In an attempt to reduce the crime rate..

[Taf]

In an attempt to reduce the crime rate, the governor is getting tough on criminals and making prison conditions harsher. Part of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to college-level courses. However, this action is clearly counter to the governor’s ultimate goal, since after being released form prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Not being able to take college-level courses while in prison is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime that he or she might otherwise have committed.
B. Former inmates are no more likely to commit crimes than are members of the general population.
C. The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.
D. Taking high school level courses in prison has less effect on an inmate’s subsequent behavior than taking college-level courses does.
E. The governor’s ultimate goal actually is to gain popularity by convincing people that something effective is being done about crime.

SPOILER:

Answer: A

Don't understand why answer c put "already" in it. I fins it easier to understad without "already".

[SuM]

I picked C !

[GmatCalif]

(C) seems like the assumption the argument depends on.


B, D and E are clearly silly and wrong.

A. Don't really know what to think of this one.

Pick (C).

[soz_gmat05]

choice C : The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.

In this choice, I think that college-level courses make no difference to commit crimes after being released (=opposite of the assumption)

can you explain why your answer is C?
thanx

[GmatCalif]

Argument
Governor wrong, because Inmates+course = committed far fewer crimes than other inmates.


We need to find an assumption, something with out which the argument will not stick.

C. The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.

This tells us that the inmates who took college-level courses were pre-disposed to or had already made up their minds on not commiting crimes after they were released.

So really even if they had not taken the courses, that would have committed less crimes. Taking college-level courses in prison was probably their way out of crime.

[Taf]

Originally Posted by GmatCalif

Argument
Governor wrong, because Inmates+course = committed far fewer crimes than other inmates.


We need to find an assumption, something with out which the argument will not stick.

C. The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.

This tells us that the inmates who took college-level courses were pre-disposed to or had already made up their minds on not commiting crimes after they were released.

So really even if they had not taken the courses, that would have committed less crimes. Taking college-level courses in prison was probably their way out of crime.

I disagree though. C: The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.
What you said should be worded like this : inmeates who took courses were already less likely to commit crimes. Then you can say that these inmates who took college-level courses were predisposed or had already made up their mind not to commit crimes after they are released.

But since answer c is " inmates were NOT already less likely to commit crimes", meaning "these inmates who took college-level courses are as likely to commit crimes after being released as those who didn't take such courses.
So it means that no matter inmates take courses or not, they will commit crimes after they are released anyway. In short, answer C weakens the argument, which claimed that the courses were helpful b/c inmates who took them commited far fewer crimes overall than those who didn't.

As for answer A : Not being able to take college-level courses while in prison is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime that he or she might otherwise have committed. I hate this kind of convoluted sentence. But, anyway. First take a look at "is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime", meaning "won't deter crime", maning "will commit crime" Second, put the whole thing together " NOT able to take courses..will commit crimes". Doesn't this mean if inmates are able to take courses, then they won't commit crimes? This answer strengthens the argument. So it is the answer.


please tell me what you think, fellows.
Correct me if I am wrong. I really want to know what's going on with this Q.

[GmatCalif]

Hey Taf,

Looks like the OA is right after all...
Check out this thread...

http://www.urch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15993 (Another 2 CRs)

gmat168 explains it as...

gmat168

Hmm, the first one seemed so clearly to be C. But it seems so clear now:

The goal of the governor is to DETER CRIME, not REPEAT crimes after people have been released from prison. It's kinda like saying, the goal of management of the hotel is to prevent people from book reservations because they don't give a mint on the pillow anymore. It probably wouldn't deter anyone who would've booked that hotel anyway.

I agree its (A).
So there you have it... was right in front of us... and we missed it
Need to watch out for the little traps...

[Taf]

Hey GmatClif

You reply actually inspired me. Anyway, I am happy that we all agree with the answer now.

In C, I think the word "already" really confused me. In my opinion, it'll be a lot easier to eliminate C if "already' is gone.

[CoolRey]

just incase anyone is reading this post which says the (OA is A), based on the GMAT Prep Software, the OA is C.