Difficulty: Medium
Correct Answer: Only II follows
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:
The problem is a supply–demand mismatch in higher-education seats. Valid courses of action must address capacity constraints ethically and effectively.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:
Good actions target root causes (insufficient seats) rather than manipulating outcomes (artificially reducing pass rates) or proposing inequitable fixes.
Step-by-Step Solution:
I: Making exams tougher merely suppresses demand by filtering otherwise capable students; it is unfair and avoids solving the real issue. Does not follow.II: Creating capacity via encouraging new colleges (with regulated quality) directly addresses the shortage. This follows logically.III: Asking rich families to send wards abroad is discriminatory and impractical as policy; it does not systematically fix capacity. Does not follow.
Verification / Alternative check:
Structural capacity expansion (II) benefits all cohorts and aligns with long-term national goals; I and III are misdirected.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Common Pitfalls:
Confusing gatekeeping with quality improvement; true quality comes from better teaching, infrastructure, and standards, not arbitrary toughness.
Final Answer:
Only II follows
Discussion & Comments