- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8916
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Sat Jan 21, 2012 12:00 am
#36351
Complete Question Explanation
Strengthen—PR. The correct answer choice is (D)
In this stimulus, the author discusses the decision to rescind a man’s PhD for an offense that occurred
years after completing his studies.
Meyer, who had earned a PhD from the University of Williamstown, was later discovered by his
employer to have falsified data, thus committing scientific fraud. The University of Williamstown
confirmed Meyer’s guilt in this instance in particular but was unable to find any evidence that
Meyer had falsified any of the information presented in his doctoral thesis. Regardless of the fact
that no falsification could be found in the doctoral data that Meyer had previously presented at the
University of Williamstown, however, the school chose to revoke the degree that Meyer had earned
at the university regardless.
The question stem asks for the policy that would most justify the university’s decision to revoke the
degree based on the discovered instance of falsification and scientific fraud, in spite of the fact that
he apparently completed his doctoral thesis legitimately (or at least left no evidence of any fraud
in that case). The correct answer choice will dictate that the University revoke Meyer’s PhD based
solely on the current case of falsified data and scientific fraud.
Answer choice (A): This choice only applies to those who falsified data in the course of their studies.
Meyer was not found to have committed academic fraud while pursuing his PhD—the stimulus
specifically provides that no evidence of falsified data was found in the university’s investigation.
Since this choice does not apply to Meyer’s situation, it cannot help to justify the university’s
decision.
Answer choice (B): While this policy might be consistent with the tough policy described in the
stimulus, this choice is limited to a discussion of admissions. The stimulus is not about applicant
admissions, because Meyer had already earned his PhD at the university, Since the admissions
policy on fraud is irrelevant to the question of whether or not the university’s decision to revoke was
justified, it cannot be the right answer to this Strengthen question.
Answer choice (C): Much like incorrect answer choice (A), this choice deals only with students
who are found to have submitted falsified academic work, and the fact that such students would
be expelled. Meyer was not found to have submitted falsified data while pursuing his PhD, and
expulsion is not an issue, so this choice would not help to justify the decision to revoke Meyer’s
doctoral degree.
Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. This is the only choice that applies directly
to Meyer’s situation, because it deals with anyone who has ever received a PhD from the University
of Williamstown. If, as this rule provides, any doctoral graduate of the university is found to have
committed scientific fraud, this justifies the university’s revoking of Meyer’s PhD, regardless of the
fact that no falsification of the doctoral thesis data was discovered.
Answer choice (E): This choice deals only with those applying for a job at the university. This has
nothing to do with the Meyer case, because Meyer is not trying to get a job at the university. This
hiring policy cannot help to justify the university’s decision to revoke Meyer’s degree, so this cannot
be the right answer.
Strengthen—PR. The correct answer choice is (D)
In this stimulus, the author discusses the decision to rescind a man’s PhD for an offense that occurred
years after completing his studies.
Meyer, who had earned a PhD from the University of Williamstown, was later discovered by his
employer to have falsified data, thus committing scientific fraud. The University of Williamstown
confirmed Meyer’s guilt in this instance in particular but was unable to find any evidence that
Meyer had falsified any of the information presented in his doctoral thesis. Regardless of the fact
that no falsification could be found in the doctoral data that Meyer had previously presented at the
University of Williamstown, however, the school chose to revoke the degree that Meyer had earned
at the university regardless.
The question stem asks for the policy that would most justify the university’s decision to revoke the
degree based on the discovered instance of falsification and scientific fraud, in spite of the fact that
he apparently completed his doctoral thesis legitimately (or at least left no evidence of any fraud
in that case). The correct answer choice will dictate that the University revoke Meyer’s PhD based
solely on the current case of falsified data and scientific fraud.
Answer choice (A): This choice only applies to those who falsified data in the course of their studies.
Meyer was not found to have committed academic fraud while pursuing his PhD—the stimulus
specifically provides that no evidence of falsified data was found in the university’s investigation.
Since this choice does not apply to Meyer’s situation, it cannot help to justify the university’s
decision.
Answer choice (B): While this policy might be consistent with the tough policy described in the
stimulus, this choice is limited to a discussion of admissions. The stimulus is not about applicant
admissions, because Meyer had already earned his PhD at the university, Since the admissions
policy on fraud is irrelevant to the question of whether or not the university’s decision to revoke was
justified, it cannot be the right answer to this Strengthen question.
Answer choice (C): Much like incorrect answer choice (A), this choice deals only with students
who are found to have submitted falsified academic work, and the fact that such students would
be expelled. Meyer was not found to have submitted falsified data while pursuing his PhD, and
expulsion is not an issue, so this choice would not help to justify the decision to revoke Meyer’s
doctoral degree.
Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. This is the only choice that applies directly
to Meyer’s situation, because it deals with anyone who has ever received a PhD from the University
of Williamstown. If, as this rule provides, any doctoral graduate of the university is found to have
committed scientific fraud, this justifies the university’s revoking of Meyer’s PhD, regardless of the
fact that no falsification of the doctoral thesis data was discovered.
Answer choice (E): This choice deals only with those applying for a job at the university. This has
nothing to do with the Meyer case, because Meyer is not trying to get a job at the university. This
hiring policy cannot help to justify the university’s decision to revoke Meyer’s degree, so this cannot
be the right answer.
