Difficulty: Easy
Correct Answer: If both I and II follow
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:
The statement ties the institute’s purpose (training and research) to a strategic goal (facing international competition). It invites two natural inferences: the necessity of capability building (I) and the institute’s functional contribution (II). We must check both for logical support from the text.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:
Conclusion I is essentially a restatement of the rationale: if one sets up training/research to meet competition, then training/techniques are considered necessary means. Conclusion II specifies the beneficial pathways—skill and technique development leading to quality and competitiveness—which is exactly what such an institute is purposed to deliver.
Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Purpose alignment: training/research → competitive readiness → supports I.2) Output implications: techniques and quality improvements are the expected outcomes → supports II.
Verification / Alternative check:
If training and research were not useful for competition, inaugurating such an institute with that justification would be incoherent; therefore both conclusions are embedded in the stated purpose.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Picking only I or only II ignores one half of the explicit design logic; “neither” contradicts the statement’s purpose.
Common Pitfalls:
Under-reading institutional purpose statements as non-committal; here the linkage is explicit.
Final Answer:
If both I and II follow.
Discussion & Comments