Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 06:19 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 06:19
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
User avatar
playthegame
User avatar
Johnson Moderator
Joined: 19 Jan 2024
Last visit: 28 Mar 2025
Posts: 423
Own Kudos:
635
 [38]
Given Kudos: 146
Location: Canada
Concentration: Operations, Leadership
Schools: Johnson '27
Products:
Schools: Johnson '27
Posts: 423
Kudos: 635
 [38]
6
Kudos
Add Kudos
32
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,993
 [9]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,993
 [9]
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
SomeOneUnique
Joined: 17 Mar 2019
Last visit: 26 Dec 2024
Posts: 122
Own Kudos:
117
 [6]
Given Kudos: 41
Location: India
Posts: 122
Kudos: 117
 [6]
5
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,388
Own Kudos:
778,224
 [1]
Given Kudos: 99,977
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,388
Kudos: 778,224
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
playthegame
­The table gives information about teacher absenteeism in 21 school systems worldwide for 2012-2013. For each school system, the table gives the country where it is located, the number of teachers it employed in 2012-2013, the average number of days those teachers were absent, and the percent of those teachers who were chronically absent (absent 18 or more days).

Scool systemLocation(country)Number of teachersAverage days absentPercent chronically absent
1A5,63610.1911.12
2B2,38213.8736.82
3C1,77811.7714.12
4C2,89615.633.81
5C2,15114.8232.03
6A9,39511.9315.22
7A8,2669.6813.65
8D6,64213.9127.12
9E9749.5612.22
10F21,8679.210.61
11B59,7508.87.43
12B10,10812.5212.44
13G9,1148.88.98
14G1,60811.5617.29
15F2,03512.0519.46
16A5,97713.3721.69
17F4,99111.7818.01
18F3,2869.8712.63
19F1,2901115.04
20E1,7109.7710.94
21D11,3628.636.07

For each of the following statements, select Yes if, based on the information provided, it can be inferred that the statement is true. Otherwise, select No.



• For the 21 school systems in the table, the number of chronically absent teachers in the school systems in Country D is greater than the number of chronically absent teachers in the school systems in Country G.

Sort the table by Location so D rows and G rows are grouped.

For each D row, multiply teachers by percent chronically absent, then add:

System 8: 6,60 * 27% ≈ 1,800
System 21: 11,000 * 6% ≈ 660
Total for D ≈ 2,460

Do the same for G:

System 13: 9,000 * 9% ≈ 810
System 14: 1,600 * 17% ≈ 270
Total for G ≈ 1,080

Compare 2,460 to 1,080. D is greater.

Answer: Yes.

• For the 21 school systems in the table, there is a positive correlation between the number of teachers and the average number of days the teachers were absent.

A positive correlation means that as the number of teachers rises, the average number of days absent should generally rise too. To check this, sort the table by Number of teachers in ascending order.

You now have 21 rows, giving 20 changes as you move from one row to the next. For each move, compare the Average days absent value. You’ll see that in half the moves, the value goes up, and in about half it goes down. So, there’s no consistent upward trend. Therefore, there is no positive correlation between the number of teachers and the average number of days absent.

Answer: No.

• The school system in the table with the median number of teachers is in the same country as the school system in the table with the median percent of chronically absent teachers.

There are 21 rows, so the median is the 11th after sorting.

Sort by Number of teachers ascending and read the 11th row.
11th is 4,991 teachers, System 17, Country F

Sort by Percent chronically absent ascending and read the 11th row.
11th is 14.12 percent, System 3, Country C

Different countries.

Answer: No.

harshgoyal
jainsaloni
Attachment:
GMAT-Club-Forum-xuhj4arb.png
GMAT-Club-Forum-xuhj4arb.png [ 40.23 KiB | Viewed 1164 times ]
General Discussion
User avatar
heyybhargav
Joined: 11 May 2024
Last visit: 11 Dec 2024
Posts: 4
Own Kudos:
8
 [1]
Given Kudos: 3
Location: India
Schools: ISB YLP'24
GPA: 7.8
Schools: ISB YLP'24
Posts: 4
Kudos: 8
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
For the first statement:
The number of chronically absent teachers in D is 6.07% of 11,362, i.e. ~ 689
The number of chronically absent teachers in G is 8.98% of 9,114, i.e. ~ 818
Here, clearly the number for D is less than that of G.

I don't understand why the answer for this statement is "Yes"
User avatar
playthegame
User avatar
Johnson Moderator
Joined: 19 Jan 2024
Last visit: 28 Mar 2025
Posts: 423
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 146
Location: Canada
Concentration: Operations, Leadership
Schools: Johnson '27
Products:
Schools: Johnson '27
Posts: 423
Kudos: 635
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
heyybhargav
For the first statement:
The number of chronically absent teachers in D is 6.07% of 11,362, i.e. ~ 689
The number of chronically absent teachers in G is 8.98% of 9,114, i.e. ~ 818
Here, clearly the number for D is less than that of G.

I don't understand why the answer for this statement is "Yes"
­Hello, if you sort the table by location you will see there are two lines for D and two for G.

So we will need to add both those lines together before we compare.

Hope this helps, good luck.

 
User avatar
vedika.vyas
Joined: 31 Oct 2023
Last visit: 27 Aug 2024
Posts: 5
Given Kudos: 15
Posts: 5
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
­You have to sort by the location and add the percentage for both rows of D and G. 
The number of chronically absent teachers in D is
6.07% of 11,362 + 27.12% of 6642. Which comes up to ~2491

The number of chronically absent teachers in G
is 8.98% of 9,114 + 17.29% of 1608. Which comes up to ~ 1096 

D>G 
 
User avatar
kop18
Joined: 30 Sep 2020
Last visit: 09 Jan 2025
Posts: 90
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 98
GMAT 1: 610 Q40 V35
GMAT 1: 610 Q40 V35
Posts: 90
Kudos: 21
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I do not understand how we consider whether a line is +vly correlated or-vly correlated. In many questions I have seen that if majority line items are showing an upward trend then we consider the set to +ve correlated. Here to in the second statement - I can see that in 12 instance # of teachers and average day absent is correlated and 9 instances these are -vly correlated. It is only towards the end that one can see a major drop in this trend.

Can someone please explain with clarity and examples how to tackle such questions?
User avatar
av722
Joined: 29 Jul 2024
Last visit: 07 May 2025
Posts: 35
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 38
GMAT Focus 1: 555 Q77 V72 DI74
GMAT Focus 1: 555 Q77 V72 DI74
Posts: 35
Kudos: 19
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
­For the 21 school systems in the table, the number of chronically absent teachers in the school systems in Country D is greater than the number of chronically absent teachers in the school systems in Country G.
did some estimation with numbers to make the calculation easier
D: 11000(.06)+7000(.3) = 2760
G: 2000(.2)+10,000(.1) = 1400

D>G, so true


For the 21 school systems in the table, there is a positive correlation between the number of teachers and the average number of days the teachers were absent.
as the number of teachers goes up, the average days absent shows no specific trend. as a result, there's no positive correlation. false


The school system in the table with the median number of teachers is in the same country as the school system in the table with the median percent of chronically absent teachers.
there's 21 teachers.
median will exist at (21+2)/2 = 11th teacher. sorting by number of teachers, median is F=4,991 teachers.
then sorting by percent of chronically absent teachers:
median is C=14.12%.
F not the same as C, so false­
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,993
 [2]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,993
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
kop18
I do not understand how we consider whether a line is +vly correlated or-vly correlated. In many questions I have seen that if majority line items are showing an upward trend then we consider the set to +ve correlated. Here to in the second statement - I can see that in 12 instance # of teachers and average day absent is correlated and 9 instances these are -vly correlated. It is only towards the end that one can see a major drop in this trend.

Can someone please explain with clarity and examples how to tackle such questions?

2 variables are positively correlated if they move in the same direction. When one increases, other increases too for the most part.

We can plot one curve for "Number of teachers" from smallest to greatest (sort by the number of teachers) - goes from 974 to 59,750.
Now when you plot the graph for "average days spent", does it go up from left to right? No it won't go up. It is going up and down at will as we can see from the data in the table. There is no consistent upward trend.

Plot the graph. Are they two positively correlated? Are they moving together? Number of teachers is rising (the table is sorted by number of teachers) but Absent days is all over the place.

I have made the graph but for some reason am unable to put it up. Will check with the mod and then put it up. Meanwhile you can try plotting it.

*Added the graph

Attachment:
Screenshot 2025-08-16 at 8.11.58 AM.png
Screenshot 2025-08-16 at 8.11.58 AM.png [ 657.29 KiB | Viewed 2887 times ]
User avatar
harshgoyal
Joined: 07 Jul 2024
Last visit: 16 Nov 2025
Posts: 9
Own Kudos:
2
 [1]
Given Kudos: 246
Posts: 9
Kudos: 2
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Is there any alternate way to achieve 100% accuracy without plotting in the test environment. Or else it would be very difficult to complete the question in 2 minutes.
KarishmaB



2 variables are positively correlated if they move in the same direction. When one increases, other increases too for the most part.

We can plot one curve for "Number of teachers" from smallest to greatest (sort by the number of teachers) - goes from 974 to 59,750.
Now when you plot the graph for "average days spent", does it go up from left to right? No it won't go up. It is going up and down at will as we can see from the data in the table. There is no consistent upward trend.

Plot the graph. Are they two positively correlated? Are they moving together? Number of teachers is rising (the table is sorted by number of teachers) but Absent days is all over the place.

I have made the graph but for some reason am unable to put it up. Will check with the mod and then put it up. Meanwhile you can try plotting it.

*Added the graph

Attachment:
Screenshot 2025-08-16 at 8.11.58 AM.png
User avatar
jainsaloni
Joined: 29 Nov 2019
Last visit: 26 Oct 2025
Posts: 13
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 45
Location: India
Schools: ISB '26
GPA: 9.2
Products:
Schools: ISB '26
Posts: 13
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
How to solve this under exam condition?
KarishmaB



2 variables are positively correlated if they move in the same direction. When one increases, other increases too for the most part.

We can plot one curve for "Number of teachers" from smallest to greatest (sort by the number of teachers) - goes from 974 to 59,750.
Now when you plot the graph for "average days spent", does it go up from left to right? No it won't go up. It is going up and down at will as we can see from the data in the table. There is no consistent upward trend.

Plot the graph. Are they two positively correlated? Are they moving together? Number of teachers is rising (the table is sorted by number of teachers) but Absent days is all over the place.

I have made the graph but for some reason am unable to put it up. Will check with the mod and then put it up. Meanwhile you can try plotting it.

*Added the graph

Attachment:
Screenshot 2025-08-16 at 8.11.58 AM.png
Moderators:
Math Expert
105388 posts
496 posts