The advantages of a college education are much too precious to waste on students who are not seriously dedicated to learning and studying. Administrators should strictly enforce the idea that students must earn the privilege of enrolling in college, and then must earn the privilege of staying there. Any student who fails a course should be immediately dismissed from the university, so that a more deserving student may take his place.
Which one of the following is the best rebuttal of the argument above?
A. A student should not be expected to fulfill college requirements unless he gets to choose the courses he wants to take.
(A) is incorrect because it's an excuse that's unrelated to the author's premise. The author argues that students who fail courses should be summarily thrown out of college, because the failure indicates that they are not "seriously dedicated to learning and studying." This, of course, is a faulty assumption. However, the flaw in the argument is not that a student should get to choose his own courses, because choice of courses has no direct bearing on dedication and seriousness. This choice addresses only the author's conclusion, not the reasons behind it.
B. The university may not have made the student fully aware of the demands of its curriculum and the intensity of study required.
(B) is also incorrect because it's also an excuse that has no bearing on the student's dedication and seriousness, which are the crux of the author's argument. Like (A), it only addresses the author's conclusion, not the reasons behind it. The author's point is that students who are not dedicated and serious should not be in college; shifting the blame to a third party based on unrelated factors does not undermine the original premise.
C. To dismiss a student who fails a course is to place achievement over the student's individual right to an education.
(C) is incorrect because it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. To the extent that a student has an "individual right to an education," that right is to the opportunity, not the outcome. In other words, a student has a right to be educated but does not have a right to receive high grades, or even to pass his courses. However, even if such a right does exist, it ends with secondary school; going to college is not a right. Further, like all other rights, it can be forfeited if one does not live up to one's responsibilities. Therefore there is nothing wrong with "plac[ing] achievement over the student's individual right to an education," especially in the college context. This idea is not incompatible with the author's argument, therefore (C) does not undermine it.
D. Scholarship is only one of the possible contributions that a student might make to the university community.
(D) is incorrect because it is also not incompatible with the author's argument. "Scholarship" here refers to a student's academic ability and performance, as opposed to "a scholarship" which would refer to a monetary grant of assistance based thereon. The idea that a student might contribute to a university community in non-academic ways, such as by playing football or having his family donate a building, does not undermine the author's argument about seriousness and dedication. It's a weak rebuttal.
E. A highly dedicated student may still fail a course for other reasons, which are unrelated to his dedication.
(E) is the best rebuttal to the author's argument because of the author's faulty assumption. The author assumes that if a student fails a course, it must mean that he is not serious or dedicated to his studies and should therefore be expelled, so someone who is serious and dedicated can take his place. The author fails to consider that serious, dedicated students may nonetheless fail courses for other reasons. Whether those reasons constitute mere excuses is beside the point; this choice undermines the author's flawed assumption, and is therefore the best rebuttal.
