【MD每日一问】LR 5#

玛莎丁丁 · 发表于 2012-4-6 21:05:43

The trustees of the Avonbridge summer drama workshop have decided to offer scholarships to the top 10 percent of local applicants and the top 10 percent of nonlocal applilcants as judged on the basis of a qualifying audition. They are doing this to ensure that only the applicants with the most highly evaluated auditions are offered scholarships to the program.

Which one of the following points out why the trustees' plan might not be effective in achieving its goal?

(a) The best applicants can also apply for admission to another program and then not enroll in the Avonbridge program.
(b) Audition materials that produce good results for one actor may disadvantage another, resulting in inaccurate assessment.
(c) The top 10 percent of local and nonlocal applicants might not need scholarships to the Avonbridge program.
(d) Some of the applicants who are offered scholarships could have less highly evaluated auditions than some of the applicants who are not offered scholarships.
(e) Dividing appliants into local and nonlocal groups in unfair because it favors nonlocal applicants.

Which one do you think is the best choice?
Why the might-be scenario would happen?

sdcar2010 · 发表于 2012-4-7 01:09:48

D)

Apple vs. Orange.

Representiveness.

"ONLY the applicants with the most highly evaluated auditions "

simonshen · 发表于 2012-4-8 14:16:09

这题说的是有local applicants跟nonlocal applicants两个pool，取local里最好的10%跟nonlocal里的10%给予奖学金。但举个例子，假设local这个pool里比nonlocal这个pool里的人总体素质差很多，local里最好的10%还不如nonlocal里的最好的50%，那为了要授奖给最好的人的话，应该把奖学金全部授予nonlocal这个pool里的applicants，而如果照两个pool里的10%都给奖的话，那就会出现D所说的问题。

【MD每日一问】LR 5#

所属分类: 法学院申请

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()