The PQ&R Corporation has developed a collection of training materials

Question

The PQ&R Corporation has developed a collection of training materials and skills tests for activities that accurately represent the types of tasks performed by employees in a production environment. Before any instruction is given, each trainee is asked to perform the training battery—a series of tasks for which they are about to receive training. Immediately on completion of instruction, trainees are again asked to perform the training battery to assess the effectiveness of instruction. After performing the battery for the second time, the trainees become employees of PQ&R. On completion of their six-month introductory period of employment, trainees are required to perform the training battery a third time.

Sajjad1994 · Accepted Answer

Official Explanation

1. For each of the following statements about the scores in Session 1, Session 2, and Session 3, select Yes if the statement is supported by the information provided. Otherwise, select No.

RO1

The Session 2 graphs show that all the trainees scored less than 20 in pretraining and greater than 60 in posttraining, so their pretraining scores were greater than 3 times their posttraining scores.

The correct answer is Yes.

RO2

The Session 1 graphs show that the order of trainees by pretraining score is identical to the order by posttraining score. Therefore, there is a positive correlation between the two scores.

The correct answer is Yes.

RO3

The Session 1 graphs show that pretraining scores ranged from approximately 25 to 45, for a range of 20. The Session 2 graphs show that pretraining scores ranged from approximately 5 to 15, for a range of 10. The Session 3 graphs show that pretraining scores ranged from approximately 22 to 45, for a range of 23. Thus, the range is least for Session 2.

The correct answer is Yes.

For each of the three training sessions, select Successful if, on the basis of the given information, it would be considered successful by PQ&R. Otherwise, select Unsuccessful.

To find the average pretraining score and post-training score for each session, one could add the 8 scores of each type and divide by the number of scores (8). A quicker estimate can be made, however, by comparing the highest pretraining score and lowest post-training score for each session. If the lowest post-training score is at least 50% higher than the highest pretraining score, the average post-training score will also be at least 50% higher than the average pretraining score, and no further calculation is needed to determine whether the training session was successful.

RO1

In Session 1, the highest pretraining score according to the graph is approximately 45. The lowest post-training score is approximately 70. The percent of increase from 45 to 70 is  %~56%, which is greater than 50%

The correct answer is Successful.

RO2

In Session 2, the highest pretraining score according to the graph is approximately 15. The lowest posttraining score is approximately 65. The percent of increase from 15 to 65 is  %~333%, which is greater than 50%

The correct answer is Successful.

RO3

In Session 3, the highest pretraining score according to the graph is approximately 45. The lowest posttraining score is approximately 80. The percent of increase from 45 to 80 is  %~78%, which is greater than 50%

The correct answer is Successful.

Immediately prior to performing the training battery at the six-month mark, all the trainees in Session 1 were subject to on-the-job observation and their performance was scored. For tasks performed during observation that were also included in the battery, the average (arithmetic mean) score was 99.5. Which one of the following would, if true, best explain the apparent discrepancy between this result and the given information?

According to the information provided, the trainees in Session 1 on average performed higher in their on-the-job observation (99.5%) than in their six-month training battery. (The graph shows that only 2 of 8 trainees scored 99% or higher in the six-month training battery.) If activities performed out of the controlled assessment environment were more prone to error, the on-the-job observation scores should be lower, not higher (excluding A).

Additionally, B, C, and D do not help explain the discrepancy because they provide no basis for comparing on-the-job performance with performance on the test battery. If, however, the training battery contained many more tasks than did the on-the-job observation (E), it is possible that trainees scored lower on those additional tasks. That could explain the discrepancy between the on-the-job observation and the six-month training battery.

Answer: E

Apt0810 · Answer

1)a)Yes,we can see for example that 2a,2b have post training scores more than 3 times the pretraining scores
b)Yes,in the session 1 as the pretraining scores are increasing the post training scores are also increasing
c)Yes,we can easily that the highest and lowest value are lowest for session 2 when compared with that of session 1 &3,and the distance between the highest and lowest value is list so yes the range is least.

2) Yes,all the sessions are successful because we can easily see that the individual values for post training sessions are atleast greater than 1.5 times the values of pretraining session so obviously the average will also be at least 1.5 greater.

3)E,Since if the trainees are assigned some subset of tasks theb only the average score can go upto 99.5 because if they would have given all the tasks then the avg would be pretty much lower

Posted from my mobile device

bM22 · Answer

Hi  sajjad , 
 Could you post the OE for question 3, I am having trouble deducing how the a small subset of tasks would result in the average going up. 
Below is my explanation for the first 2 questions.

1. 
A. For at least one trainee, the posttraining score was greater than 3 times the pretraining score.

From the graph we can infer that for 2a, the pre-training score = ~5, and post-training score = ~ 65 (> 3 times the pre-training score)
Since, condition mentioned is for at least one trainee = > >= 1.
So, 1 is enough, but from the graph we can easily interpret that the post training scores for 2b, 2c, 2d, 2e, 2f, 2g, 2g is also greater than 3 times the pre-training scores of the respective trainees.

Answer is Yes.

B. The data for Session 1 exhibit a positive correlation between pretraining and posttraining scores.
yes, since the scores for both the sessions are increasing.

Answer is  Yes .

C. For the three sessions, the range of pre-training scores is least for Session 2.
Range of Pre-training scores for session 1: 45-25 = ~ 20
For Session 2: 15-5 = ~10 
For Session 3: 43-22 = ~21.
We can see, the range is lowest for session 2.

Answer Yes.

2. For each of the three training sessions, select Successful if, on the basis of the given information, it would be considered successful by PQ&R. Otherwise, select Unsuccessful.

Let's do it for Session 1: 
 The corresponding average pre-training score = (25+28+30+35+40+40+41+42)/8 = 45.12
=> average (arithmetic mean) post-training score for Session 1: (71 +72+ 77+ 78 + 80 + 80 + 81 + 81)/ 8 = 77.5 (clearly >50% of the average of the pre- training scores.)
 => Training for Session 1 was successful.
 
For session 2: The wide difference in scores, indicates that the average of the post-training scores is >50% of the average of the pre-training scores.
 => training for Session 2 was also successful.
  
For Session 3, also the wide difference in scores easily helps us identify the average diff., thus making the training for session 3 also  successful .

Thanks.

YashYashkratos · Answer

Can someone please explain the third table (trainees by session) 
i do not understand the pre training score order and post training score order.

chetan2u · Answer

The graphs are exactly the same. It os more like sorting the table in present questions. The pre training score ordered is sorted from lower pre training score to higher pre-training score( check the top edge of the dark blue portion for each employee), and post training score ordered is sorted from lower post training score to higher post-training score( check the top edge of the light blue portion for each employee).

PReciSioN · Answer

For Q3,

E says - "On the job, the trainees are usually assigned only a small subset of the tasks included in the training battery."

Does this help explain why the employees scored higher in this small subset than in the overall training battery? No.

B - "The tasks that trainees performed most poorly during on-the-job observation are those that the trainees perform least frequently on the job."
 
This suggests that there is some correlation between infrequent performance and poor performance. Since tasks in the training battery, that are not part of the job, are not performed at all, this could indeed explain why the overall score for training battery was lower than the on-the-job scores.

Could  avigutman  ,  Bunuel  ,  chetan2u  comment on this please? Thanks.

zermatt17 · Answer

Question 1) "For each of the following statements about the scores in Session 1, Session 2, and Session 3, select Yes if the statement is supported by the information provided. Otherwise, select No."

It says "the scores in session 1, session 2, and session 3"

"For at least one trainee, the posttraining score was greater than 3 times the pretraining score." >> should I read it as at least one trainee in one session or in ALL 3 sessions?

bb · Answer

Hi. You would look for 1 trainee that has improved in ANY session by 3x. So Session 1, 2 or 3 would satisfy that condition.

bb · Answer

Hi. For Question 3, we are looking for why they scored 99.5 on the "on-the-job observation) and and lower on the battery. If the on-job observation included only a small sub-set of tasks as E says, then maybe they only did 5 things and did them really well on the job while the battery required them to do 10 or 15 tasks and some of them they were not good at, and thus got lower scores. I think you may have read this one backwards.

E is the correct answer.  The battery tests a lot more than what they do on the job.

B is irrelevant.  We know they got a score of 99.5 on the observation. This tells us nothing about the training battery. Who cares which tasks were scored lower or higher. What they got a 98 on some and 100 on others?

bumpbot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club BumpBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

	Activities performed out of the controlled assessment environment were more prone to error.
	The tasks that trainees performed most poorly during on-the-job observation are those that the trainees perform least frequently on the job.
	Trainees completing the training battery at the six-month mark were much more likely to perform the tasks well.
	Trainees in Session 1 participated in extensive review of their training materials between the posttraining and six-month administrations of the training battery.
	On the job, the trainees are usually assigned only a small subset of the tasks included in the training battery.

The PQ&R Corporation has developed a collection of training materials

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

Yes	No
		For at least one trainee, the posttraining score was greater than 3 times the pretraining score.
		The data for Session 1 exhibit a positive correlation between pretraining and posttraining scores.
		For the three sessions, the range of pretraining scores is least for Session 2.

GMAT Multi-Source Reasoning (MSR) Questions

The PQ&R Corporation has developed a collection of training materials

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards