(A) brings up two sets (scholars and those motivated by a desire to win academic prizes) and tells us that most members of the first set do not belong to the second. It then concludes that some members of the second set do not belong to the first. The stimulus also brings up two overlapping sets and then concludes that some members of the second set do not belong to the first, so (A) matches.

Wrong flaw. (B) establishes a conditional relationship: if a politician disregards the wishes of most voters, then they are foolish. It then incorrectly brings up a new idea in the conclusion—what voters deserve. The stimulus, meanwhile, brings up two overlapping sets and concludes that some members of the second set do not belong to the first, so (B) doesn’t match.

Wrong flaw. (C) introduces a superset and a subset (corporations and those who only pretend to care about the environment when advertising new products). It then incorrectly makes a conclusion about the superset based on information that only applies to the subset. The stimulus, meanwhile, brings up two overlapping sets and concludes that some members of the second set do not belong to the first, so (C) doesn’t match.

Wrong flaw. (D) introduces factual information (some parents don’t care about their kids’ school curriculum), then incorrectly shifts to a conclusion about what should be done with that information. The stimulus, meanwhile, brings up two overlapping sets and concludes that some members of the second set do not belong to the first, so (D) doesn’t match.

Wrong flaw. (E) introduces a subset and a superset (profits and profits made from good management decisions). It then incorrectly shifts to a conclusion about poorly-managed companies, despite only providing information about company profits. The stimulus, meanwhile, brings up two overlapping sets and concludes that some members of the second set do not belong to the first, so (E) doesn’t match.