GWD-10-Q29 让人绝望，但是貌似又理解了。。。。

白冬冬

GWD-10-Q29：GWD-2-14

Smithtown University’s fund-raisers succeeded in getting donations from 80 percent of the potential donors they contacted.  This success rate, exceptionally high for university fund-raisers, does not indicate that they were doing a good job.  On the contrary, since the people most likely to donate are those who have donated in the past, good fund-raisers constantly try less-likely prospects in an effort to expand the donor base.  The high success rate shows insufficient canvassing effort.

Which of the following, if true, provides more support for the argument?

• Smithtown University’s fund-raisers were successful in their contacts with potential donors who had never given before about as frequently as were fund-raisers for other universities in their contacts with such people.
• This year the average size of the donations to Smithtown University from new donors when the university’s fund-raisers had contacted was larger than the average size of donations from donors who had given to the university before.
• This year most of the donations that came to Smithtown University from people who had previously donated to it were made without the university’s fund-raisers having made any contact with the donors.
• The majority of the donations that fund-raisers succeeded in getting for Smithtown University this year were from donors who had never given to the university before.
• More than half of the money raised by Smithtown University’s fund-raisers came from donors who had never previously donated to the university.
  

白冬冬

逻辑链：

Smiths 的 fund-raisers 接触的80%的人都捐了钱，（貌似很牛），但是因为.....(其实这个地方完全不用懂)，结论是80% 不代表sufficient effort。问加强该结论。

A选项直接加强结论：Smiths 的 fund-raisers 频率（努力）跟其他的fund-raisers 的频率（努力）一样。即努力程度一样，跟百分比没关系。

takeaway：

1）加强题是可以出现新的概念的，就是这里的frequency。 因此support 题不能看见‘other’ 这样的词就当作无关比较而删除。

2）“问support conclusion，选项是conclusion 就是对的”， 这种霸王加强逻辑其实也是见过的，跟逻辑链没有一毛钱关系。

求讨论，求拍砖，求辩真理，求考试别遇见这样的题。。。。

alzn2765

白冬冬 发表于 2016-6-14 22:30
逻辑链：
Smiths 的 fund-raisers 接触的80%的人都捐了钱，（貌似很牛），但是因为.....(其实这个地方完全 ...

1. frenquency并不是“新概念”，frenquency只是constantly try换了一种说法

白冬冬

alzn2765 发表于 2016-6-15 18:10
1. frenquency并不是“新概念”，frenquency只是constantly try换了一种说法

嗯，受教了，谢谢！

700upupup

看了楼上的，发现大家都误解了一个地方，就是frequently。它其实修饰的是successful。我刚开始也以为意思是频繁的接触，但是仔细看这里contacts是作名词用的。
明白这一点，答案就很明显了。
a说的意思就是 SU在“说服没捐过款的对象”这件事情上，成功率是和其他学校一样的，也就排除了SU说服less-likely prospects成功率也可以很高，即 SU is doing good，的可能性，所以high success rate 一定是建立在“少去说服之前没捐过款的人”，也就是less canvassing 上的。
再来看c，这里题干第一句很重要，80%的比例是donors they contact的80%，而不是donations的总数80%（自己做题时理所当然地认为是后者，不知道有没有小伙伴也掉进了这个坑…），所以c是无关项。

MissWang_xx929

题干的结论：S大学的人不厉害。（即使他们向80%的人筹到款了）

A选项: S大学的人确实不厉害。（因为他们向没有捐过款的人筹集捐款时和别的大学室一样的成功率）