The governor of State X recently announced a plan to put computers

Question

The governor of State X recently announced a plan to put computers in schools. He noted that math scores in State X had been declining, and stated that the plan will reverse the trend.

The conclusion above would be most strongly supported if, which one of the following were inserted into the argument as an additional premise?

A. Students in State X have more hours of math instruction now than 10 years ago.
B. A polling firm recently showed that education was a top concern of the residents of State X.
C. Studies have shown that students who use computers regularly achieve higher test scores than do students who do not use computers.
D. Studies have shown that students who use computers regularly score more highly on the math portions of standardized tests than students who do not. 
E. Studies show that students who rely on computers for calculations do not learn to make those calculations themselves.

Shreyaarora · Answer

okay so C & D are the only relevant ones here. honestly could be a bit confusing but the only thing is that D - is stronger since it's directly connecting the computers to math tests whereas C is more for improvement in general.

AdarshSambare · Answer

Yeah only C & D are relevant ones:

Let’s compare option  C  and  D  clearly:
 
  Option C:  “Students who use computers regularly achieve higher test scores than those who do not.”
 → This talks about  overall test scores  (any subject). It does not specifically mention  math , which is the concern in the argument. 
  Option D:  “Students who use computers regularly score more highly on the  math portions  of standardized tests than students who do not.”
 → This directly links  computer use  to  better math performance , which supports the governor’s claim that computers will improve math scores.

So,  D  is better because it directly connects computers to improved  math scores , while  C  is too general.

Karanrev · Answer

Option D mentions a increase in certain segment that is standardized test rather than in general so it shouldn't be the right answer

guddo · Answer

I think the word “standardized” is not a problem here.

The conclusion is about declining  math scores , and standardized tests are one common way schools measure math scores. So D does not have to show that computers improve every part of math ability.

It is enough that D shows students who use computers score higher on the  math portion  of such tests. That directly supports the claim that computers could help reverse a decline in math scores.

egmat · Answer

Hi Karanrev,

I see exactly where this is coming from. You're reading D's mention of "the  math portions of standardized tests " as a  narrowing  - as if D only helps a tiny slice of the situation and therefore can't fully support the conclusion. That instinct (be suspicious of an answer that's too narrow) is a good one in general, but here it's pointing the wrong way.

Look at what the conclusion is actually about.  The governor is worried about one specific thing:  math scores  in State X have been  declining , and his plan will  reverse that trend . The conclusion is math-specific. So the ideal premise is one that connects computers specifically to  better math performance  - not to "education" broadly.

That's why D's specificity is a  strength, not a weakness :
- D says computer users "score more highly on the  math  portions of standardized tests."
- Those math scores are exactly the thing the governor says is falling.
- So D bridges the gap cleanly: computers - higher math scores - trend reverses.

Compare it to  C , which says computer users get higher test scores  in general . C is broader, and that breadth is precisely its problem - higher overall scores could come entirely from reading or science while math keeps sliding. C leaves the math gap open; D closes it.

Quick word-play check to lock this in.  Keep the argument identical and just turn one knob in D:
- If D said "score higher on the  reading  portions" - does it support a  math  conclusion? No.
- If D said "score higher on tests  in general " - that's just C, weaker.
- With " math  portions" - it matches the conclusion word-for-word.

So "standardized tests" isn't restricting D to some irrelevant corner - it's the very measure the governor's claim lives on. Matching the scope of the conclusion is what makes an answer strong, and D matches it exactly.

Answer: D

The governor of State X recently announced a plan to put computers

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

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

The governor of State X recently announced a plan to put computers

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