aniket2045
voodoochild
According to the new school district policy, only teachers that have tiled floors can have food in their classrooms. All of the classrooms in the new wing of the high school have tiled floors. However, most of the school's classrooms are still carpeted. Therefore, teachers who like to eat their lunches in their classrooms should be offered classrooms in the new wing of the high school.
Which of the following is an assumption that enables the conclusion above to be properly drawn?
(A) Teachers in the new wing who eat their lunches in the cafeteria should keep their assigned classrooms
(B) Teachers with tiled classrooms should not eat in their classrooms, even though the new district policy permits them to do so.
(C) Teachers with carpeted classrooms should be allowed to eat in their classrooms
(D) The district policy should allow all teachers who want to eat in their classrooms an equal opportunity to do so, regardless of original classroom assignments.
(E) The district policy should minimize potential damage to school property, such as that caused by food stains in carpet.
VeritasKarishma - If I negate B, argument gets destroyed, as it will say only teachers with tiled classroom will have lunch in their classrooms. No other teacher will get opportunity to have lunch in classroom even if he or she wants to.
Can you please explain why B is wrong.
Only teachers that have tiled floors can have food in their classrooms.
All of the classrooms in the new wing of the high school have tiled floors.
However, most of the school's classrooms are still carpeted.
Conclusion: Teachers who like to eat their lunches in their classrooms should be offered classrooms in the new wing of the high school.
We want an assumption that will allow the conclusion to be properly drawn. That is, we need the option that will make the conclusion hold. What will help us establish the conclusion? Teachers can have food only if they have attuned classroom. New wing has tiled classrooms but rest are carpeted (accounting for most of the classrooms). If we say that teachers who want to eat in their classrooms should be able to, then it makes sense to conclude that these teachers should be offered classrooms in the new wing.
(A) Teachers in the new wing who eat their lunches in the cafeteria should keep their assigned classrooms
Not correct.
(B) Teachers with tiled classrooms should not eat in their classrooms, even though the new district policy permits them to do so.
This is against our conclusion. Hence this cannot help make our conclusion valid.
(C) Teachers with carpeted classrooms should be allowed to eat in their classrooms
No, we are saying that teachers who want to eat in classrooms should be given the new tiled classrooms.
(D) The district policy should allow all teachers who want to eat in their classrooms an equal opportunity to do so, regardless of original classroom assignments.
Correct. This says that the policy should allow all teachers to have an equal opportunity to eat in the classroom. If this stands, then we can say that those who want to eat in the classroom should be given the new tiled classrooms so that they can eat there (as per the policy that they can eat in tiled classrooms only)
(E) The district policy should minimize potential damage to school property, such as that caused by food stains in carpet.
It does. Perhaps that is why eating in carpeted classrooms is not allowed.
Answer (D)
_________________
-
Start FREE with selected GMAT/EA Content upon registration at anaprep.com
YouTube Channel: karishma.anaprep
Updated on: 30 Dec 2018, 11:30 
75%
(hard)
47%
(02:23)
wrong 
