The school principal : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) - Page 2
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 27 Feb 2017, 09:34

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# The school principal

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7191
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 2173

Kudos [?]: 14054 [0], given: 222

### Show Tags

20 Dec 2010, 13:06
noboru wrote:
OA is D, and your reasoning is fantastic!

However,

Premise: C>E
Conclusion: No E>No C

is not a flawed pattern.

Could anybody clarify that?

You are right. It is not flawed reasoning.

But this reasoning isn't representative of the actual situation.
If the situation were the following:

Then the reasoning would be correct.

But here, the argument says "The school principal insisted that bad teaching causes student failures. Then he went on to conclude that no failures means no bad teaching."

'Bad teaching causes student failures' is not a premise. So we do not have to assume it to be true. It is just the principal's perspective. The principal's reasoning is flawed because of multiple reasons.
1 - There could be many other reasons for failures too e.g. students do not work hard.
2 - It is possible that the teaching is still bad but the students are putting in more effort on their own or perhaps taking classes with some prep provider or taking some online classes. There can be ten other reasons why failures disappeared.

In essence, we are saying that the cause-effect relation the principal insists on doesn't necessarily hold. That is why his reasoning is flawed.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

SVP
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1628
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Followers: 43

Kudos [?]: 1092 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

20 Dec 2010, 13:38
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
noboru wrote:
OA is D, and your reasoning is fantastic!

However,

Premise: C>E
Conclusion: No E>No C

is not a flawed pattern.

Could anybody clarify that?

You are right. It is not flawed reasoning.

But this reasoning isn't representative of the actual situation.
If the situation were the following:

Then the reasoning would be correct.

But here, the argument says "The school principal insisted that bad teaching causes student failures. Then he went on to conclude that no failures means no bad teaching."

'Bad teaching causes student failures' is not a premise. So we do not have to assume it to be true. It is just the principal's perspective. The principal's reasoning is flawed because of multiple reasons.
1 - There could be many other reasons for failures too e.g. students do not work hard.
2 - It is possible that the teaching is still bad but the students are putting in more effort on their own or perhaps taking classes with some prep provider or taking some online classes. There can be ten other reasons why failures disappeared.

In essence, we are saying that the cause-effect relation the principal insists on doesn't necessarily hold. That is why his reasoning is flawed.

that helped a lot.
thanks!
_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Joined: 08 Oct 2010
Posts: 213
Location: Uzbekistan
Schools: Johnson, Fuqua, Simon, Mendoza
WE 3: 10
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 686 [0], given: 974

### Show Tags

25 Jan 2011, 23:51
We reveal that the construction of the stem is Assumption-Result-Conclusion. The similar pattern we see in ans. choice D.

C also does come close but with one distinction that here the manager does directly interfere in order to cause the result which is not a case in the stem. Thus, it is D.
SVP
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Posts: 1672
Location: United States (IN)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Followers: 33

Kudos [?]: 522 [0], given: 36

### Show Tags

30 Mar 2011, 20:35
_________________

Formula of Life -> Achievement/Potential = k * Happiness (where k is a constant)

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

VP
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1353
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 244 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

16 Jun 2011, 01:37
its a clean D here.
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

Manager
Joined: 25 Apr 2011
Posts: 87
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 740 Q50 V40
GPA: 3.5
WE: Securities Sales and Trading (Investment Banking)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 7

### Show Tags

18 Jun 2011, 19:33
yea itz D
Re: The school principal   [#permalink] 18 Jun 2011, 19:33

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 26 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
High School Principal: There is little doubt that 6 30 Dec 2012, 07:08
6 The school principal insisted that student failures are 4 04 Nov 2012, 08:05
12 The principal of a public elementary school complained 9 09 Jul 2011, 12:41
14 High School Principal: There is little doubt that 22 01 May 2010, 22:49
1 The principal of School X has proposed a plan that would add 7 20 Jun 2008, 17:34
Display posts from previous: Sort by