# Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument - Discussion

Discussion Forum : Statement and Argument - Section 2 (Q.No. 29)
Directions to Solve

Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument.

• (A) If only argument I is strong
• (B) If only argument II is strong
• (C) If either I or II is strong
• (D) If neither I nor II is strong and
• (E) If both I and II are strong.

29.

Statement: Should all the colleges in India be allowed to devise their own curriculum and syllabus for the vocational courses promoting self-employment?

Arguments:

1. Yes. This is an important step to generate employment opportunities.
2. No. This will affect the quality of education due to lack of uniformity in syllabus.
Only argument I is strong
Only argument II is strong
Either I or II is strong
Neither I nor II is strong
Both I and II are strong
Explanation:
Clearly, colleges, if given a free hand, would through individual efforts come up with fresh, competent courses to draw in more students. This would open up new avenues for employment. So, argument I holds strong. In the light of this, argument II appears to be vague.
Discussion:
12 comments Page 1 of 2.

Gaurav said:   2 years ago

Deek said:   3 years ago
Option B seems be correct.

Amirtha said:   3 years ago
I too agree option B is right.
(1)

Sahil said:   8 years ago
Clearly, option B is correct as lack of uniformity will create a lot of difficulties for the employers.
(1)

Pikku said:   8 years ago
A is also correct ultimately it will create employment both argument are correct.

Siva prasad reddy said:   8 years ago
I think B is the correct one because the mindset of those colleges would be somewhat back in education field.

Eric said:   9 years ago
Really? That's "clear"? While it is true that colleges COULD create very great programs, they could just as easily come up with fully inept and pompous courses that would actually negatively impact students' abilities to attain employment.

On the other hand, uniformity can be huge for employers. You know exactly what you're getting, and if the course produces competent people, they will be much more likely to hire a lot of graduates rather than making a gamble on one of thousands of courses by colleges across the country.

Assumption II is correct, while assumption I cannot be.

Duong said:   10 years ago
I felt both arguments can be strong. I agree education is important, but people can also make strong argument about the differences in syllabus lead to difficulties in determine quality.

The answer suggested in this question is rather biased.

Sandeep Kumar said:   1 decade ago
No Arthur Option B is correct. Have a look on Education in India. Don't look only at Educational Institutions that are Organized by Central Govt. and at Institutions offering CBSE syllabus. Each and every state has its own syllabus namely "STATE SYLLABUS" This doesn't match the Central Syllabus causing a great imbalance in the Central Govt. employment Opportunities.

Consider AP(my native state) for medical students statewise there is EAMCET and central govt. had decided to remove that and said that all medical students should write NEET test for admissions to medical colleges. but syllabus of state govt is different from syllabus of central govt(which is hard to AP medical students) making them unfit for admitting into top medical colleges and employment.

and coming to Gujarat do you know that 90% of Gujarat students are from Gujarati medium and not from English medium offering CBSE. But opportunities goes to CBSE students. For this reason the Gujarat govt has reduced the CBSE actual % by 10% to give opportunity to the state Gujarati students. This is all due to the lack of uniformity in the syllabus of central and state governments.