It is currently 20 Oct 2017, 13:01

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

The school principal

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
1 KUDOS received
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1489

Kudos [?]: 1449 [1], given: 2

Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Oct 2010, 10:13
1
This post received
KUDOS
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

20% (01:35) correct 80% (01:45) wrong based on 70 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

I actually dont see a flawed pattern here.
For me the argument is:

Hypothesis: Bad Teaching-->Student Failure
Conclusion: No Student Failure (grades disappeared) --> No Bad Teaching (teaching improved)
Nothing worng with that!
Please comment.
Thanks.

The school principal insisted that student failures are caused by bad teaching. In a relatively short time failing grades disappeared from the school. The principal happily recognized this as evidence that the teaching had improved at the school.
The flawed pattern of reasoning in the above is most similar to that in which one of the following?
(A) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was caused by overeating. In a brief time all the members stopped overeating. The nutritionist was pleased to conclude that they had stopped gaining weight.
(B) The manager insisted that the workers who filed complaints had too many difference tasks. The manager simplified the jobs, and complains stopped. The manager happily concluded that the working environment had been improved.
(C) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was merely in their imagination. Members were given weight charts for the last three months. The nutritionist was pleased to conclude that the complaints of weight gain had stopped.
(D) The manager insisted that the workers who filed complaints did not have enough to do. Soon there were no more complaints filed. The manager was pleased to conclude that the workers were now productively filling their time.
(E) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was cause by their thinking of food too often. The nutritionist was happy to conclude that the weight gain had stopped once the team members reported that they had stopped thinking of food so often.
_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit


GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 1449 [1], given: 2

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Posts: 223

Kudos [?]: 105 [0], given: 20

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Oct 2010, 12:03
i think its D. Its the closest in pattern.

Fail/Complaints <----- Bad teacher/Not enough to do.

Then bad grades/complaints disappeared (note: principal did not take any other positive action other than making the allegation; for this reason B is wrong where the manager took some positive action - he "simplified the job").

Conclusion reached: teaching improved/time being filled productively.

The 'bad' cause - bad teacher/not enough to do turns into an improvement (good teaching/productive usage of time) in the conclusion

Kudos [?]: 105 [0], given: 20

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 12 Oct 2010
Posts: 5

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Oct 2010, 12:17
bad teaching responsible for failure.
failure improved therefore teaching must have improved.

X responsible for Y
Y improved Hence X improved

In E
Thinking food responsible for weight gain.
weight gain improved therefore thinking improved(stopped)

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 15 May 2010
Posts: 14

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 4

Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Oct 2010, 13:42
I will go with [D]
This one has the closest pattern of Assumption-Result-Conclusion.

[E] is a close one, but if looked at closely, we can see that the team members reported that they had stopped thinking of food... whereas in the problem statement no student (or anybody) reported of bad teaching.

This is a good CR question... would be nice to see some more explanations... thanks for posting it!

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 4

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 08 Oct 2010
Posts: 26

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Oct 2010, 18:17
according to me its D.
whats OA ??

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: Keep fighting!
Affiliations: IIT Madras
Joined: 31 Jul 2010
Posts: 220

Kudos [?]: 535 [0], given: 104

WE 1: 2+ years - Programming
WE 2: 3+ years - Product developement,
WE 3: 2+ years - Program management
Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Oct 2010, 18:23
i am with D too.

Kudos [?]: 535 [0], given: 104

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Posts: 40

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 1

Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Oct 2010, 23:27
D
Took me few minutes to compare and read through all the options. D is closest.

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 1

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Posts: 118

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 17

Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Oct 2010, 23:58
D OA pls?

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 17

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 17 Apr 2010
Posts: 97

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 12

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Oct 2010, 11:25
IMO B..OA pls

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 12

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 29 Dec 2009
Posts: 31

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 2

Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Oct 2010, 12:53
+1 (B)
OA pls..?

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 2

2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Aug 2010
Posts: 218

Kudos [?]: 225 [2], given: 5

Location: Boston
Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Nov 2010, 18:01
2
This post received
KUDOS
noboru wrote:
I actually dont see a flawed pattern here.
For me the argument is:

Hypothesis: Bad Teaching-->Student Failure
Conclusion: No Student Failure (grades disappeared) --> No Bad Teaching (teaching improved)
Nothing worng with that!
Please comment.
Thanks.

The school principal insisted that student failures are caused by bad teaching. In a relatively short time failing grades disappeared from the school. The principal happily recognized this as evidence that the teaching had improved at the school.
The flawed pattern of reasoning in the above is most similar to that in which one of the following?
(A) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was caused by overeating. In a brief time all the members stopped overeating. The nutritionist was pleased to conclude that they had stopped gaining weight.
(B) The manager insisted that the workers who filed complaints had too many difference tasks. The manager simplified the jobs, and complains stopped. The manager happily concluded that the working environment had been improved.
(C) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was merely in their imagination. Members were given weight charts for the last three months. The nutritionist was pleased to conclude that the complaints of weight gain had stopped.
(D) The manager insisted that the workers who filed complaints did not have enough to do. Soon there were no more complaints filed. The manager was pleased to conclude that the workers were now productively filling their time.
(E) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was cause by their thinking of food too often. The nutritionist was happy to conclude that the weight gain had stopped once the team members reported that they had stopped thinking of food so often.


D. It's circular logic. In the example given, the principal is claiming that the students are failing because of bad teaching. When the students stop failing, he then claims that the teaching has improved. But he never proved that bad teaching was the cause of student failures, nor did he actually show that teaching improved. He made a claim, didn't back it up, then used his own unproven claim to prove itself.

In D, the same type of circular logic is used - the manager claims that workers are filing complaints because they have nothing to do, but fails to back that claim up at all. Then, when workers stop filing complaints, the manager claims it's because the workers no longer have nothing to do. Again, he makes a claim, fails to provide evidence, and then uses the claim to prove itself.

Kudos [?]: 225 [2], given: 5

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Posts: 70

Kudos [?]: 176 [0], given: 18

Location: India
Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Nov 2010, 20:44
TehJay wrote:
noboru wrote:
I actually dont see a flawed pattern here.
For me the argument is:

Hypothesis: Bad Teaching-->Student Failure
Conclusion: No Student Failure (grades disappeared) --> No Bad Teaching (teaching improved)
Nothing worng with that!
Please comment.
Thanks.

The school principal insisted that student failures are caused by bad teaching. In a relatively short time failing grades disappeared from the school. The principal happily recognized this as evidence that the teaching had improved at the school.
The flawed pattern of reasoning in the above is most similar to that in which one of the following?
(A) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was caused by overeating. In a brief time all the members stopped overeating. The nutritionist was pleased to conclude that they had stopped gaining weight.
(B) The manager insisted that the workers who filed complaints had too many difference tasks. The manager simplified the jobs, and complains stopped. The manager happily concluded that the working environment had been improved.
(C) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was merely in their imagination. Members were given weight charts for the last three months. The nutritionist was pleased to conclude that the complaints of weight gain had stopped.
(D) The manager insisted that the workers who filed complaints did not have enough to do. Soon there were no more complaints filed. The manager was pleased to conclude that the workers were now productively filling their time.
(E) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was cause by their thinking of food too often. The nutritionist was happy to conclude that the weight gain had stopped once the team members reported that they had stopped thinking of food so often.


D. It's circular logic. In the example given, the principal is claiming that the students are failing because of bad teaching. When the students stop failing, he then claims that the teaching has improved. But he never proved that bad teaching was the cause of student failures, nor did he actually show that teaching improved. He made a claim, didn't back it up, then used his own unproven claim to prove itself.

In D, the same type of circular logic is used - the manager claims that workers are filing complaints because they have nothing to do, but fails to back that claim up at all. Then, when workers stop filing complaints, the manager claims it's because the workers no longer have nothing to do. Again, he makes a claim, fails to provide evidence, and then uses the claim to prove itself.


Superb explanation! +1
_________________

Spread some happiness..Press Kudos! :)

Kudos [?]: 176 [0], given: 18

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: Planning to retake.
Affiliations: Alpha Psi Omega
Joined: 25 Oct 2010
Posts: 89

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 14

Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 650 Q42 V37
GRE 1: 1310 Q630 V680
GPA: 3.16
Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Nov 2010, 01:58
1:21 - D. Woohoo!
_________________

Did I help you? Please give me kudos.

Each moment of time ought to be put to proper use, either in business, in improving the mind, in the innocent and necessary relaxations and entertainments of life, or in the care of the moral and religious part of our nature.

-William Andrus Alcott

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 14

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Aug 2009
Posts: 53

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 19

Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Nov 2010, 05:22
Premise 1: Cause ----> Effect
Conclusion: No Effect -----> No Cause

A : Cause----> Effect
No Cause -----> No Effect
B: Cause 1 -----> Effect 1
No Cause 1 ------> No effect 1
Hence Effect 2
C: Cause 1----> Effect
Cause 2 -----> No Effect

D: Cause -----> Effect
No Effect -----> No Cause

E: Cause----> Effect
No Cause -----> No Effect

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 19

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Oct 2010
Posts: 90

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

Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Nov 2010, 09:16
noboru wrote:
I actually dont see a flawed pattern here.
For me the argument is:

Hypothesis: Bad Teaching-->Student Failure
Conclusion: No Student Failure (grades disappeared) --> No Bad Teaching (teaching improved)
Nothing worng with that!
Please comment.
Thanks.

The school principal insisted that student failures are caused by bad teaching. In a relatively short time failing grades disappeared from the school. The principal happily recognized this as evidence that the teaching had improved at the school.
The flawed pattern of reasoning in the above is most similar to that in which one of the following?
(A) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was caused by overeating. In a brief time all the members stopped overeating. The nutritionist was pleased to conclude that they had stopped gaining weight.
(B) The manager insisted that the workers who filed complaints had too many difference tasks. The manager simplified the jobs, and complains stopped. The manager happily concluded that the working environment had been improved.
(C) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was merely in their imagination. Members were given weight charts for the last three months. The nutritionist was pleased to conclude that the complaints of weight gain had stopped.
(D) The manager insisted that the workers who filed complaints did not have enough to do. Soon there were no more complaints filed. The manager was pleased to conclude that the workers were now productively filling their time.
(E) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was cause by their thinking of food too often. The nutritionist was happy to conclude that the weight gain had stopped once the team members reported that they had stopped thinking of food so often.


+1 to D from me.

Seems to me like the original sentence fails to describe any action taken to combat the issue at hand. In several of the answer choices action is taken to improve the situation, such as in option A, which explicitly stated that several members stopped overeating.

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

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 01 Jun 2009
Posts: 36

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 2

Location: Pune, India
Schools: ISB
Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Nov 2010, 10:38
yeah, its D

noboru wrote:
I actually dont see a flawed pattern here.
For me the argument is:

Hypothesis: Bad Teaching-->Student Failure
Conclusion: No Student Failure (grades disappeared) --> No Bad Teaching (teaching improved)
Nothing worng with that!
Please comment.
Thanks.

The school principal insisted that student failures are caused by bad teaching. In a relatively short time failing grades disappeared from the school. The principal happily recognized this as evidence that the teaching had improved at the school.
The flawed pattern of reasoning in the above is most similar to that in which one of the following?
(A) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was caused by overeating. In a brief time all the members stopped overeating. The nutritionist was pleased to conclude that they had stopped gaining weight.
(B) The manager insisted that the workers who filed complaints had too many difference tasks. The manager simplified the jobs, and complains stopped. The manager happily concluded that the working environment had been improved.
(C) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was merely in their imagination. Members were given weight charts for the last three months. The nutritionist was pleased to conclude that the complaints of weight gain had stopped.
(D) The manager insisted that the workers who filed complaints did not have enough to do. Soon there were no more complaints filed. The manager was pleased to conclude that the workers were now productively filling their time.
(E) The nutritionist insisted that the weight gain that team members complained of was cause by their thinking of food too often. The nutritionist was happy to conclude that the weight gain had stopped once the team members reported that they had stopped thinking of food so often.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 2

VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1489

Kudos [?]: 1449 [0], given: 2

Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Nov 2010, 04:54
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?
Thanks in advance!

ramgmat wrote:
Premise 1: Cause ----> Effect
Conclusion: No Effect -----> No Cause

A : Cause----> Effect
No Cause -----> No Effect
B: Cause 1 -----> Effect 1
No Cause 1 ------> No effect 1
Hence Effect 2
C: Cause 1----> Effect
Cause 2 -----> No Effect

D: Cause -----> Effect
No Effect -----> No Cause

E: Cause----> Effect
No Cause -----> No Effect

_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit


GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 1449 [0], given: 2

Retired Moderator
User avatar
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1635

Kudos [?]: 1105 [0], given: 109

Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Dec 2010, 18:12
+1 D
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 1105 [0], given: 109

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 02 Oct 2010
Posts: 145

Kudos [?]: 50 [0], given: 29

Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Dec 2010, 21:54
suhi wrote:
according to me its D.
whats OA ??


Yeah its D...

Kudos [?]: 50 [0], given: 29

VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1489

Kudos [?]: 1449 [0], given: 2

Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Re: The school principal [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Dec 2010, 13:33
Nobody is going to clarify this?

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?
Thanks in advance!

ramgmat wrote:
Premise 1: Cause ----> Effect
Conclusion: No Effect -----> No Cause

A : Cause----> Effect
No Cause -----> No Effect
B: Cause 1 -----> Effect 1
No Cause 1 ------> No effect 1
Hence Effect 2
C: Cause 1----> Effect
Cause 2 -----> No Effect

D: Cause -----> Effect
No Effect -----> No Cause

E: Cause----> Effect
No Cause -----> No Effect

_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit


GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 1449 [0], given: 2

Re: The school principal   [#permalink] 20 Dec 2010, 13:33

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 26 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

The school principal

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.