You've Unlocked a New GRE Question!

Text Solution:

Breakdown of the argument:

Background: A year ago, Greenville Elementary School’s playground was renovated to increase safety.

Premise: In the year following the renovation, 42 percent fewer injuries occurred on the playground than during the previous year.

Conclusion: The renovation made the playground a safer place.

The author makes a cause-and-effect argument:

Cause: renovation of Greenville’s playground

Effect: 42% decrease in playground injuries

In drawing the conclusion, the author assumes that the playground renovation is the only possible cause of the decrease in injuries.

So, the correct answer could present information that rules out an alternative cause.

CORRECT ANSWER(A) Last year, the supervisors at Greenville Elementary School’s playground and the playground rules were the same as they had been the previous year.

This choice identifies and rules out two alternative causes of the reduction in injuries.

A change in playground supervision or playground rules could decrease the number of playground injuries.

This information indicates that the supervisors were not more attentive and that the rules were not stricter than they had been the previous year.

So, there is more reason to think that the renovation caused the reduction in injuries.

Thus, this choice strengthens the conclusion.

(B) After becoming aware of the decrease in injuries on Greenville Elementary School’s playground, the administration of a nearby school decided to renovate that school’s playground.

The fact that the reduction in injuries at Greenville’s playground inspired another school to renovate its playground has no bearing on the argument.

After all, the reduction could be due to many other factors, such as improved playground supervision.

So, we do not have an additional reason to think that the renovation was the factor that reduced injuries.

Thus, this choice does not strengthen the conclusion.

(C) The students who used the playground both years said that they preferred using the newly renovated playground.

This choice has no effect on the argument.

Student preferences are irrelevant to whether the renovation improved safety.

After all, students could prefer the renovated playground for many reasons unrelated to safety, such as how fun the playground is.

Thus, we have no additional reason to think that the renovation caused the reduction in injuries.

So, this choice does not strengthen the conclusion.

(D) Because of unusually rainy weather last year, students spent less time on Greenville Elementary’s playground last year than the previous year.

By presenting an alternative cause for the decrease in playground injuries, this choice weakens the argument.

If students spent less time on the playground, they had less time to get injured on the playground.

So, injuries would be likely to decrease even if the renovation did not increase playground safety.

Thus, we now have reason to question whether the renovation caused the reduction in injuries.

So, this choice does not strengthen the conclusion.

(E) Last year, fewer injuries occurred at Greenville Elementary’s renovated playground than at Amity Elementary School’s playground.

This choice has no effect on the argument.

The number of injuries at a different school’s playground is irrelevant to whether the renovation improved the safety of Greenville’s playground.

For all we know, there have always been fewer injuries at Greenville’s playground than at Amity’s.

Thus, there is no additional reason to think that the playground renovation caused the reduction in injuries that Greenville experienced.

So, this choice does not strengthen the conclusion.