Difficulty: Medium
Correct Answer: Only II and III are strong
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:
Professional programme admissions need to be fair, comparable across varied schooling systems, and predictive of success. We must weigh equity, measurement validity, and practicality.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:
Strong arguments are those that bear on selection validity and fairness of measurement. While affordability (I) is important, it can be addressed by fee waivers/subsidies without discarding standardized selection. Arguments II and III directly concern measurement reliability and comparability.
Step-by-Step Solution:
I – Weaker: Cost barriers are an access problem best solved via financial aid, not by eliminating common testing.II – Strong: Divergence shows that school marks alone may not capture aptitude for professional courses; supports alternative metrics.III – Strong: Heterogeneous grading practices necessitate a common yardstick to calibrate applicants fairly.
Verification / Alternative check:
Many systems use blended models (tests + past performance) plus financial support—recognizing II and III while mitigating I via aid.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Common Pitfalls:
Conflating equity-of-access issues with measurement-validity decisions.
Final Answer:
Only II and III are strong
Discussion & Comments