Administrator: Because revenue fell by

Answer choices

1. A

   Unsupported Comparison5% picked this

   presumes, without providing justification, that more money would be saved by reducing faculty salaries than would be saved

   The author never implies that one options would save more money than the other. She just asserts that we're NOT doing option 1, and thus she thinks that all that's left is option 2.

   5%
2. B

   Correct87% picked this

   presumes, without providing justification, that the budget cannot be reduced unless faculty positions are eliminated or

   Why this is right

   This expresses the False Choice the author presented, that budget reduction requires either cutting jobs or reducing salaries. If we negate this assumption, we get the powerful objection of "The budget could be reduced by other means besides those two you mentioned".

   Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   87%
3. C

   Not an Objection1% picked this

   ignores the possibility that, though budget cuts will be needed, they will not need to be as

   The author doesn't imply that we're seeking a budget cut that equals 15%. Just because a 15% drop in revenue has impelled us to reduce our budget doesn't mean that we're planning to do so in an exact 1:1 ratio of 15% smaller budget.

   1%
4. D

   Not an Assumption3% picked this

   presumes, without providing justification, that some faculty members will leave their jobs rather than accept

   There's nothing in the author's comments that would allow us to derive the idea that she's assuming some people will quit rather than accept a reduced salary.

   3%
5. E

   Does Not Ignore4% picked this

   ignores the possibility that the budget could be reduced by eliminating some faculty positions and reducing the

   The author addresses this possibility by saying "we will not be eliminating any positions". We may have thought to ourselves initially, "Why does it have to be one or the other? Just cut some jobs and reduce salaries by a little?" But that would not be evaluating the author's reasoning. Evaluating their reasoning means accepting their premise (there will be NO jobs cut) and figuring out why that still doesn't prove their conclusion.

   4%