求助~GWD-10-Q29：GWD-2-14

songhanxiao

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?



A.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.
B.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.
C.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.
D.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.
E.More than half of the money raised by Smithtown University’s fund-raisers came from donors who had never previously donated to the university.


我选的C，答案是A，求解释~~~

文春三刀禾

me too C  help!!!

akiluk

http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_CR/thread-334963-1-9.html

题目说 good fund-raisers constantly try less-likely prospects in an effort to expand the donor base. 厉害的筹款人都是去尝试联系那些成功率更低的捐款人（也就是没捐过的）来拓宽这个捐款群体，得出结论university’s fund-raisers不牛b~ 要加强~

而C 说  今年大部分向SU大学捐钱的人都是之前捐过钱的人，而university’s fund-raisers 都没有和捐这些钱的人联系过~   其实是证明
university’s fund-raisers 很NB ，（因为成功率高，而且expand the donor base）所以是削弱喔~

sdcar2010

Premises: 1) The success rate for Smithtown university fund-raising team was extremely high.
2) The high success rate shows insufficient canvassing effort (to contact more people)
Conclusion: High success rate for Smithtown university fund-raisers does not indicate that they were doing a good job (canvassing effort to contact more people)

A) 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.  If this is true, then the premise (2) made in the stimulus was wrong since apparently the fund-raisers did make an effort to include new donors instead of focusing exclusively on previous donors. So a high successful rate does not equal bad canvassing effort.  This is a weakener.

C) 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 premise is that the fund-raisers did not contact enough potential donor.  Here is the proof that many potential donors exist among those who have not been contacted by the fund-raising team.  They should improve their outreach program and improve their canvassing effort.  This is a strengthener.

C is the answer.

P.S.  The wording in both the stimulus and the answer choices are confusing.  Both answers (A) and (C) could be right depending on how you argue your case.  If the stimulus only treats expending donor base plus high successful rate as the criteria  for a successful fund-raising effort, the question would make much more sense.

ahasusanna

NN为嘛你在两个帖子里说的答案不一样……

hst199173

我觉得还是C对，因为C答案表示今年获得的80%的捐款中很大一部分是来自于以前捐过的但是fund-raiser没有联系过的人，也就是说fund-raiser没有花费力气再这些人身上，但是这些人却做出了很大的贡献，也就更加的加强了原题中的说法The high success rate shows insufficient canvassing effort.
A答案中A.    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.
SU学校的fund-raiser与其他学校的一样成功联系到潜在的捐助者，又怎样？？potential doner难道就以为着会donate么？？进一步推理过度了吧？而且与其他学校的一样成功，不也可以理解为SU的fund-raiser很卖力么？这不就削弱题目的结论The high success rate shows insufficient canvassing effort.了么？？求继续讨论！

ahasusanna

good fund-raisers constantly try less-likely prospects in an effort to expand the donor base是说好的筹款人应该去联系没有捐过钱的人
The high success rate shows insufficient canvassing effort.是说成功率低才说明有足够的努力
也就是要去找没有捐过钱的人，并且成功率低才行么，那A只是说他们和其他大学的人一样成功，并不能表示成功率低啊，我觉得这题没答案的说

maestri

在下拙见：

根据题干：该校筹款成功率高--〉好的筹款人要联系没捐过款的人---〉高成功率表现了游说努力的不足

分析：题干从头到尾没说该校联系的捐款人情形怎样，是初捐还是再捐。那么支持的选项需要表现出这一点，不然是得不出结论的。

因此：A的意思为：S校联系的初捐人捐款的成功率和其他学校差不多，也就是说

1. S校在初捐人方面做得并不比其他学校好（和其他学校差不多）
2. 80%的捐款比例说明，初捐人捐款占的比例和别的学校差不多--〉再捐人捐款比例比别的学校高很多--〉（事实：再捐人基本很容易捐款）--〉S校联系的再次捐款人多--〉努力不够

jlwzx

我覺得，這個問題是否可以這樣簡單地終結？
題目討論的是聯繫捐款人的成功率，是和人數有關的，而不是不同捐款人群（新的和老的）各自的捐款金額。然而，BCDE都是在討論金額（donations, money 等），唯有A與金額無關

wwk_lion

非常有道理！！

在下拙见：

根据题干：该校筹款成功率高--〉好的筹款人要联系没捐过款的人---〉高成功率表现了游说努力的不足

分析：题干从头到尾没说该校联系的捐款人情形怎样，是初捐还是再捐。那么支持的选项需要表现出这一点，不然是得不出结论的。

因此：A的意思为：S校联系的初捐人捐款的成功率和其他学校差不多，也就是说

1. S校在初捐人方面做得并不比其他学校好（和其他学校差不多）
2. 80%的捐款比例说明，初捐人捐款占的比例和别的学校差不多--〉再捐人捐款比例比别的学校高很多--〉（事实：再捐人基本很容易捐款）--〉S校联系的再次捐款人多--〉努力不够

-- by 会员 maestri (2012/5/14 17:32:39)