Rewrite the following sentences in actual proper English.
Period 1:
In the essay there was room cleaning vs. archaeology and the discovery of learning.
Period 3:
Signifying that her love for her daughter no matter what stage of life or how much they transition it can only grow, espically when she states it can be "weighed and reweighed."
Period 4:
He say's to explain how in the beginning he was cleaning out her room, then it became more personal when he see's items she kept since she was a baby.
Period 5:
Which sets the tone and the mood in the read to express how the parent are feeling in the reading about their child.
Period 8:
This goes back to the title, with the word “excavating,” because it is usually used to find important artifacts.
December 9, 2009
December 8, 2009
Homework #40 Answer
During exam periods, cookie sales in the school cafeteria are high. Cookies are selling well in the cafeteria today, so it must be exam time.
Which one of the following is logically most similar to the argument above?
A. Logical thinking is enough to ensure success in the computer programming field. But none of my friends are computer programmers, so they must all be illogical.
(A) is incorrect because it does not match the pattern of the logic in the stimulus. The pattern of the logic in the stimulus is as follows: When the first condition (X) is true, then the second condition (Y) is true; since Y is true, X must also be true. This is not exactly sound logic; in fact, we've seen something like this before in Homework #23 (Answer). Although this is not strictly a cause-and-effect relationship, it is still an attempt to reverse the logic whose result is not always necessarily true. The fact that Y happens whenever X happens does not mean that any time Y happens, X must also have happened.
The logic in choice (A) is flawed, but not for the same reason. The pattern here is that if X is true, then Y is true; since Y is false, X must be false.
B. Someone who thinks logically can become a computer programmer. David thinks very logically, so he can become an excellent computer programmer.
(B) is incorrect because there is no flaw in the logic here. This is a simple attempt to state a general rule and then cite a specific example that follows the rule. If X = Y, and David = X, then David = Y.
C. Skill in thinking logically is one guarantee of success at computer programming; a degree from a prestigious technical school like M.I.T. is another.
(C) is incorrect because there is really no logical sequence in this statement at all. This is a simple statement of fact. X = Z and Y also = Z. Nothing wrong with that, and it certainly doesn't match the stimulus.
D. A computer programmer must be able to think logically. Rob is a very logical person, so he must be a computer programmer.
(D) is correct. Like the stimulus, this tells us that when X is true, Y is true; since Y is true, X must also be true. This choice exhibits the same logical flaw as the stimulus.
E. Computer programmers are always able to solve logic problems. None of the students can solve logic problems, so none of them are computer programmers.
(E) is incorrect because it's perfectly logical. If X can always do Y, and none of the students can do Y, then none of the students can be X.
Which one of the following is logically most similar to the argument above?
A. Logical thinking is enough to ensure success in the computer programming field. But none of my friends are computer programmers, so they must all be illogical.
(A) is incorrect because it does not match the pattern of the logic in the stimulus. The pattern of the logic in the stimulus is as follows: When the first condition (X) is true, then the second condition (Y) is true; since Y is true, X must also be true. This is not exactly sound logic; in fact, we've seen something like this before in Homework #23 (Answer). Although this is not strictly a cause-and-effect relationship, it is still an attempt to reverse the logic whose result is not always necessarily true. The fact that Y happens whenever X happens does not mean that any time Y happens, X must also have happened.
The logic in choice (A) is flawed, but not for the same reason. The pattern here is that if X is true, then Y is true; since Y is false, X must be false.
B. Someone who thinks logically can become a computer programmer. David thinks very logically, so he can become an excellent computer programmer.
(B) is incorrect because there is no flaw in the logic here. This is a simple attempt to state a general rule and then cite a specific example that follows the rule. If X = Y, and David = X, then David = Y.
C. Skill in thinking logically is one guarantee of success at computer programming; a degree from a prestigious technical school like M.I.T. is another.
(C) is incorrect because there is really no logical sequence in this statement at all. This is a simple statement of fact. X = Z and Y also = Z. Nothing wrong with that, and it certainly doesn't match the stimulus.
D. A computer programmer must be able to think logically. Rob is a very logical person, so he must be a computer programmer.
(D) is correct. Like the stimulus, this tells us that when X is true, Y is true; since Y is true, X must also be true. This choice exhibits the same logical flaw as the stimulus.
E. Computer programmers are always able to solve logic problems. None of the students can solve logic problems, so none of them are computer programmers.
(E) is incorrect because it's perfectly logical. If X can always do Y, and none of the students can do Y, then none of the students can be X.
December 7, 2009
Homework #39 Answer
The form of the Petrarchan sonnet provides the reader with a more exquisite literary experience than does the form of the detective novel. We know this is true because the best critics, the ones with delicate sensibilities, always prefer the Petrarchan sonnet to the detective novel. And we know that these critics are the best critics, because they prefer the Petrarchan sonnet.
The flaw in the logic expressed in the argument above is that the author
A. fails to provide the names of specific critics who prefer the Petrarchan sonnet over the detective novel.
(A) is incorrect because the logic would still be flawed even if the author provided the names of the critics. The author is claiming that one literary form is better than another because the "best critics" prefer the former, but then uses that very preference as proof that those critics are actually the "best." The argument doubles back on itself; replacing "the best critics" with a series of names would not change the operation of the statements.
B. assumes that the point he wishes to establish is necessarily true.
(B) is correct. The author is basically using his conclusion as evidence to prove that the evidence supporting the conclusion is valid. In other words, the author is saying that X is better than Y, and we know that because the "best critics" prefer X. But he goes on to state that their preference for X is what makes them the "best critics." This makes no sense.
Here's an example of the same argument, in a different context: Republicans are better for America than Democrats. I know that because the best news outlet in America, Fox News, supports Republicans. And we know that Fox news is the best news outlet in America, because it supports Republicans.
The fallacy lies in the assumption that the point the author is trying to establish is necessarily true; what is claimed as support is actually an assumption, but the author does not seem to understand that. One cannot claim that X is true because Y is true, then turn around and defend Y by citing X. A proves B, and B proves A; this is circular logic and flawed reasoning.
C. generalizes from one small, specific example to a broad, general rule.
(C) is incorrect because the author does no such thing. He provides no "small, specific example" of anything; everything cited is a broad category.
D. does not provide a valid counter-argument that would dispute his own conclusion.
(D) is incorrect because while it is true that the author does not provide a valid counter-argument, that is not his job, and more importantly, that is not the flaw in his logic.
E. fails to provide examples of any exceptions to the rule he proposes.
(E) is incorrect for the same reason as (D); the author is not obligated to provide examples of exceptions to the rule he proposes. Again, it is true that he does not do so, but his "failure" to do so does not constitute a flaw in his logic. The flaw in his logic is that he assumes his premise is true using circular logic; A proves B, and B proves A.
Homework #40
During exam periods, cookie sales in the school cafeteria are high. Cookies are selling well in the cafeteria today, so it must be exam time.
Which one of the following is logically most similar to the argument above?
A. Logical thinking is enough to ensure success in the computer programming field. But none of my friends are computer programmers, so they must all be illogical.
B. Someone who thinks logically can become a computer programmer. David thinks very logically, so he can become an excellent computer programmer.
C. Skill in thinking logically is one guarantee of success at computer programming; a degree from a prestigious technical school like M.I.T. is another.
D. A computer programmer must be able to think logically. Rob is a very logical person, so he must be a computer programmer.
E. Computer programmers are always able to solve logic problems. None of the students can solve logic problems, so none of them are computer programmers.
Which one of the following is logically most similar to the argument above?
A. Logical thinking is enough to ensure success in the computer programming field. But none of my friends are computer programmers, so they must all be illogical.
B. Someone who thinks logically can become a computer programmer. David thinks very logically, so he can become an excellent computer programmer.
C. Skill in thinking logically is one guarantee of success at computer programming; a degree from a prestigious technical school like M.I.T. is another.
D. A computer programmer must be able to think logically. Rob is a very logical person, so he must be a computer programmer.
E. Computer programmers are always able to solve logic problems. None of the students can solve logic problems, so none of them are computer programmers.
December 4, 2009
Homework #38 Answer
Samuel Taylor Coleridge must have found the inspiration for "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" in Hakluyt's 1600 edition of the real-life sea narrative, The Southern Voyage of John Davis. Although Coleridge did not mention the 200-year-old work in his notes, both "Mariner" and Southern Voyage prominently feature a tale of misfortune resulting from the killing of a bird. They also both feature a rotting ship drifting out of control in the tropics, and a scene of a dying man cursing his fate. Furthermore, William Wordsworth, Coleridge's good friend and occasional collaborator, had an interest in books about actual historical sea voyages, and may have owned a copy of Davis' story.
The author of the passage makes his point primarily by
A. drawing an analogy between literature and seafaring.
(A) is incorrect because the author draws no such analogy. Although both works of literature he cites involve seafaring to some extent, the author is comparing the two works to each other, in order to suggest that the later work was influenced by the earlier work.
B. reinterpreting a classic literary work.
(B) is incorrect because the author makes no attempt to reinterpret either of the literary works mentioned. In other words, he does not challenge the conventional interpretation of either work, nor any particular scholar's interpretation of either work. He is merely claiming that one must be based on the other, a claim which does not require any reinterpretation.
C. paralleling an author's work with the events of the author's life.
(C) is incorrect because the author draws no such parallel; nothing about Coleridge's life is mentioned in the stimulus. The only "parallel" being drawn is between some elements of Coleridge's story and the Southern Voyage story that appear to be similar.
D. supporting a claim with circumstantial evidence.
(D) is correct. The author claims that Coleridge's poem must be based on the Southern Voyage story published in 1600, and bases that claim on two things: (1) a few broad similarities between the two stories, and (2) the possibility that one of Coleridge's contemporaries possessed a copy of the text in question. None of the facts cited by the author can definitively prove that Coleridge based "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" on The Southern Voyage of John Davis; in fact they might just be mere coincidences. They do tend to support the author's conclusion, but they require additional, more direct facts in order to constitute actual proof. Therefore they qualify as circumstantial evidence, as opposed to direct evidence.
E. disputing a controversial claim of literary influence.
(E) is incorrect because the author is not "disputing" anything, and no "controversial claim" is presented in the stimulus. If anything, the author's own claim might be controversial, but that depends on the scholarly consensus which is outside the scope of the argument.
The author of the passage makes his point primarily by
A. drawing an analogy between literature and seafaring.
(A) is incorrect because the author draws no such analogy. Although both works of literature he cites involve seafaring to some extent, the author is comparing the two works to each other, in order to suggest that the later work was influenced by the earlier work.
B. reinterpreting a classic literary work.
(B) is incorrect because the author makes no attempt to reinterpret either of the literary works mentioned. In other words, he does not challenge the conventional interpretation of either work, nor any particular scholar's interpretation of either work. He is merely claiming that one must be based on the other, a claim which does not require any reinterpretation.
C. paralleling an author's work with the events of the author's life.
(C) is incorrect because the author draws no such parallel; nothing about Coleridge's life is mentioned in the stimulus. The only "parallel" being drawn is between some elements of Coleridge's story and the Southern Voyage story that appear to be similar.
D. supporting a claim with circumstantial evidence.
(D) is correct. The author claims that Coleridge's poem must be based on the Southern Voyage story published in 1600, and bases that claim on two things: (1) a few broad similarities between the two stories, and (2) the possibility that one of Coleridge's contemporaries possessed a copy of the text in question. None of the facts cited by the author can definitively prove that Coleridge based "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" on The Southern Voyage of John Davis; in fact they might just be mere coincidences. They do tend to support the author's conclusion, but they require additional, more direct facts in order to constitute actual proof. Therefore they qualify as circumstantial evidence, as opposed to direct evidence.
E. disputing a controversial claim of literary influence.
(E) is incorrect because the author is not "disputing" anything, and no "controversial claim" is presented in the stimulus. If anything, the author's own claim might be controversial, but that depends on the scholarly consensus which is outside the scope of the argument.
Homework #39
The form of the Petrarchan sonnet provides the reader with a more exquisite literary experience than does the form of the detective novel. We know this is true because the best critics, the ones with delicate sensibilities, always prefer the Petrarchan sonnet to the detective novel. And we know that these critics are the best critics, because they prefer the Petrarchan sonnet.
The flaw in the logic expressed in the argument above is that the author
A. fails to provide the names of specific critics who prefer the Petrarchan sonnet over the detective novel.
B. assumes that the point he wishes to establish is necessarily true.
C. generalizes from one small, specific example to a broad, general rule.
D. does not provide a valid counter-argument that would dispute his own conclusion.
E. fails to provide examples of any exceptions to the rule he proposes.
The flaw in the logic expressed in the argument above is that the author
A. fails to provide the names of specific critics who prefer the Petrarchan sonnet over the detective novel.
B. assumes that the point he wishes to establish is necessarily true.
C. generalizes from one small, specific example to a broad, general rule.
D. does not provide a valid counter-argument that would dispute his own conclusion.
E. fails to provide examples of any exceptions to the rule he proposes.
December 3, 2009
Homework #37 Answer
A student at any college within the CUNY system is permitted and encouraged to take classes at other CUNY schools when they complement the offerings of his home institution. For example, a student enrolled at Brooklyn College can take a class at Queens College, Hunter College, College of Staten Island, etc. Please note, however, that the final determination of credits earned and requirements satisfied remains with the student's own academic dean at his own school, even if the other school where he takes the class has a different policy. In other words, a student enrolled at Brooklyn College who takes a class at Queens College has to meet the requirements of Brooklyn College, even if Queens College's requirements are different. The rules governing a student's course of study depend solely on the institution in which he is officially enrolled, not on his physical presence in any given classroom.
The above policy statement implies that
A. any student admitted to a CUNY school will be allowed to officially enroll at another CUNY school.
(A) is incorrect because nothing in the stimulus implies a relationship between where one is admitted and where one is enrolled. It is important to understand what these words mean, and the differences between them, in order to successfully answer this question. Application comes first, then admittance (acceptance), then enrollment (commitment to attend and payment of tuition), then classes taken and credits earned, then if requirements are met, graduation. The argument here concerns any student who is already enrolled in, and expects to graduate from, one particular CUNY college. The stimulus tells us that a student enrolled in one school may take classes at another, not that a student admitted to one school (an event which comes before enrollment) may enroll at another. It doesn't tell us anything about how one proceeds from admission to enrollment; that process is outside the scope of the argument.
B. a college may exclude a student enrolled in the CUNY system from its non-academic programs.
(B) is incorrect because it is also not implied by the stimulus. "Non-academic programs" are beyond the scope of the argument, as is whether or not any college may exclude any CUNY student from anything. The fact that CUNY colleges allow students from other CUNY colleges to take academic classes does not imply that they do NOT allow such students to participate in non-academic activities.
C. each college's Admissions Office is the sole judge of who is eligible to attend its classes.
(C) is incorrect because the argument is not concerned with who gets to decide whether or not a student may attend classes at any particular college. In fact, the stimulus makes the blanket statement that students are "permitted and encouraged" to take classes outside of their home school within the CUNY system. The argument here is concerned with whether or not any classes taken at other colleges will count toward the student's degree at his own college.
D. students are not required to follow rules of conduct established by colleges at which they are not enrolled.
(D) is incorrect because it's absurd; there's no reason, in the stimulus or otherwise, to think anyone is not subject to the rules of conduct established by any institution in which he becomes involved, or even on whose property he sets foot. The argument is that students may take classes at other colleges but that their own college gets to decide whether to count those classes toward the student's degree. This does not, by any stretch, mean that the student would not be subject to the other college's rules and regulations. In any event, rules of conduct are not the same thing as academic requirements, and are therefore outside the scope of the argument, so (D) cannot be correct.
E. a student's academic dean at his own school can refuse to accept course credits for classes the student has taken at a different CUNY school.
(E) is correct because it's the only logical choice; it is the most obvious implication of the stated policy. The stimulus clearly and unequivocally states that a student's own academic dean at his own school gets to decide whether or not a class taken at another college will count toward the student's degree requirements. If it's the dean's decision, then the dean can either accept the credits or refuse to accept the credits.
The above policy statement implies that
A. any student admitted to a CUNY school will be allowed to officially enroll at another CUNY school.
(A) is incorrect because nothing in the stimulus implies a relationship between where one is admitted and where one is enrolled. It is important to understand what these words mean, and the differences between them, in order to successfully answer this question. Application comes first, then admittance (acceptance), then enrollment (commitment to attend and payment of tuition), then classes taken and credits earned, then if requirements are met, graduation. The argument here concerns any student who is already enrolled in, and expects to graduate from, one particular CUNY college. The stimulus tells us that a student enrolled in one school may take classes at another, not that a student admitted to one school (an event which comes before enrollment) may enroll at another. It doesn't tell us anything about how one proceeds from admission to enrollment; that process is outside the scope of the argument.
B. a college may exclude a student enrolled in the CUNY system from its non-academic programs.
(B) is incorrect because it is also not implied by the stimulus. "Non-academic programs" are beyond the scope of the argument, as is whether or not any college may exclude any CUNY student from anything. The fact that CUNY colleges allow students from other CUNY colleges to take academic classes does not imply that they do NOT allow such students to participate in non-academic activities.
C. each college's Admissions Office is the sole judge of who is eligible to attend its classes.
(C) is incorrect because the argument is not concerned with who gets to decide whether or not a student may attend classes at any particular college. In fact, the stimulus makes the blanket statement that students are "permitted and encouraged" to take classes outside of their home school within the CUNY system. The argument here is concerned with whether or not any classes taken at other colleges will count toward the student's degree at his own college.
D. students are not required to follow rules of conduct established by colleges at which they are not enrolled.
(D) is incorrect because it's absurd; there's no reason, in the stimulus or otherwise, to think anyone is not subject to the rules of conduct established by any institution in which he becomes involved, or even on whose property he sets foot. The argument is that students may take classes at other colleges but that their own college gets to decide whether to count those classes toward the student's degree. This does not, by any stretch, mean that the student would not be subject to the other college's rules and regulations. In any event, rules of conduct are not the same thing as academic requirements, and are therefore outside the scope of the argument, so (D) cannot be correct.
E. a student's academic dean at his own school can refuse to accept course credits for classes the student has taken at a different CUNY school.
(E) is correct because it's the only logical choice; it is the most obvious implication of the stated policy. The stimulus clearly and unequivocally states that a student's own academic dean at his own school gets to decide whether or not a class taken at another college will count toward the student's degree requirements. If it's the dean's decision, then the dean can either accept the credits or refuse to accept the credits.
Homework #38
Samuel Taylor Coleridge must have found the inspiration for "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" in Hakluyt's 1600 edition of the real-life sea narrative, The Southern Voyage of John Davis. Although Coleridge did not mention the 200-year-old work in his notes, both "Mariner" and Southern Voyage prominently feature a tale of misfortune resulting from the killing of a bird. They also both feature a rotting ship drifting out of control in the tropics, and a scene of a dying man cursing his fate. Furthermore, William Wordsworth, Coleridge's good friend and occasional collaborator, had an interest in books about actual historical sea voyages, and may have owned a copy of Davis' story.
The author of the passage makes his point primarily by
A. drawing an analogy between literature and seafaring.
B. reinterpreting a classic literary work.
C. paralleling an author's work with the events of the author's life.
D. supporting a claim with circumstantial evidence.
E. disputing a controversial claim of literary influence.
The author of the passage makes his point primarily by
A. drawing an analogy between literature and seafaring.
B. reinterpreting a classic literary work.
C. paralleling an author's work with the events of the author's life.
D. supporting a claim with circumstantial evidence.
E. disputing a controversial claim of literary influence.
December 2, 2009
Homework #36 Answer
For exactly ten years, it has been against the law to bungee-jump in New York State. All members of the Rubberband Club must live in New York State, and must have bungee-jumped at least once in the last two years. The Rubberband Club is currently taking applications for new members.
Which one of the following necessarily follows from the information presented above?
A. Every current member of the Rubberband Club has bungee-jumped outside of New York.
(A) is incorrect, because any current member could have bungee-jumped in New York, albeit illegally, without ever bungee-jumping anywhere else. The fact that something is against the law does not mean that it cannot and will not ever happen. The Club rule requires a member to have bungee-jumped at least once within the past two years; it does not require him to have done so legally.
The stimulus seems to set forth three specific conditions that may be important:
- when the member (current or prospective) bungee-jumped;
- where the member bungee-jumped; and
- whether he did so legally.
For a question like this, it is constructive to read the answer choice as a rule and then ask if it is possible that there is an exception. For choice (A), is it possible that there is a current member of the club who has never bungee-jumped outside of New York? The fact that every member must have bungee-jumped at least once within the last two years means that if they did so in New York, it was illegal. There could be members of the club who have only bungee-jumped in New York; whether they did so legally is outside the scope of the statement in choice (A).
B. No one currently applying for membership in the Rubberband Club has legally bungee-jumped in New York.
Is it possible that someone currently applying for membership has legally bungee-jumped in New York? Yes; (B) is incorrect because it is possible for a prospective member to have bungee-jumped legally in New York more than ten years ago, and then bungee-jumped again within the last two years, either illegally in New York or legally elsewhere.
C. The current members of the Rubberband Club have bungee-jumped illegally at least once.
Is it possible that no current member of the Club has ever bungee-jumped illegally? Yes; (C) is incorrect because they could all have done all of their recent bungee-jumping outside New York, and any of their New York bungee-jumping before it was outlawed. The club rules require the members to live in New York, not to bungee-jump there.
D. Current members of the Rubberband Club who have never bungee-jumped outside of New York have broken the law in New York.
Is it possible that any current member who has never bungee-jumped outside of New York has not broken the law in New York? No; (D) is correct. Anyone who is a current member of the Rubberband Club has to have bungee-jumped at least once in the past two years. Any member who has never bungee-jumped outside of New York has to have bungee-jumped in New York. Therefore, since they must have bungee-jumped within the past two years, and can only have done so in New York where it has been illegal throughout that time, they must have broken the law.
E. The Rubberband Club does not include any members who have bungee-jumped legally in New York.
Is it possible that there are members of the Rubberband Club who have bungee-jumped legally in New York? Yes; (E) is incorrect because the Club could include members who bungee-jumped in New York before it was outlawed, and bungee-jumped elsewhere within the past two years.
Which one of the following necessarily follows from the information presented above?
A. Every current member of the Rubberband Club has bungee-jumped outside of New York.
(A) is incorrect, because any current member could have bungee-jumped in New York, albeit illegally, without ever bungee-jumping anywhere else. The fact that something is against the law does not mean that it cannot and will not ever happen. The Club rule requires a member to have bungee-jumped at least once within the past two years; it does not require him to have done so legally.
The stimulus seems to set forth three specific conditions that may be important:
- when the member (current or prospective) bungee-jumped;
- where the member bungee-jumped; and
- whether he did so legally.
For a question like this, it is constructive to read the answer choice as a rule and then ask if it is possible that there is an exception. For choice (A), is it possible that there is a current member of the club who has never bungee-jumped outside of New York? The fact that every member must have bungee-jumped at least once within the last two years means that if they did so in New York, it was illegal. There could be members of the club who have only bungee-jumped in New York; whether they did so legally is outside the scope of the statement in choice (A).
B. No one currently applying for membership in the Rubberband Club has legally bungee-jumped in New York.
Is it possible that someone currently applying for membership has legally bungee-jumped in New York? Yes; (B) is incorrect because it is possible for a prospective member to have bungee-jumped legally in New York more than ten years ago, and then bungee-jumped again within the last two years, either illegally in New York or legally elsewhere.
C. The current members of the Rubberband Club have bungee-jumped illegally at least once.
Is it possible that no current member of the Club has ever bungee-jumped illegally? Yes; (C) is incorrect because they could all have done all of their recent bungee-jumping outside New York, and any of their New York bungee-jumping before it was outlawed. The club rules require the members to live in New York, not to bungee-jump there.
D. Current members of the Rubberband Club who have never bungee-jumped outside of New York have broken the law in New York.
Is it possible that any current member who has never bungee-jumped outside of New York has not broken the law in New York? No; (D) is correct. Anyone who is a current member of the Rubberband Club has to have bungee-jumped at least once in the past two years. Any member who has never bungee-jumped outside of New York has to have bungee-jumped in New York. Therefore, since they must have bungee-jumped within the past two years, and can only have done so in New York where it has been illegal throughout that time, they must have broken the law.
E. The Rubberband Club does not include any members who have bungee-jumped legally in New York.
Is it possible that there are members of the Rubberband Club who have bungee-jumped legally in New York? Yes; (E) is incorrect because the Club could include members who bungee-jumped in New York before it was outlawed, and bungee-jumped elsewhere within the past two years.
Homework #37
A student at any college within the CUNY system is permitted and encouraged to take classes at other CUNY schools when they complement the offerings of his home institution. For example, a student enrolled at Brooklyn College can take a class at Queens College, Hunter College, College of Staten Island, etc. Please note, however, that the final determination of credits earned and requirements satisfied remains with the student's own academic dean at his own school, even if the other school where he takes the class has a different policy. In other words, a student enrolled at Brooklyn College who takes a class at Queens College has to meet the requirements of Brooklyn College, even if Queens College's requirements are different. The rules governing a student's course of study depend solely on the institution in which he is officially enrolled, not on his physical presence in any given classroom.
The above policy statement implies that
A. any student admitted to a CUNY school will be allowed to officially enroll at another CUNY school.
B. a college may exclude a student enrolled in the CUNY system from its non-academic programs.
C. each college's Admissions Office is the sole judge of who is eligible to attend its classes.
D. students are not required to follow rules of conduct established by colleges at which they are not enrolled.
E. a student's academic dean at his own school can refuse to accept course credits for classes the student has taken at a different CUNY school.
The above policy statement implies that
A. any student admitted to a CUNY school will be allowed to officially enroll at another CUNY school.
B. a college may exclude a student enrolled in the CUNY system from its non-academic programs.
C. each college's Admissions Office is the sole judge of who is eligible to attend its classes.
D. students are not required to follow rules of conduct established by colleges at which they are not enrolled.
E. a student's academic dean at his own school can refuse to accept course credits for classes the student has taken at a different CUNY school.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)