UGCNET Questions

The argument moves from an institute’s high success rate to a personal guarantee of success. For this to hold, it must be assumed that the student will be able to benefit from whatever facilities and teaching produced that rate. This assumes sufficient personal effort, attendance, and basic ability to keep up with the programme. Without this assumption, the high success rate of others does not automatically guarantee success for a particular individual.

Option A:
Option A may be relevant but is not strictly necessary; even if some variation exists, individuals who work hard can still succeed.

Option B:
Option B concerns the stability of the success rate over time, which is important but does not directly guarantee any one person’s result.

Option C:
Option C focuses on the learner’s own effort and ability, which is crucial for translating institutional success into personal success, making it a key hidden assumption.

Option D:
Option D is a background consideration about systemic change but is not the central unspoken premise tying institute performance to individual guarantee.

The argument links online courses with distraction at home and then directly concludes they are ineffective. For this move to work, the speaker must be assuming that distraction has a strong negative impact on learning outcomes. If distraction did not significantly reduce learning effectiveness, the fact that students “often get distracted” would not support the claim of ineffectiveness. Thus, the hidden bridge premise is that distraction harms learning in a substantial way.

Option A:
Option A overstates the issue by claiming distraction is the only factor, which is not required for the argument; the reasoning can proceed even if other factors exist.

Option B:
Option B is an additional claim about traditional classrooms that is not necessary for the argument; the focus is on online context and distraction.

Option C:
Option C correctly identifies the needed link between distraction and reduced effectiveness, which is what turns the observation into a criticism of online courses.

Option D:
Option D introduces cost, which is irrelevant to the line of reasoning about effectiveness and distraction.

The survey result describes a correlation between two behaviours: low sleep and higher coffee consumption. Logical reasoning requires us not to jump directly from correlation to causation. Several causal models are possible, including common underlying factors like stress or work patterns. A cautious interpretation acknowledges the association while calling for further study to clarify any causal link.

Option A:
Option A prematurely attributes causation in one direction without ruling out other possibilities.

Option B:
Option B simply reverses the direction of causality and is equally unwarranted based on the correlation alone.

Option C:
Option C states what the data actually show—an association—and correctly notes that more rigorous analysis is necessary to identify cause and effect, if any.

Option D:
Option D dismisses the association entirely, which is not justified simply because correlation does not specify causation.