The number of applications for teaching positions in Newtown

[JbhB682]

Source: GMAT prep

The number of applications for teaching positions in Newtown’s public schools was 5.7 percent lower in 1993 than in 1985 and 5.9 percent lower in 1994 than in 1985. Despite a steadily growing student population and an increasing number of teacher resignations, however, Newtown did not face a teacher shortage in the late 1990’s.

Which of the following, if true, would contribute most to an explanation of the apparent discrepancy above?


(A) Many of Newtown’s public school students do not graduate from high school.

(B) New housing developments planned for Newtown are slated for occupancy in 1997 and are expected to increase the number of elementary school students in Newtown’s public schools by 12 percent.

(C) The Newtown school board does not contemplate increasing the ratio of students to teachers in the 1990’s.

(D) Teachers’ colleges in and near Newtown produced fewer graduates in 1994 than in 1993.

(E) In 1993 Newtown’s public schools received 40 percent more applications for teaching positions than there were positions available.

OA : E

[JbhB682]

Hi Experts - I did select E but I did have two quick questions on E

Question 1

Option E only explains why there is no teacher shortage even though the number of applications have gone down (because you had 40 % more applications)

Option E DOES NOT explain why there is no teacher shortage even though resignations have gone up.

Is my assessment of E accurate ?

Question 2

Q2) Does option E tell us anything about if the 40 % more applications compensated for the increased resignations. My understand is YOU CANNOT assume that from option E

Thoughts ?

[esledge]

First, I'll point out that you aren't expressing concern about what "a steadily growing student population" means for teaching positions ... nor should you be too concerned about that.

Second, I'd suggest that you should be similarly unconcerned about "an increasing number of teacher resignations." It's not quantified enough for you to make anything of it individually, so just note it as one of the "oddities" that make it paradoxical that "Newtown did not face a teacher shortage in the late 1990's."

You just need to explain the LACK of a teacher shortage, and (E) does that:

# of applications = 1.4 * # of teaching positions available
so,
# of applications > # of teaching positions available
so,
All positions could be filled. There was not a teacher shortage.

Also note that "Positions available" would account both for the vacancies created by the teacher resignations and for any additional teachers needed to teach additional students, so neither factor creates a separate "quantity" to consider.