GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 26 Jun 2019, 04:05

### 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

# To meet the specific needs of a small, localized program like that of

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

General GMAT Forum Moderator
Joined: 29 Jan 2015
Posts: 1284
Location: India
WE: General Management (Non-Profit and Government)
To meet the specific needs of a small, localized program like that of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 02 Dec 2018, 18:37
1
2
Question 1
00:00

based on 78 sessions

66% (03:29) correct 34% (03:27) wrong

### HideShow timer Statistics

Question 2
00:00

based on 86 sessions

76% (00:28) correct 24% (00:33) wrong

### HideShow timer Statistics

Question 3
00:00

based on 92 sessions

49% (01:17) correct 51% (00:54) wrong

### HideShow timer Statistics

To meet the specific needs of a small, localized program like that of the PFF Fellows, an evaluation should employ the case study design. A predominantly qualitative research method, the case study is designed to examine a subject in its natural setting and, in our case, to provide an appreciative, focused assessment of the individual concerns and idiosyncrasies of the program under consideration. By virtue of engaging with the people involved with the program itself, the case study can offer a respectful, expressive, sympathetic perspective on a program. Attending to the community within a program as it does, the case study method of interviews, surveys, and other anecdotal feedback instruments is ideal for a program of moderate scope and experiential nature. Since its approach is qualitative, the case study provides descriptive data that lead to an increased understanding of the program among all stakeholders, and can help facilitate discussion and relationship-building during the consideration of results. A program of modest size and close connection is accordingly a fine candidate for a case study evaluation.

The case study design was selected for two principal reasons: first, because the PFF Fellows program is not being compared with any other group – this is a formative evaluation seeking information that will improve the Fellows program, not a summative evaluation comparing its merit to that of other similar and potentially implementable programs; second, because both the PFF Fellows program’s own measures of success and the key questions guiding this evaluation (how well prepared did faculty feel, how satisfied are they with their current positions and their career arcs, etc.) are primarily qualitative themselves.

Other facets of the program contribute to making a case study design feasible. Since this evaluation’s foremost concern with the data is that they bear directly on local aspects of the PFF Fellows program, generalizability of results is not paramount. Also, since this evaluation is assessing the program from the perspective of present and past participants, it is not an experiment; pretreatment data are unnecessary when there is to be no treatment. The case study design similarly favors programs where processes are to be scrutinized, and in this particular evaluation, the approach, intervention, and guidance of the PFF Fellows program, not the value of the product, are to be explored. Finally, the PFF Fellows program is young and still developing; consequently, an evaluation that assesses which elements of the program have proven beneficial and which yet stand to be improved would fit the current state of the program, introducing few pressures or outside influences into the program itself and allowing for the naturalistic engagement so critical to a fruitful qualitative evaluation.
Question

1- Which of the following could most reasonably be inferred from this passage?

A- an evaluation of the PFF Fellows program would benefit from naturalistic engagement

B- a summative evaluation would add to a complete assessment of the PFF Fellows program

C- a formative evaluation is not appropriate when evaluating a program of vast scope

D- a proper evaluation of the PFF Fellows program will require pretreatment data

E- evaluation is unlikely to yield meaningful results when applied to major sociocultural institutions

2- What is the primary purpose of this passage?

A- to recommend an approach

B- to criticize an approach

C- to define a method

E- to identify a candidate for research

3- Which of the following best describes the function of the third paragraph in this passage?

A- to voice a prominent concern

B- to answer a number of possible objections

C- to explain the results of a study

D- to illustrate a method already introduced

E- to rebut critics of the author

_________________
If you liked my post, kindly give me a Kudos. Thanks.

Originally posted by rohan2345 on 02 Dec 2018, 12:17.
Last edited by aragonn on 02 Dec 2018, 18:37, edited 1 time in total.
formatted
MBA Section Director
Affiliations: GMATClub
Joined: 22 May 2017
Posts: 2529
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Re: To meet the specific needs of a small, localized program like that of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Dec 2018, 21:36

+1 kudos to the posts containing answer explanations of all questions

_________________
Manager
Joined: 03 Aug 2018
Posts: 69
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GMAT 1: 590 Q45 V26
GPA: 3.5
Re: To meet the specific needs of a small, localized program like that of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2018, 01:13
Hi Experts

For Q2, when we say recommend, shouldn't we be comparing one entity to others? While the language of the passage from beginning is why Case study approach is apt, but we don't discuss any immediate comparisons with other approaches. Please can you help me with rationale behind correct answer.

For Q3, passage 3 is adding more points to the case study approach, but I don't see any objections made. Why is option 2 correct ..

Thank You
Abhinav
General GMAT Forum Moderator
Joined: 29 Jan 2015
Posts: 1284
Location: India
WE: General Management (Non-Profit and Government)
To meet the specific needs of a small, localized program like that of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2018, 08:02
2
Here are the official explanations for this passage.

1- Solution: In open-ended Inference questions in Reading Comprehension passages, you simply have to check each answer choice. Start by remembering our Inference rules from Critical Reasoning: treat each answer choice like a conclusion, make sure the conclusion contains no new information not already given in the premises, make sure the conclusion generalizes properly (no generalizing “up” from a Particular statement to a Universal statement, for example -- from “some cakes are tasty" to "all cakes are tasty"). The “bad generalization” rules are particularly useful to help eliminate bad answer choices: watch out for categorical statements like "x is not appropriate" or "y is the only way to solve a problem", as the GMAT tends to prefer conservative, tentative Inference answers rather than broadly generalizing ones. In our case (B) and (D) say the opposite of what we have in the passage (summative evaluations are not recommended here and the PFF Fellows program does not require pretreatment data), while (C) and (E) improperly generalize. (A), which connects a statement in the first paragraph to a statement in the third by saying that both statements describe a small, case study-friendly program, is thus the best answer.

2- Solution: In Purpose questions you generally want to look for a recurrent theme in the passage, something that answers the question of why this article was written. The most important thing in most Purpose questions is to not mistake the introduction or the conclusion for the purpose itself, as the GMAT loves to have both of those feature as incorrect answer choices, and in this case (C) is dangerous, as it characterizes the introduction but not the passage as a whole. The recurrent theme in the passage is why the case study method is appropriate to this particular evaluation, so (A) is the best answer with the most support.

3- Solution: The correct answer is B. On Specific questions, beware answer choices that improperly introduce elements not present in the passage itself. Critics are nowhere mentioned, so (E) is out, and the method already introduced is unclear, unless the author means the case study method, which has already been described at length, so (D) is out. No study has been conducted or referred to -- the passage is proposing a new study, not commenting on any completed ones -- so (C) is also bad. (A) is another very dangerous bad answer type: the answer uses the trigger phrase “prominent concern” to echo the “foremost concern” found in the topic sentence of the third paragraph, but beyond the similar phrase this answer choice has nothing to do with the third paragraph.
_________________
If you liked my post, kindly give me a Kudos. Thanks.
Manager
Joined: 10 Mar 2016
Posts: 114
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Real Estate
GMAT 1: 550 Q44 V23
Re: To meet the specific needs of a small, localized program like that of  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2018, 11:46
2
1. A- an evaluation of the PFF Fellows program would benefit from naturalistic engagement
- given in first para
B- a summative evaluation would add to a complete assessment of the PFF Fellows program
- nowhere it is written
C- a formative evaluation is not appropriate when evaluating a program of vast scope - opposite

D- a proper evaluation of the PFF Fellows program will require pretreatment data
- opposite
E- evaluation is unlikely to yield meaningful results when applied to major sociocultural institutions - opposite

2. A- to recommend an approach
- says at last para
B- to criticize an approach
- out of scope
C- to define a method - author did not just defined. He says it would fit.

D- to undermine a tradition - out of scope

E- to identify a candidate for research - out of scope

3. A- to voice a prominent concern - extreme choice

B- to answer a number of possible objections - says the last para about the concern with the data

C- to explain the results of a study - no results are given

D- to illustrate a method already introduced - out of scope

E- to rebut critics of the author - out of scope
_________________
Please Hit Kudos if you like my post useful.
Re: To meet the specific needs of a small, localized program like that of   [#permalink] 04 Dec 2018, 11:46
Display posts from previous: Sort by