PrepTest 136, Section 4, Question 20
University president: We will be forced to reduce(41 more words not shown)
The conclusion of the university(14 more words not shown)
- AThe university will(14 more words not shown)
- BThe university will(12 more words not shown)
- CThe university will(10 more words not shown)
- DThe university will(15 more words not shown)
- EThe university will(14 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Does cutting spending necessarily mean cutting the quality of education?
A university could cut something that contributes little to teaching rather than lay off professors or reduce classes. If that happened, less spending might leave educational quality intact. The president needs to explain why the proposed budget cuts would instead harm the education students receive.
There is also a question about marketing: why is more aggressive marketing necessary to raise enrollment? The final sentence answers that one for us. Without such marketing, the university cannot increase enrollment. We should accept that stated connection and concentrate on the one still missing.
Follow the argument without the conclusion: no additional marketing means no enrollment increase, which means spending must fall. So far, we have reached a budget cut. To reach a loss of educational quality, we need one more link: reducing spending prevents the university from maintaining its current quality.
What we’re looking for
Adding that link would show why marketing is necessary to preserve quality. It would not guarantee that marketing succeeds; it would show that, without it, the university cannot get the desired result.
Working the answers
- A
This says increasing enrollment harms educational quality. It does not show why the spending cut caused by failing to increase enrollment would harm quality. It also creates a problem for the president's proposed route rather than supplying the intended missing link.
- B
The passage says failing to increase enrollment forces a spending reduction. That does not establish that increasing enrollment guarantees no reduction; other costs could still force cuts. Even if we add B, it says nothing about how spending affects educational quality, which is the gap in the argument.
- C
This guarantees an enrollment increase from marketing. But the conclusion says marketing is required to preserve quality, not that marketing is guaranteed to achieve the goal. More importantly, C still does not connect the spending reduction to a loss of educational quality.
- DCorrect
A spending reduction now means the university cannot maintain educational quality. Without more marketing, enrollment cannot increase; without that increase, spending must fall; and under D, quality then cannot be maintained. That proves marketing is necessary for the president's stated goal.
- E
This says marketing is enough to avoid a spending reduction. It does not show why avoiding that reduction is necessary for maintaining educational quality. If the university could cut spending without hurting education, the conclusion would still be unsupported. D closes that gap.
More Sufficient Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Sufficient Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.