Statement:\n“In the case of outstanding candidates, the condition of previous experience of social work may be waived by the Admission Committee for the M.A. (Social Work).”\n\nConclusions:\nI. Some students for M.A. (Social Work) will have previous social-work experience.\nII. Some students for M.A. (Social Work) will not have previous social-work experience.\n\nWhich conclusion(s) logically follow(s)?

Introduction / Context:
The statement permits a waiver of prior experience for “outstanding” candidates; it does not assert how many such candidates will apply or be admitted.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Policy: prior experience may be waived for a subset (outstanding candidates).
• No data on the composition of the admitted cohort.

Concept / Approach:
“May be waived” establishes a possibility, not a certainty about actual admissions. Without facts on who gets admitted, we cannot conclude existence of experienced or inexperienced students in the final cohort.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Edge cases: All admitted could still have experience (waiver unused), or all could be outstanding (waiver used but all had experience); the policy alone cannot settle it.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
They convert a permissive rule (“may waive”) into existence claims.

Common Pitfalls:
Equating possibility with certainty in syllogisms.

Final Answer:
If neither Conclusion I nor II follows.