CAT 5 CR Question

[enggbs]

The current administration and Congress have once again practiced bad public policy in failing to increase Pell grants or at least limit their reduction for next year’s budget. Pell grants improve access to higher education for those who have historically been disadvantaged in our society by financial or other life circumstances, thereby helping recipients elevate themselves to the middle class. Without that access, the gap between the rich and poor in this country will continue to widen, increasingly straining the stability of our democracy.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion of this argument?

A) Total spending on programs targeted at improving access to higher education for disadvantaged students will increase in next year’s federal budget.
B) The neediest candidates for Pell grants often lack information about their eligibility for such grants.
C) Congress recently authorized a bill that will increase after-school programs in urban communities.
D) On average, an individual Pell grant funds less than 15% of the full cost of attending a four-year college or university.
E) Federal spending on education for next year will increase as a percentage of the total budget.


I do not agree with the OA answer and the explanation provided and i would like you to identify flaw in my reasoning

[enggbs]

I eliminated C, D and E. I left with A and B

I feel the answer shd be B becuase of the following reason

If we assume " The neediest candidates for Pell grants often lack information about their eligibility for such grants." it attacks the conclusion. While the choice 1 " Total spending on programs targeted at improving access to higher education for disadvantaged students will increase in next year’s federal budget." also attacks the conclusion but it might be possible that the population of disadvantage students will increase too and the increased budget might not be sufficient.


Tutors , please explain

[Aragorn]

The current administration and Congress have once again practiced bad public policy in failing to increase Pell grants or at least limit their reduction for next year’s budget. Pell grants improve access to higher education for those who have historically been disadvantaged in our society by financial or other life circumstances, thereby helping recipients elevate themselves to the middle class. Without that access, the gap between the rich and poor in this country will continue to widen, increasingly straining the stability of our democracy.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion of this argument?

A) Total spending on programs targeted at improving access to higher education for disadvantaged students will increase in next year’s federal budget.
B) The neediest candidates for Pell grants often lack information about their eligibility for such grants.
C) Congress recently authorized a bill that will increase after-school programs in urban communities.
D) On average, an individual Pell grant funds less than 15% of the full cost of attending a four-year college or university.
E) Federal spending on education for next year will increase as a percentage of the total budget.


I do not agree with the OA answer and the explanation provided and i would like you to identify flaw in my reasoning

I am not a tutor, but I think..
Conclusion is "Without that access, the gap between the rich and poor in this country will continue to widen, increasingly straining the stability of our democracy"
that pell grant is useful for bridging the gap between poor-rich and that it is probably the most important way to do so and that reducing the$gap reduces strain in democracy.

To fail the Argument, we should look for ways to either find a good alternative source of funding to bridge the rich-poor gap, or to diminish the % contribution of pell grant to the overall effect of bridging the gap....

we have then either A or D

D is too specific. May be 15% is the only gap amount that needs to be filled, so negating D doesn't falsify the conclusion.
So I pick A
Moreover, even if pell grant $ amount goes down, the net $ amount for edu programs for disadvantaged students will increase.

..what is OA?

[Hanumayamma]

Argument: Current Admin. And congress reduced funding / not increased to Pell grants.
Pell Grants facilitate educational opportunity to disadvantaged sections.

The answer choice that weakens the argument either contradicts this fact or facilitates other programs that increase function to education needs of disadvantaged sections.


A) Total spending on programs targeted at improving access to higher education for disadvantaged students will increase in next year’s federal budget. [Hold it]

B) The neediest candidates for Pell grants often lack information about their eligibility for such grants. [Irrelevant to the argument - eliminate it]

C) Congress recently authorized a bill that will increase after-school programs in urban communities. ["After-school programs not even discussed - eliminate it]

D) On average, an individual Pell grant funds less than 15% of the full cost of attending a four-year college or university. [May be true but has nothing to weaken the argument - eliminate it]

E) Federal spending on education for next year will increase as a percentage of the total budget. [Good one - Weaken the argument]

Between A and E - A is close to the argument - Hold it

Answer: A

[RonPurewal]

aragorn: To fail the Argument, we should look for ways to either find a good alternative source of funding to bridge the rich-poor gap, or to diminish the % contribution of pell grant to the overall effect of bridging the gap....

that is the main point.

(b) fails to weaken the argument, or weakens it only by a microscopic amount, because
* these individuals' awareness is too far removed from the pivotal issue, which is their access to the grants (i.e., the existence of the grants themselves, or of reasonable alternatives)
and
* 'the neediest individuals' are only a small fraction of the population under consideration.

(a) provides solid evidence that alternative funding will be available in the stead of the pell grants, so that's the best choice.