Critical Reasoning — Assumptions Statement (Chairman of the Admission Committee): “We must introduce objective-type tests to improve our examinations for admission to the MBA.” Which assumptions are implicit?

Introduction / Context:
An authority recommends introducing objective-type tests to improve MBA admissions. We must identify which background beliefs must be true for this recommendation to make sense.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I: The admission at present is directly through the interview.
• II: The Admission Committee is desirous of improving the admission examinations.
• III: The Chairman himself is an MBA.

Concept / Approach:
Look for assumptions about goals and feasibility, not irrelevant biographical facts. Use the necessity (negation) test.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Assumption II: The proposal aims to “improve” admissions; this presupposes the committee values improvement. Negate II (“the committee does not care to improve”), and the statement loses its institutional point. Hence, II is necessary.2) Assumption I: Even if the current process already includes written tests or other subjective measures (not only interviews), adding objective tests could still be proposed for improvement. Therefore, I is not necessary.3) Assumption III: The Chairman’s qualification is irrelevant. Whether or not he is an MBA does not affect the logic of introducing objective tests.

Verification / Alternative check:
The recommendation stands as long as “improvement” is a shared aim. It does not depend on the exact current method nor on the Chairman’s degree.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• I and II / I / I and III / None: Each includes a nonessential element (I or III) or omits the core aim (II).

Common Pitfalls:
Do not infer current procedures from proposed changes; proposals can be additive, not necessarily replacements.

Final Answer:
Only II is implicit