Statement: For outstanding candidates, the condition of previous social-work experience may be waived by the Admission Committee for the M.A. (Social Work) program. Conclusions: I. Some M.A. (Social Work) students will have previous experience of social work. II. Some M.A. (Social Work) students will not have previous experience of social work.

Introduction / Context:The statement establishes a conditional waiver: outstanding candidates may have the usual requirement (prior social-work experience) waived. This has direct implications for the composition of the admitted cohort with respect to experience status.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Normal rule: prior experience required.
• Exception: outstanding candidates may be exempted.
• Therefore, two admissible categories exist: with experience (those who meet the usual rule) and without (those granted waiver).

Concept / Approach:If a rule allows a waiver for a subset, then logically some admitted students can lack the waived attribute (here, prior experience). Simultaneously, because the rule still exists for non-waived applicants, some admitted candidates will have the experience. Hence both conclusions follow.

Step-by-Step Solution:1) Identify two pathways to admission: with-experience (rule) and without-experience (waiver for outstanding).2) Therefore, I follows: some students with prior experience.3) Therefore, II follows: some students without prior experience (via waiver).

Verification / Alternative check:Even if many are waived, at least some non-waived will have experience; conversely, the existence of the waiver creates the possibility of admission without experience. The statement’s very purpose is to allow both categories.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:Only-I or Only-II ignores one side of the explicit policy design; “neither” contradicts the waiver language.

Common Pitfalls:Reading “may be waived” as “will never be applied” or as “applies to everyone,” both of which are misinterpretations.

Final Answer:If both the conclusion I and II follow.