- UID
- 1152389
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2015-9-7
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
For years, the debate over public education reform has centered on financing. Many claim that pouring more money into the public schools will improve student performance. However, the only way to fix our school systems is to inject new ideas and new approaches. Today the schools are organized to benefit their adult employees rather than the students.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?
A. Schools that have instituted “new approaches” attract the best performing students.
B. Schools without outside playgrounds have lower levels of student performance than schools that do.
C. Studies show that student performance corresponded most directly with the education of the students’ families.
D. School employees, by an overwhelming margin, said that the system performed well.
E. Researchers in education have shown that students from school districts with high per-capita spending tend to receive higher scores on standardized tests.
答案是E, 我看到gmatclub论坛上很多人争议B,但我选的是A。。。
我是这样想的,结论不是认为fix school systems(improve student performance)的唯一方法是inject new ideas 和 new appraoches么?A是说new approaches本身就吸引了best performing students,所以students performance improve了并不是由new appraoches导致的呀 (因为他们本身就best-peroforming)
求指导 thanks in advance
|
|