Statement: Should admission to all professional courses be based on past academic performance rather than entrance tests? Arguments: I. Yes. This helps candidates who cannot afford the costs of entrance tests. II. Yes. Many deserving candidates with high qualifying marks perform poorly on one-off entrance tests. III. No. Standards across Boards/Universities vary; a common entrance calibrates candidates on a single yardstick. Choose the option that best identifies the strong argument(s).

Introduction / Context:
Professional-course admissions weigh fairness, predictiveness, and comparability. The question is whether to replace entrance tests entirely with past academic performance.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Boards/Universities differ in syllabus difficulty and grading leniency.
• Entrance tests provide a common evaluation but may be high-pressure snapshots.
• Affordability concerns are real but can be addressed by fee waivers and subsidies.

Concept / Approach:
We assess which arguments address validity and comparability (selection quality) versus those that can be solved by auxiliary policies without changing the selection principle.

Step-by-Step Solution:
I: Cost concerns highlight equity but can be mitigated via waivers, scholarships, and free practice resources. This does not justify eliminating entrance tests outright. Weak.II: Points to a known measurement limitation—single-day, high-stakes tests can under-represent sustained achievement. This is directly relevant to selection quality. Strong.III: Heterogeneous school standards make a common benchmark valuable. This supports retaining an entrance component for calibration. Strong.

Verification / Alternative check:
Many systems use blended models (weightage for past performance + entrance scores) to balance II and III while offering fee waivers to address I.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Including I mistakes a solvable affordability issue for a reason to overhaul assessment; “Only III” ignores II’s valid critique; “None” ignores II and III.

Common Pitfalls:
Framing equity solutions (waivers) as selection-principle arguments.

Final Answer:
Only II and III are strong