Question

The Society for Education in India (in short SEI) had been engaged in running primary schools in different parts of the country since the 1950s. While attending a conference on employee selection, Mr J. Mehta, a senior member of the society, learned that a leading school had recently employed a psychologist to perform employment functions, i.e., recruitment and selection of teachers. Within two months of his return, Mr J. Mehta contacted a reputed university and employed a graduating psychologist, Mr Bibek Gupta.

Mr Bibek Gupta was employed by SEI with the single directive that he was to contribute to the selection of teachers. This task had previously been the prerogative of the principals of each school. Mr Gupta immediately notified each principal that in future he was to be notified of the personnel needs, and in return he would recruit, screen, and select the teachers.

At the end of his first year with SEI, Mr Gupta realized that his efforts had resulted in failure. During his first few months he encountered much opposition from several principals who had been managing schools for ten or more years. They did not believe in newer psychological techniques and preferred selecting people based on their own assessment. Other principals frequently refused to accept the teachers selected by Mr Gupta. Finally, Mr Gupta began to notice fewer and fewer principals notifying him of vacancies in their schools. Realizing that he was not making any effective contribution, Mr Gupta submitted the suggestion to the society members that support and co-operation of the school principals should be a matter of executive order, or else his resignation should be considered.

Directions: For each question below, an answer (A) and a reason (R) are given. Base your analysis only on the information in the passage above. Mark your response using the code:
1. if both A and R are based on information given in the passage, and R is the correct explanation of A.
2. if both A and R are based on information given in the passage, but R is not the correct explanation of A.
3. if A is based on information given in the passage, but R is not based on the facts given.
4. if A is not based on information given in the passage, but R is based on the information given in the passage.
5. if both A and R are not based on information given in the passage.

Question: "At the end of his first year with SEI, Mr Gupta realized that his efforts had resulted in failure." Was Mr Bibek's self-assessment justified?
A: Yes, since the selection of teachers continued to be done as it was being done earlier.
R: He was placed in a situation where the concerned persons refused to consult him regarding his expertise. Hence his impact was dependent on co-operation by others.

• A. Both A and R are based on information given in the passage, and R is the correct explanation of A.
• B. Both A and R are based on information given in the passage, but R is not the correct explanation of A.
• C. A is based on information given in the passage, but R is not based on the facts given.
• D. A is not based on information given in the passage, but R is based on the information given in the passage.

Hint:

Confirm A and R are each true per the passage, then check whether the lack of principal cooperation in R is the actual cause of the outcome in A.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

We need to check if A (Gupta's self-assessment of failure was justified) and R (the reason offered) both hold up against the passage, and whether R actually explains A.

1. Checking A: the passage says principals "frequently refused to accept the teachers selected by Mr Gupta" and that Gupta noticed "fewer and fewer principals notifying him of vacancies." By the end of the year, teacher selection was effectively back in the principals' hands, just as it was before Gupta joined. So A, that selection continued as it had before, is directly supported by the passage.
2. Checking R: the passage gives exactly this reason: principals "did not believe in newer psychological techniques", refused to accept his choices, and stopped notifying him of openings. Since Gupta's whole role depended on principals notifying him and accepting his recommendations, his impact was entirely dependent on their cooperation, which is what R states.
3. Does R explain A? Yes. A says the old process continued; R gives the reason: the principals withheld cooperation, so Gupta could never actually apply his expertise. That is a direct cause and effect link, not just two separate true facts.

Let's summarize:

• A is confirmed: the passage shows selection reverting to the old, principal led process.
• R is confirmed and is the reason A happened: lack of cooperation from the principals blocked Gupta's role.

Both A and R are based on the passage, and R correctly explains A. The answer is option 1.