Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership

Categories

PT48, S1, Q10

yhchoi1687yhchoi1687 Alum Member
in Logical Reasoning 80 karma


Hi, I understand why the answer choice (D) is correct, but I have a question on (B).
The stimulus states that since "faculty salaries constitute a small part of the university's expenditure," the administration's explanation is not believable.
So I thought even though faculty salaries constitute a small part of expenditure, if they "significantly" increased after the tuition increase, the faculty's explanation can make sense, so this can be weakening argument.
To counter this weakening argument, I thought (B) can be suggested that increase in faculty salaries is only 5% which is lower than general increase in tuition. This is why I thought (B) can be strengthening argument which can fight back against possible weakening argument.
Probably I thought too complicated in this low number question (supposed to be not this tricky).
But could you explain further why (D) is better answer choice than (B)?

Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • nye8870nye8870 Alum ⭐
    1749 karma
    Here's what I see: (B)"With this year’s budget, the university increased the allotment for faculty salaries by 5 percent while tuition was increased by 6 percent." So 5% increase goes to the faculty and 1% to the needy students. That is entirely consistent with the administration's claim. Of course (D) cites all these additional substantial items which will be using/needing more money (cost more).
Sign In or Register to comment.