Logical Reasoning

PT132 · S2 · Q25 University president: Our pool of applicants

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

University president: Our pool of applicants has been shrinking over the past few years.

Conclusion

If we want to increase the size of our applicant pool, we need to raise out tuition and fees.

Evidence

It's possible that the reason we've seen our pool shrink over the past few years is that we charge too little for tuition and fees, giving off the impression that we're not as high quality an institution.

Evaluation

Any time an author says , she's assuming - Y is actually a viable way of getting X - There aren't other ways of also getting X

So this author is assuming that (assuming it wouldn't turn even more people away).

Our author is assuming that .

And then there seems to be a Possible vs. Certain move in her argument, where she goes from "It's possible that X is the explanation" to "We'll have to do something about X".

Goal

Look for any of the three assumptions we've noted, or any other answer that, if negated, would make it sound like we don't need to raise tuition in order to increase our applicant pool.

25.

The university president's argument requires the assumption that

  1. Correct

    the proposed explanation for the

    Why this is right

    This was one of our three prephrase, the Possible vs. Certain move she made. If we negated this, and said "having lower tuition/fees is not the reason that the applicant pool has been shrinking", that would badly weaken her argument.

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

    47% picked this

  2. the quality of a university

    Too Strong: dependent Not Author's Assumption

    This sounds like something the author believes that parents of high school students believe. She is thinking that, in parents' minds "tuition is an indicator of quality". But "dependent" is stronger than "an indication", and this is the parents' assumption, not the author's.

    13% picked this

  3. an increase in tuition and

    Reversed Logic Too Strong: guarantee

    The conclusion said "in order to get larger pool, we must increase tuition", which would look like this: larger pool → increase tuition / fees This answer accuses the author of claiming that increasing tuition would definitely work. The author is only assuming that her proposed solution could possibly work. If I say, "In order to get a 170+ score on LSAT, you must get great at Logic Games", that doesn't mean I'm assuming that "getting great at Logic Games guarantees you'll get a 170+ score".

    12% picked this

  4. there is no additional explanation

    Weak Impact

    I would take this answer if (A) didn't exist. If we negate it, and there is some additional reason (besides low tuition/fees giving off a low quality vibe) for they the applicant pool is shrinking, then that somewhat weakens the author's conclusion. If my low LSAT score is only due to Games, then "in order to raise my score, I must get better at Games". Meanwhile, if there is an additional explanation, such as I'm also bad at Reading Comp, then it's not true to say "in order to raise my score, I must get better at Games". After all, I could get better at Reading Comp and raise my score that way. Ultimately, negating this answer isn't as strong an objection as negating choice (A). Necessary Assumption questions play by the rules of "Which answer, if negated, most weakens". Also, by saying "one possible explanation" for the shrinking pool, the author is allowing for the idea that there may different or additional explanations.

    18% picked this

  5. the amount charged by the

    Irrelevant

    Whether it has or hasn't increased in recent years, the effect of the author's premise would be the same: if the current tuition/fees are lower than other schools, then we might be perceived as being inferior quality to these other schools.

    10% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free