School superintendent: It is a sad fact that, until now, entry into the academically best high school in our district has been restricted to the children of people who were wealthy enough to pay the high tuition.
Conclusion
Parents who were previously denied the option of sending their children to the best high school now have this option.
Evidence (since)
The high school previously required high tuition, which limited entry to children of wealthy parents. The requirement has now changed to only allow students who live in the neighborhood of the school.
Evaluate
The superintendent assumes that by replacing a tuition barrier with a neighborhood residency barrier, more parents who could not afford the tuition will now have access to the school.
Essentially, the claim is that the neighborhood residency requirement will create greater access for families that aren't wealthy, compared to what the high tuition requirement allowed.
For this to work, we need to assume that living in the neighborhood isn't just another filter for wealthy families. Otherwise, it could be that the people who live near the school are still only those who previously could afford the tuition.
We're looking for whether the superintendent is assuming that the neighborhood residency requirement includes parents who couldn’t afford the tuition, which would indicate increased access.
Goal
Look for an answer dealing with this Assumed Difference, that a neighborhood requirement is more likely to result in economic diversity than the old tuition requirement. Or an answer that, if negated, would give us a way to show that this Plan (neighborhood requirement) would not achieve its Goal (enabling parents who were previously denied to now be able to send their kids to this school).