Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Aug 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Save up to $1,000 on select GMAT prep now. This Fall, achieve your most ambitious goals with millions of student success stories behind you.
Aug 2710:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
We’ve worked incredibly hard to build TTP into the best test prep experience possible, and it would mean a lot to us to win Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep. If TTP has helped you, we’d be incredibly grateful for your vote.
Aug 3110:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM EDT
Top Scores Start with a Elite Online Prep Course. Enroll for 6 months of access to over 400 hours of GMAT video lessons AND 715+ Score Guarantee!
Sep 0609:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EST
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful EA course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Perfect class schedule and easy course access for working professionals. Class starts Sept. 6, 9:30am-12:30pm EST
Sep 0907:00 AM PDT
-10:00 AM PDT
Meet AdComs and explore top Master’s programs - MiM, MiF, MSc, MSBA and more. - Application Fee Waivers - Free 1-Week of GMAT Club Tests: - Master's Application Toolkit - Grand Prize Giveaway
Oct 1308:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Oct. 13, 2026 - Jan. 7, 2027, 8:00pm-10:00pm EST
21 Feb 2026, 21:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
Several environmental advocacy groups claim to represent the interests of rural farming communities affected by climate change. Yet, many of these organizations are primarily staffed and funded by individuals from urban areas, with little direct experience in agriculture. This has led some critics to question whether these groups truly reflect the priorities of the communities they aim to support.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the criticism raised about the advocacy groups?
A. Rural farmers often prioritize short-term economic survival over long-term environmental initiatives proposed by government agencies.
B. Some of the most vocal opponents of environmental advocacy groups are also those who have historically resisted regulatory oversight of farming practices.
C. Advocacy groups led by individuals without direct exposure to the affected communities often lack a nuanced understanding of local challenges.
D. Urban-based environmental organizations typically rely on policy advisors with academic expertise in climate science and sustainability.
E. Farming communities are often hesitant to engage with organizations they perceive as outsiders, regardless of the groups’ stated intentions.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the criticism raised about the advocacy groups?
A. Rural farmers often prioritize short-term economic survival over long-term environmental initiatives proposed by government agencies.
B. Some of the most vocal opponents of environmental advocacy groups are also those who have historically resisted regulatory oversight of farming practices.
C. Advocacy groups led by individuals without direct exposure to the affected communities often lack a nuanced understanding of local challenges.
D. Urban-based environmental organizations typically rely on policy advisors with academic expertise in climate science and sustainability.
E. Farming communities are often hesitant to engage with organizations they perceive as outsiders, regardless of the groups’ stated intentions.
21 Feb 2026, 21:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
Several environmental advocacy groups claim to represent the interests of rural farming communities affected by climate change. Yet, many of these organizations are primarily staffed and funded by individuals from urban areas, with little direct experience in agriculture. This has led some critics to question whether these groups truly reflect the priorities of the communities they aim to support.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the criticism raised about the advocacy groups?
A. Rural farmers often prioritize short-term economic survival over long-term environmental initiatives proposed by government agencies.
B. Some of the most vocal opponents of environmental advocacy groups are also those who have historically resisted regulatory oversight of farming practices.
C. Advocacy groups led by individuals without direct exposure to the affected communities often lack a nuanced understanding of local challenges.
D. Urban-based environmental organizations typically rely on policy advisors with academic expertise in climate science and sustainability.
E. Farming communities are often hesitant to engage with organizations they perceive as outsiders, regardless of the groups’ stated intentions.
The Core Logic of the Argument: The argument presents a conflict: environmental advocacy groups claim to represent rural farmers, but they are staffed by urbanites with no farming experience. Critics argue that because of this specific staffing issue, the groups likely do not reflect the actual priorities of the farming communities. To strengthen this criticism, we need to find a logical connection that proves "being from an urban area with no agricultural experience" leads to "failing to understand rural priorities."
(A) Incorrect. This is a classic "Scope Shift" trap. The argument is specifically criticizing environmental advocacy groups. This answer choice talks about farmers prioritizing economics over initiatives proposed by government agencies. While it shows a conflict between farmers and external authorities, it does not strengthen the criticism of the advocacy groups mentioned in the prompt. Farmers might hate government plans but actually agree with private advocacy groups; we cannot assume the two are the same.
(B) Incorrect. This answer choice attacks the credibility of the critics rather than addressing the content of the criticism. Pointing out that the opponents are "historically resistant to oversight" suggests they might be biased, but it doesn't help us determine if the advocacy groups actually understand the farmers or not. In fact, this might arguably weaken the validity of the criticism by suggesting it is politically motivated.
(C) Correct. This option provides the essential "logical bridge" between the premise and the conclusion. The premise states the staff lacks "direct experience" (they are urban). This answer choice confirms that groups without direct exposure "often lack a nuanced understanding of local challenges." If they lack understanding, they cannot accurately reflect the community's priorities. This validates the specific reasoning used by the critics.
(D) Incorrect. This answer choice focuses on the qualifications of the staff (academic expertise). While having experts in climate science is good for the "science" side of the advocacy, it does not address the "social" side of understanding rural priorities. A group can be scientifically accurate but still completely out of touch with the economic or cultural priorities of a farming community. Therefore, this does not strengthen the criticism regarding priorities.
(E) Incorrect. This option explains why farmers might dislike or ignore the groups (because they perceive them as outsiders). However, it does not prove that the groups' actual priorities are misaligned. A group could have the perfect plan that truly reflects the farmers' best interests, but simply be ignored due to mistrust. This explains the relationship dynamic, but it doesn't prove the specific criticism that the groups are misinformed or have the wrong priorities.
Answer: C
Several environmental advocacy groups claim to represent the interests of rural farming communities affected by climate change. Yet, many of these organizations are primarily staffed and funded by individuals from urban areas, with little direct experience in agriculture. This has led some critics to question whether these groups truly reflect the priorities of the communities they aim to support.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the criticism raised about the advocacy groups?
A. Rural farmers often prioritize short-term economic survival over long-term environmental initiatives proposed by government agencies.
B. Some of the most vocal opponents of environmental advocacy groups are also those who have historically resisted regulatory oversight of farming practices.
C. Advocacy groups led by individuals without direct exposure to the affected communities often lack a nuanced understanding of local challenges.
D. Urban-based environmental organizations typically rely on policy advisors with academic expertise in climate science and sustainability.
E. Farming communities are often hesitant to engage with organizations they perceive as outsiders, regardless of the groups’ stated intentions.
The Core Logic of the Argument: The argument presents a conflict: environmental advocacy groups claim to represent rural farmers, but they are staffed by urbanites with no farming experience. Critics argue that because of this specific staffing issue, the groups likely do not reflect the actual priorities of the farming communities. To strengthen this criticism, we need to find a logical connection that proves "being from an urban area with no agricultural experience" leads to "failing to understand rural priorities."
(A) Incorrect. This is a classic "Scope Shift" trap. The argument is specifically criticizing environmental advocacy groups. This answer choice talks about farmers prioritizing economics over initiatives proposed by government agencies. While it shows a conflict between farmers and external authorities, it does not strengthen the criticism of the advocacy groups mentioned in the prompt. Farmers might hate government plans but actually agree with private advocacy groups; we cannot assume the two are the same.
(B) Incorrect. This answer choice attacks the credibility of the critics rather than addressing the content of the criticism. Pointing out that the opponents are "historically resistant to oversight" suggests they might be biased, but it doesn't help us determine if the advocacy groups actually understand the farmers or not. In fact, this might arguably weaken the validity of the criticism by suggesting it is politically motivated.
(C) Correct. This option provides the essential "logical bridge" between the premise and the conclusion. The premise states the staff lacks "direct experience" (they are urban). This answer choice confirms that groups without direct exposure "often lack a nuanced understanding of local challenges." If they lack understanding, they cannot accurately reflect the community's priorities. This validates the specific reasoning used by the critics.
(D) Incorrect. This answer choice focuses on the qualifications of the staff (academic expertise). While having experts in climate science is good for the "science" side of the advocacy, it does not address the "social" side of understanding rural priorities. A group can be scientifically accurate but still completely out of touch with the economic or cultural priorities of a farming community. Therefore, this does not strengthen the criticism regarding priorities.
(E) Incorrect. This option explains why farmers might dislike or ignore the groups (because they perceive them as outsiders). However, it does not prove that the groups' actual priorities are misaligned. A group could have the perfect plan that truly reflects the farmers' best interests, but simply be ignored due to mistrust. This explains the relationship dynamic, but it doesn't prove the specific criticism that the groups are misinformed or have the wrong priorities.
Answer: C
08 Jun 2026, 07:49
Kudos
Bookmarks
I don’t quite agree with the solution. Aren't strengtheners supposed to be new information that supports the argument the most? The passage already states that the primary staff is not experienced with the direct experiences of agriculture, then isn't option C just repeating it in a more detailed language, rather than bringing some new supporting information? while option e states a logical reason as to why inexperienced staff will not be the best idea since the local agricultural community OFTEN are hesitant to communicate with what they perceive as outsiders.
