medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Speaker X: Publicly funded universities should be required to admit any student who graduates in the top ten percent of their high school class. This is the only fair way to ensure that the highest-achieving students from every background have access to a top-tier education. Speaker Y: Such a policy would be unfair to high-achieving students at more competitive schools. A student who is in the top fifteen percent at a rigorous academy might be better prepared for university than a top-ten-percent student at a less challenging high school.
Speaker X and Speaker Y disagree over which one of the following?
- Whether ranking within one's graduating class is by itself a fair and adequate basis for university admission
- Whether applicants from disadvantaged backgrounds ought to be given special weight in the admissions process
- Whether a high school's graduation rate reliably reflects the quality of education it provides
- Whether a top-fifteen-percent student at a demanding school is in fact better prepared than a top-ten-percent student elsewhere
- Whether a university's foremost aim should be to enroll the most academically prepared applicants available
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these statements?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these premises?
- Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the authors' conclusion?
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ