## #25 - University president: Our pool of applicants has been

PowerScore Staff

Posts: 6774
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:19 pm
Points: 3,447

Complete Question Explanation

Assumption. The correct answer choice is (A)

In this stimulus a university president says that the application pool has been shrinking, and that
one possible explanation is the low tuition and fees charged by the school. The president suggests
that these low charges might not reflect well on the quality of the education offered by the school,
from the perspective of visiting students and parents, when compared with more expensive schools.
The president concludes that if the school wants to increase its applicant numbers, tuition and fees
should be raised. This argument is fairly straightforward (though clearly not airtight) and can be
diagrammed as follows:

Premise: The school’s applicant pool has been decreasing over the last few years.

Premise: One possible explanation is that the school’s low tuition and fees are
perceived, by visiting students and parents, as a reflection of lower quality.

Conclusion: In order to increase the size of the school’s applicant pool, the university
should raise its tuition and fees.

The stimulus is followed by an Assumption question, so the university president’s argument will rely
upon the correct answer choice. As with all Assumption questions, we can apply the Assumption
Negation Technique to certain answers in order to confirm that a given answer choice is correct or
incorrect. In this question, we will negate every answer choice for the purpose of clarity; on the
LSAT you would only negate those answers that you could not eliminate, or to confirm the correct

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. The author’s conclusion clearly relies upon
the assumption that the excessively low tuition and fees are to blame for the school’s diminishing
pool of applicants. If these low costs are not the true culprit, then the author’s conclusion would not
make much sense.

In order to confirm that this is the correct answer, we can apply the Assumption Negation technique,
which will also further clarify the argument’s reliance on this assumption (again, the correct answer,
when negated, or taken away, will hurt the author’s argument. When we negate this answer choice,
we arrive at the following:

The proposed explanation for the decline in applications does not apply in this case.

Clearly, when we take away the assumption provided by this answer choice, the argument fails: if the
author’s explanation is not applicable, there would be no basis for the assertion that an increase in
tuition and fees would provide a remedy for the dwindling application numbers.

Answer choice (B): The author’s conclusion does not rely on assuming that educational quality
is dependent on the amount of a school’s tuition (but rather on the perception of linking tuition
to quality in the minds of students and parents). While this choice could conceivably be used to
strengthen an argument for increased tuition and fees, it is not an assumption on which the author’s
argument relies. Again, for confirmation we can apply the Assumption Negation technique. The
negated version of this choice would be as follows:

The quality of a university education is not dependent on the amount of tuition charged by
the university.

This negated version does not hurt the author’s argument, because the suggestion to increase tuition
and fees is based on the premise that students and parents might think this reflects poorly on the
quality of the institution (regardless of the validity of such conclusions).

Answer choice (C): This is a potentially tricky wrong answer choice; while it looks like something
the author might like to assume, it is not an assumption that is absolutely required by the author’s
argument.

The application of the Assumption Negation Technique might be particularly valuable in the
clarification of this analysis. The negated version of this answer choice is as follows:

An increase of tuition and fees would not guarantee a larger applicant pool.

Recall that the author’s conclusion was that to increase the size of the university applicant pool, the
school needs to increase tuition and fees. The assertion that the plan would not be guaranteed to
work does not undermine the assertion that the need nonetheless exists.

Answer choice (D): The author’s conclusion is based on the idea that the diminishing number of
applications is potentially attributable to the perceptions of visiting students and parents. This does
not require the assumption that the low tuition and fees are the only possible cause. To clarify, we
can assess the negated version of this choice, as follows:

There might be additional explanations for the university’s shrinking applicant pool.

Again, even if there are additional explanations, this does not completely undermine the assertion
that an increase in tuition and fees might help to solve the problem.

Answer choice (E): Applying the Assumption Negation Process to this choice, we get the following
negated version:

The amount the university charges for tuition has increased in recent years.

This does not undermine the author’s argument, because the suggested increases in tuition and fees
are made on the basis that overall the school charges too little.
rachue
LSAT Master

Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 8:28 pm
Points: 0

Hi,

I'm having trouble understanding why A is the better answer here over D. D seems like the stronger answer to me here. If the one explanation is that tuition is too low, then the university president could come to his conclusion.

Steve Stein
PowerScore Staff

Posts: 1168
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 4:33 pm
Points: 1,249

Here, a university president says that the application pool has been shrinking, and that one possible explanation is the low tuition and fees charged by the school. The president suggests that these low charges might not reflect well on the quality of the education offered by the school, compared with more expensive schools. The president concludes that if the school wants to increase its applicant numbers, tuition and fees should be raised:

Premise: The school’s applicant pool has been decreasing over the last few years.

Premise: One possible explanation is that the school’s low tuition and fees are perceived, by visiting students and parents, as a reflection of lower quality.

Conclusion: In order to increase the size of the school’s applicant pool, the university should raise its tuition and fees.

The stimulus is followed by an Assumption question, so the university president’s argument will rely upon the correct answer choice. As with all Assumption questions, we can apply the Assumption Negation Technique to certain answers in order to confirm that a given answer choice is correct or incorrect.

Answer choice A is the correct answer choice. The author’s conclusion clearly relies upon the assumption that the excessively low tuition and fees are to blame for the school’s diminishing pool of applicants. If these low costs are not the true culprit, then the author’s conclusion would not make much sense.

To confirm that this is the correct answer, we can apply the Assumption Negation technique, which will also further clarify the argument’s reliance on this assumption (the correct answer, when negated, or taken away, will hurt the author’s argument). When we negate this answer choice, we arrive at the following:

The proposed explanation for the decline in applications does not apply in this case.

Clearly, when we take away the assumption provided by this answer choice, the argument fails: if the author’s explanation is not applicable, there would be no basis for the assertion that an increase in tuition and fees would provide a remedy for the dwindling application numbers.

As for Answer Choice (D), keep in mind that this is an Assumption question, which means that we are looking for the answer choice that is required by the author's conclusion--not the one that would be sufficient to prove the author's conclusion.

In this case, the author’s conclusion is based on the idea that the diminishing number of applications is potentially attributable to the perceptions of visiting students and parents. This does not require the assumption that the low tuition and fees are the only possible cause. To clarify, we can assess the negated version of this choice, as follows:

There could be additional explanations for the university’s shrinking applicant pool.

Again, even if there were additional explanations, this would not completely undermine the assertion that an increase in tuition and fees might help to solve the problem.
Steve Stein
PowerScore Test Preparation
rachue
LSAT Master

Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 8:28 pm
Points: 0

Thanks for such a detailed response. I still have one question regarding C, though. If we use the Assumption Negation technique, it also hurts the argument (an increase in tuition and fees at the university would NOT guarantee a larger applicant pool). So why is C also incorrect? Is it because there is still a mere possibility that there could be a larger applicant pool after tuition hikes?
Steve Stein
PowerScore Staff

Posts: 1168
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 4:33 pm
Points: 1,249

Recall that the president's conclusion was that to increase the size of the university applicant pool, the school needs to increase tuition and fees. The assertion that the plan would not be guaranteed to work does not undermine the president's conclusion.

Another example:

Premise: If we want to survive the jump from this airplane, we need to wear parachutes.
We might note that parachutes will not guarantee our survival, but that fact does not undermine the premise that we need parachutes for the jump.
Steve Stein
PowerScore Test Preparation
rachue
LSAT Master

Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 8:28 pm
Points: 0

Ah ok, with the example that makes it much more clear. Thanks.
netherlands
LSAT Master

Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 3:39 pm
Points: 0

Hi there PS!

I had a question about this one on choosing between A and C. After eliminating the others I chose to eliminate "C" because the president said that the "possible" explanation for the decline was that tuition issue - not that it was certainly the reason. Thus, his proposed solution isn't based on a "guarantee" that it will work but the "possibility" that it'll work if he's right about the cause of the problem.

I eliminated C based off of that reasoning. Is that a correct way to go about it? Please let me know if there were any other nuances that I looked over.
Steve Stein
PowerScore Staff

Posts: 1168
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 4:33 pm
Points: 1,249

Hi Netherlands,

Keep in mind that this is an Assumption question, which means that the right answer choice must provide an assumption that is required by the author's argument. The university president says that raising tuition and fees is necessary. The president is not claiming that this solution is guaranteed to work, so this choice does not provide an assumption that the president relies upon.

In other words, were we to respond "but your plan doesn't guarantee the desired outcome," that would not defeat the argument, because the president never claimed that success was guaranteed, just that the approach was necessary.

Please let me know whether this is clear--thanks!

~Steve
Steve Stein
PowerScore Test Preparation
Nfontes93
LSAT Apprentice

Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2015 12:19 pm
Points: 4

I was between A and C on this question. Both answer choices looked right to me. Can someone explain why C is wrong? If an increase is tuition does not guarantee a larger applicant pool, wouldn't that at least weaken the conclusion? I know that an assumption does not have to strengthen a conclusion, but I don't see how C could not be an underlying assumption.
Steve Stein
PowerScore Staff

Posts: 1168
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 4:33 pm
Points: 1,249

Great question! The university president in that one says that the application pool has been shrinking, and a possible explanation is the school's low tuition and fees. The president suggests these low fees might not reflect well on the quality of the education offered by the school when compared with more expensive schools by visiting students and parents. The president concludes that to increase the school's applicant numbers, tuition and fees should be raised. This argument is fairly straightforward (though clearly not airtight) and can be diagrammed as follows:

Premise: The school’s applicant pool has been decreasing over the last few years.

Premise: One possible explanation is that the school’s low tuition and fees are perceived, by visiting students and parents, as a reflection of lower quality.

Conclusion: In order to increase the size of the school’s applicant pool, the university should raise its tuition and fees.

The answer that you chose, answer choice (C), is a tricky wrong answer choice; while it looks like something the author might prefer, it is not an assumption that is absolutely required by the author’s argument.

The application of the Assumption Negation Technique might be particularly valuable in the clarification of this analysis. The negated version of this answer choice is as follows:

An increase of tuition and fees would not guarantee a larger applicant pool.

Again, the author’s conclusion was that to increase the size of the university applicant pool, the school needs to increase tuition and fees. The assertion that the plan would not be guaranteed to work does not undermine the assertion that the need nonetheless exists.

Even if that is the only way to achieve the stated goal, that doesn't mean that it's guaranteed to work. For example, the only way that I can win the lottery today is to buy a ticket—though sadly, a win is not guaranteed.

I hope that's helpful! Please let me know if anything is still unclear—thanks!

~Steve
Steve Stein
PowerScore Test Preparation