Practice vs. Preaching — Language Medium Hypocrisy Statement: • Leaders who loudly advocate Hindi typically send their children to English-medium schools. Which conclusion(s) follow?

Introduction / Context:
The statement contrasts public advocacy (promoting Hindi) with private choices (sending children to English-medium schools). We must decide which conclusion is supported by this inconsistency.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The leaders publicly argue for Hindi usage.
• The same leaders choose English-medium schooling for their own children.
• No information is given about the quality or availability of Hindi-medium schools.

Concept / Approach:
Conclusion II (“There is a world of difference between preaching and practising.”) is a classic inference: the described behavior contradicts the public stance, indicating hypocrisy or inconsistency. Conclusion I (“India lacks good Hindi-medium schools.”) introduces a cause that is not stated; the behavior could have multiple reasons (perceived career advantage, proximity, personal preference, etc.).

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Even if some leaders cite quality issues, the statement itself does not provide that justification, so we cannot adopt it as a conclusion.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• I alone / Both: require extra assumptions.
• Either / Neither: II clearly follows from the presented inconsistency.

Common Pitfalls:
Reading motives into behavior without explicit support.

Final Answer:
Only conclusion II follows