#20 - Professor: The number of new university students

[iberkley19]

Answer choice (B) explains the drop in the number of people earning chemistry degrees, but doesn't reconcile it with the fact that the number of new students entering as chemistry majors has remained unchanged.

I am still concerned as to why Answer (B) is incorrect. When this answer compares to the answer to Question 22 in Practice Test 73 Section 4, they seem very similar: Answer (D) says supermarkets throughout the entire nation have experienced a sharp decrease in sales of yogurt recently. But the answer for this question was considered correct, while Answer (B) for this question was incorrect. What am I missing here?

I am also still confused; would it be possible to get this explained again?

[Jay Donnell]

Hi!

I can understand the confusion brought up by the earlier student as to why the more broader answer worked in the question about yogurt, but failed here in the chemistry question. However, I think there is a clear and simple explanation for the difference between the two questions.

In the question referenced in the earlier explanation (Prep test 73, Sept 2014 section 4 #22), the paradox involves why the store-brand milk has seen an increase in sales but the store-brand yogurt has seen a decrease. This contrast is key, and the correct response that claims "Supermarkets throughout the entire nation have experienced a sharp decrease in sales of yogurt recently" helps to explain the difference between the two items.

In the question at hand (Prep test 76, October 2015 section 2 #20), the paradox involves only chemistry majors, and how they have had a stable number of incoming students who choose to major in chemistry but that despite the promising job prospects, there has been a drop in chemistry graduates. There is no contrast here between chemistry and the other sciences, the mystery is simply between the number of incoming students who choose to major in chemistry but fail to graduate within the major. In this case, knowing the drop in natural science majors across the board does very little to explain the specific issue within chemistry, and the paradox that must be resolved involves what happened between choosing chemistry as a major but sometime throughout their studies these students drop out of the major. That is precisely where the correct response comes in, with its mention of the changing curriculum leading to a dampening of chemistry's intellectual appeal.

As Nikki said earlier, knowing the national drop in natural science majors doesn't help to rectify the sides of this paradox which include very relevant points about the stable number of incoming students who choose chemistry, and the promising outlook for chemistry jobs after graduation.

Both are tough Resolve the Paradox questions, but I hope this helped to explain this additional paradox between the discussed answers across the two questions!

[blade21cn]

I agree with Nikki on two things here: (1) This was one of the trickiest questions on this test; (2) based on the scenario in the stimulus, we need to account for why chemistry students are dropping out of their major.

I'm not convinced by (E). It proposes that chemistry students dropped out because the way the classes are taught dampens its intellectual appeal. But how does that interact with the stimulus that "job prospects for graduates with chemistry degrees are better than ever"? Do we know that students cares more about being intellectually stimulated than being gainfully employed to pay off their huge student loans? Wouldn't that be a big assumption to make?

The stimulus states "job prospects for graduates with chemistry degrees are better than ever." This is a comparison between job prospects now for chemistry graduates and job prospects in the past for chemistry graduates. I chose (D), because it compares job prospects now for chemistry graduates with certain other science graduates. Specifically, job prospects for chemistry graduates now are no better than prospects for certain other science graduates. In other words, currently, job prospects for certain other science graduates is better than (or at least as good as) chemistry graduates. Wouldn't that perfectly explain why chemistry students are changing their major to one of these certain other science majors?

[Malila Robinson]

Hi blade21cn,
With Answer C it allows for the possibility that there are in fact students coming into a chemistry degree (possibly because of the job prospects), but gives a reason for why they may not make it past the first class (lack of intellectual appeal).
Answer D assumes that science degrees & the knowledge requirements for them are to some degree interchangeable. But having an affinity for chemistry does not mean that someone would automatically be a good biologist (for example). So even if the job prospects were similar it wouldn't necessarily explain why folks are not getting chemistry degrees.
Hope that helps!
-Malila

[marilati]

Hi,

I'm still unsure about why Answer E is correct. How do we know that students would change majors or leave school if classes were boring or didn't have intellectual appeal? I'm having a hard time connecting the pieces here.

[Bob O'Halloran]

Hi Marilati,
Thank you for the question.
For this question, we are asked to pick the answer choice that most helps to explain the decline. Answer choice (E) gives at least a plausible explanation for the paradox in the stimulus. It may not be the definitive explanation, but it is the only one of the answer choices that does explain the paradox.
Please let us know if you have other questions.
Thank you
Bob