caused due to extensive computer usage and bad posture?

Given that →The use of computers cannot be diminished

                  →The teachers have planned to carefully monitor the posture of the children while they are using computers in the classroom

Thought Process

Clearly, here the stress is primarily on two things causing the hand and wrist injuries: the long duration of computer usage and the bad posture while working at the computers in the classroom. The teachers have observed this, and they believe that careful supervision will lead to the students correcting their posture, thus reducing greatly the number of such injuries. But what about the time when there are no teachers to monitor posture during computer usage?

Falsification condition#1

What if these students also use computers extensively at home/outside the school?

In that case there would not be anyone to monitor their posture at home/outside the school and that might result in injuries all the same. Even if the teachers are able to correct the students’ posture in school, the schoolchildren will fall back to the incorrect posture once away from school and the injuries would continue.

This would break down our conclusion.

Assumption#1

Hardly any of the schoolchildren at Harnville use computers extensively outside the school/at home.

Falsification Condition#2

What if there existed other operational/functional/infrastructural factors that were causing the injuries?

Let us say the computer table is of the wrong height or width. Or say the keyboards are of bad quality. Or say the chairs are not posture friendly. Any or all of these could be reasons that may still persist even after careful supervision. In that case our conclusion would break down.

Assumption#2

There are no other operational/functional/infrastructural factors that are causing the injuries.


Answer Choice Analysis

A
Our main concern is to evaluate the possibility of reducing hand and wrist injuries through careful supervision. Whether other injuries are also caused due to incorrect posture does not help me clarify the feasibility of the teachers’ plan.

Hence, this is not the correct option.

B
Our main concern is to evaluate the possibility of reducing hand and wrist injuries caused by computers through careful supervision. Hand and wrist injuries not caused by computers is beyond the scope of our argument

Hence, this is not the correct choice.

C -Correct answer choice analysis

(C) What proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville with hand and wrist injuries use computers extensively outside the classroom

This is in line with our pre-thinking assumption#1. 

Let’s put it through the variance analysis.

Yes- A large proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville with hand and wrist injuries USE computers extensively outside the classroom.
If this is the case, then even if the teachers monitor their posture at school, the hand and wrist injuries continue to take place. This weakens our belief in the conclusion.

No- A large proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville with hand and wrist injuries DO NOT USE computers extensively outside the classroom
In this case, the monitoring of the posture at school would bring down the number of hand and wrist injuries considerably and would strengthen our belief in the teachers’ plan.

Hence, this is the correct answer.

D
Changing the curriculum will present us with another argument. And this argument itself will cease to exist. We are to consider a scenario where the computer usage cannot be reduced and that is partly responsible for the injuries.

Hence, this is not the correct answer.

E
Whatever be the proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville already using correct posture while working on a computer, it does not change the fact that in Harnville, it is common to find hand and wrist injuries among the school children caused by extensive use of computers. This does not impact my conclusion.

Hence, this is not the correct choice.

Hi VeritasPrepKarishma

I went through the explanations but am unclear about terminology -
out of scope.

Let me present my understanding of argument to know my shortfalls:

Teacher's plan: To monitor student's posture, when they are present in classrooom, (see argument end in particular)
to bring sharp reduction in number of injuries caused by incorrect posture.

Goal: knowing what data, will this plan be successful?

A and B -> do not talk about relevant injuries are out.
C -> In argument we are only concerned with students who use computers in school classroom. The inherent assumption is that why would teachers bother to look for students posture after school hours?
D -> Should be correct OA since if ans is YES, then students will be less injured and vice versa.
E-> We are not concerned with proportion of students, we are concerned with monitoring posture and injuries caused.

PARA talks of hand and wrist injuries and two options that school has for reducing these.
But the plan is to monitor the posture in class.

Let's see the choices and find the choices to find the answer that would be helpful in ascertaining the efficacy of the plan..


(A) Whether extended use of a computer while maintaining incorrect posture can cause injuries other than hand and wrist injuries
we are talking specifically of hand and wrist injuries. So OUT of scope

(B) Whether hand and wrist injuries not caused by computer use are common among schoolchildren in Harnville
we are talking of these injuries specific to computer usage. So OUT of scope

(C) What proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville with hand and wrist injuries use computers extensively outside the classroom
Yes. This tells us even if teaches monitor the posture in class but the students use computer extensively in homes, the desired result may not be reached

(D) Whether changes in the curriculum could reduce the schools' dependence on computers
This option has already been left out by school authorities. So OUT of scope again

(E) What proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville already use correct posture while using a computer.
csaluja, Again we are talking of students NOT using posture properly and effect of monitoring their posture in computer classes. So OUT of scope

Chetan,

I am not quite happy with this question. Let us only talk about BCE.


B:Whether hand and wrist injuries not caused by computer use are common among schoolchildren in Harnville:If this were true, then the plan will not be sucessful no matter how much teachers monitor, and if this were not true, then plan will be successful-let us keep this
C: What proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville with hand and wrist injuries use computers extensively outside the classroom-Now, this option talks about only children who have the injury. What about those who dont have but can get,what if their proportion in more in the class?I am not sure how this can be the answer
E:What proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville already use correct posture while using a computer: If the proportion is huge, then there wont be a sharp reduction. But if the proportion is not huge, then the plan will be successful. Let us keep this.

Both C and E can be the answer IMO-would like to know your thoughts on this.
Also, if GMATNinja can explain this please.

Thanks

We are told that "The kinds of hand and wrist injuries that result from extended use of a computer while maintaining an incorrect posture are common among schoolchildren in Harnville." The teachers want to reduce those injuries by monitoring the students' posture. So we know that at least SOME of the students have bad posture, since they are suffering from injuries that specifically result from incorrect posture.

If that's the case, monitoring the students' posture should help reduce those injuries, regardless of what proportion of the students actually have bad posture. Knowing the proportion of students who already use correct posture would not help us assess the likelihood that the teachers' plan will be successful.

The answer is C
The argument talks about the use of computers in school and monitoring children who use the computers .
But if children use computers more outside their school then the plan of the school to monitor the posture while using computer is not going to be effective .
Hence we got our answer by negating C


Sent from my ONE E1003 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

incorrect posture + long computer use ---> HWI
computer are important so cant reduce time
but posture can be correct by teachers

Weakener :-
Prethinking:-
what if teachers themselves have no idea what is correct posture?
Sharp reduction :- what if posture is a problem but only 10% issue, what if it is more bcoz of use of computer and less because of posture.


Which of the following would it be most useful to know in order to assess the likelihood that the teachers' plan will be successful?

(A) Whether extended use of a computer while maintaining incorrect posture can cause injuries other than hand and wrist injuries : Out of scope

(B) Whether hand and wrist injuries not caused by computer use are common among schoolchildren in Harnville :- OUT of scope

(C) What proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville with hand and wrist injuries use computers extensively outside the classroom
Lets say 10% schoolchildren in Harnville with hand and wrist injuries use computers extensively outside the classroom then teachers help them much.
Lets say 90% schoolchildren in Harnville with hand and wrist injuries use computers extensively outside the classroom then teachers can't help them much.



(E) What proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville already use correct posture while using a computer.
Lets say 10% proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville already use correct posture while using a computer. Then yes, sharp reduction can happen.
but say 90% proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville already use correct posture while using a computer, then sharp reduction won't be possible because problem is more because of extensive use of computer than because of posture

why not E?

I THINK SHARP REDUCTION IS WHAT TUMBLING ME HERE.

BOTH C & E seems correct to me. Any explaination

Here is the point - you are aiming for a sharp reduction in number of such cases. If the number reduces from 100 to 30, it is a sharp reduction. It is also a sharp reduction if the number reduces from 10 to 3. So actual proportion of such cases is immaterial, whether 100 or 10.

Posted from my mobile device

Understanding the passage

The kinds of hand and wrist injuries that result from extended use of a computer while maintaining an incorrect posture are common among schoolchildren in Harnville.

• In Harnville, it is common to find a specific type of hand injury among the schoolchildren.
• This particular type of hand injury was caused by prolonged use of computers while maintaining incorrect posture.

Computers are important to the school curriculum there

• The use of computers in school is crucial for the students.

so instead of reducing the amount their students use computers, teachers plan to bring about a sharp reduction in the number of these injuries by carefully monitoring their students' posture when using computers in the classroom.

• So, the teachers came up with a plan to reduce the number of these injuries significantly without lowering the usage of computers.
• The teachers planned to supervise the students' posture carefully while using computers in the classroom.
• Note that teachers will only be able to monitor students in the classroom.

Conclusion: If the teachers supervise the students' posture carefully while using computers in the classroom, then they will be able to significantly reduce the number of hand and wrist injuries among schoolchildren, without lowering the usage of computers.

Pre-thinking

Falsification Scenario

In what scenario - will the teachers NOT be able to significantly reduce the number of hand and wrist injuries caused due to prolonged use of computers among schoolchildren.

Given that:
(i) The use of computers cannot be lowered.
(ii) The teachers plan to monitor the posture of schoolchildren while using computers in the classroom.

Thought Process
According to the passage, there are two reasons for hand and wrist injuries among schoolchildren in Harnville: the extensive use of computers and incorrect posture while using computers in the classroom. Since the use of computers cannot be lowered because it is an important curriculum, teachers planned to carefully supervise and rectify the posture of the students while using computers in the classroom. Thereby reducing the number of hand and wrist injuries.

Falsification condition 1: What if the students at Harnville use computers extensively and maintain incorrect posture at home/some other place?
In this scenario, if the students use computers extensively and maintain incorrect posture at home/some other place, then it could result in similar injuries. The teachers will not be able to supervise and rectify the students' posture; therefore, the number of injuries may not reduce, and the conclusion of the author will break down.

Assumption 1: The students at Harnville do not use computers extensively and maintain incorrect posture at home/some other place.

Falsification Condition 2: What if something else is causing the injuries like the height of the table, chairs with an uncomfortable sitting position, etc.

Assumption 2: There are no other operational/functional/infrastructural factors that are causing the injuries.

Answer Choice Analysis

(A) Whether extended use of a computer while maintaining incorrect posture can cause injuries other than hand and wrist injuries INCORRECT

• This option choice does not help us determine the feasibility of the teachers’ plan.

(B) Whether hand and wrist injuries not caused by computer use are common among schoolchildren in Harnville INCORRECT
• This option does not help us evaluate the reduction of hand and wrist injuries caused by using computers, in fact, this is out of scope.

(C) What proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville with hand and wrist injuries use computers extensively outside the classroom CORRECT
• Variance Test
o Yes - A large proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville with hand and wrist injuries USE computers extensively outside the classroom.
o This is in line with our pre-thinking and proves that the teachers’ plan will not succeed. Thus, weakening our belief in the conclusion.
o No - A large proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville with hand and wrist injuries DO NOT USE computers extensively outside the classroom.
o This proves that the teachers’ plan to monitor the students and reduce hand & wrist injuries will succeed. Thus, strengthening our belief in the conclusion.


(D) Whether changes in the curriculum could reduce the schools' dependence on computers INCORRECT

• We are considering a scenario where the usage of computers cannot be reduced, and that is partly responsible for the injuries. Changing the curriculum is out of scope.

(E) What proportion of schoolchildren in Harnville already use correct posture while using a computer. INCORRECT
• This information does not change the fact that in Harnville, it is common to find hand and wrist injuries among the school children caused by extensive use of computers.

My approach -

I eliminated option A, D and E, successfully.

Option B-

1. Yes, H&W injuries not caused by computer use are common among children. This scenario implies there may be some other cause. Therefore, the plan will not work as the cause of the problem is different.

2. H&W injuries caused by computer use are common; therefore, the plan will work.


Option C-

1. A large proportion of students use computers outside the school, but we already know that they use it in school; therefore the plan will result in a reduction of injuries

2. A small proportion of students use computers outside the school, but we already know that they might suffer H&W injuries from excessive use in school; therefore, the plan will still work.

Hi Vartikaa

There is no disputing the fact that hand and wrist injuries are caused by "extended use of a computer while maintaining an incorrect posture". This is explicitly stated in the passage.

If we assess option (B), the point to remember is that teachers plan to "bring about a sharp reduction in the number of these injuries" ie; they plan to reduce hand and wrist injuries caused by computer use only by monitoring posture in the classroom. Even if there is some other cause, correcting the posture in the classroom will result in lower injuries caused by computers, which is the target of the teachers' plan.

Therefore, knowing of other causes does not help us assess whether the teachers' plan targeting injuries caused by computers will succeed or not.

Hope this helps.

For option C: Isn't it possible that correcting postures at school may inevitably increase students using correct posture at home, thus weakening C as an answer.

And won't option E help the teacher to use the students using correct posture as an encouraging medium for others to follow thereby reducing the injuries?

Kindly help me understand my gap in reasoning.

The question asks that we identify a piece of information that would be useful to know in order to determine whether the teachers’ plan will be successful. This plan is to sharply reduce hand and wrist injuries resulting from incorrect posture by carefully monitoring students’ posture when using computers in the classroom.

With that in mind, here’s (C):


It’s definitely possible that correcting posture at school will improve posture at home. But the entire premise of the teachers’ argument is that the students’ posture will improve and their injuries will be reduced by careful monitoring. If the students use computers frequently at home, their posture may improve there or it may stay the same. We simply don’t know, so it’s possible the teachers’ plan would not succeed. Therefore, (C) would be useful to know in order to assess the plan’s likelihood of succeeding. Eliminate (C).

And here’s (E):


Whether many or few students currently use correct posture does not impact the likelihood of the teachers’ plan succeeding. The teachers could just as easily use students with poor posture as examples of the potential negative consequences as they could use students with good posture as examples of the potential positive consequences. So, (E) would not indicate whether the teachers’ plan is likely to succeed, and we can eliminate it.

Check out a fuller explanation of (C) here and (E) here.

I hope that helps!

Hi all, I see why C is the answer, but why not B?

B suggests there could be another cause.

Suppose the injuries not caused by cpu use are VERY common, then perhaps the plan to monitor computer usage in school is an entirely moot point, because cpus aren't the cause. Conversely, if injuries not caused by cpu use are uncommon, then we have more reason to attribute the cause to cpus.

The argument deals with a very specific kind of injury: "hand and wrist injuries that result from extended use of a computer while maintaining an incorrect posture."

To lower these exact kinds of injuries, teachers plan to monitor their students' posture when using computers in the classroom.

So, which answer choice helps us evaluate the teachers' plan?

Take another look at (B):

(B) talks about hand/wrist injuries NOT caused by computer use -- for example, maybe kids break their wrists while playing sports.

This type of injury is totally irrelevant to the injuries discussed in the passage. It doesn't matter whether kids tend to get these other wrist/hand injuries -- we just need to evaluate whether the plan in the passage will help with the injuries that ARE caused by computer use.

(B) doesn't help with that evaluation, so eliminate (B).

I hope that helps!

Hi avigutman - While I agree A/B/D and E are wrong. I don't see how C is relevant either.

I ask this maybe because I am influenced by another OG CR Question. The way to eliminate D in this question is because We really don't care if the kids are bringing drinks from home given the arguement is about buying MORE DRINKS from the vending machine placed in the cafeteria specifically..

Simirlarly, I asked myself when looking at option C

-- I only care about what the plan of action DURING school is
-- Not only that, I only care about POSTURE specifically (not computer usage) as the arguement is about "POSTURE"

Hence I was not happy with C because
-- its something irrelevant give its taking place OUTSIDE classroom
-- its talking about computer usage ALONE (not even talking about POSTURE)

Thoughts ?

jabhatta2

The reason we care about computer use outside the classroom is that they plan to bring about a sharp reduction in the number of these injuries in general (not just these injuries happening in the classroom).

I responded to the point about the other question here:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/although-the ... l#p2807664

Thank you so much avigutman. That makes sense.

Just one followup -

The types of hand and wrist injuries is because of extensive computer usage WHILE having bad posture

You need to have BOTH pre-requisites for this specific injury

Hence when I read the plan (which is to focus on improving bad posture only) - I said hmmmm
Seems like you can use computers extensively but as long as you sit straight (good posture), it doesn’t seem like you will get the specific type of hand and wrist injury (need to have both pre-requisites working at the same time)


Here option C only talks about one pre-requisite (computer usage) and nothing about 2nd pre-requisite [posture]

Yes, kids use computer extensively
o Maybe the kids have good posture outside school and thus don’t get the hand and wrist injuries
o Maybe the kids have bad posture outside school and then only will get the hand and wrist injuries

No, kids don’t use computer extensively
o well then you won’t get the hand and wrist injury.

We need to know if the kids use computer usage extensively AND have bad posture OUTSIDE school, do we not ?