Logical Reasoning · Micro-test

Critical Reasoning: Course of Action

A course-of-action question is less about logic puzzles and more about judgment - CLAT wants to know if you can spot the practical, proportionate fix and reject the tempting but excessive overreaction.

10 questions · 5 minutes · instant scoring

Updated 10 September 2026

What this topic actually tests

A course-of-action question describes a specific problem and then lists two suggested actions, labelled I and II, asking which of them 'follows' - meaning which is a sensible, practical, and directly relevant step that a reasonable authority would actually take to address the stated problem. A course of action follows only if it satisfies three tests together: it must be directly relevant to the specific problem described, not a generic or tangential step; it must be practically feasible to implement, not merely theoretical; and it must be proportionate to the scale and severity of the problem as described, neither too weak to matter nor wildly excessive. The most heavily tested pattern is the disproportionate-response trap, where one suggested action addresses the right problem but overreacts far beyond what the situation warrants - shutting down an entire operation, permanently banning all involved parties, or taking an irreversible step in response to a first-time or moderate issue. Such actions do not follow, even though they are topically related, because reasonableness is part of the test, not just relevance. The opposite pattern is an action that is mild and reasonable but does not actually address the specific cause of the problem described, drifting into an unrelated administrative step instead. Worked example: for the problem 'several students were found copying during an exam', the action 'implement stricter invigilation and use multiple examiners per hall' follows, since it directly and proportionately targets the cause. The action 'permanently expel all students who copied, regardless of severity' does not follow, since it is a disproportionate, one-size-fits-all punishment that ignores differences in severity and circumstance.

The common trap on this topic

The most common CLAT mistake is treating any action that is topically related to the problem as automatically following, without separately checking whether it is proportionate to the scale of the issue described. Aspirants are especially prone to accepting extreme, irreversible actions - permanent shutdowns, blanket bans, total closures - simply because they would technically eliminate the problem, forgetting that a reasonable authority would first try a measured, targeted response rather than an extreme one, especially for a moderate or first-reported issue. A second trap is rejecting a sound course of action because it does not completely solve the entire problem on its own, when the test only requires that the action be a reasonable and relevant step in the right direction, not a total or immediate fix. A third trap involves actions that sound busy and proactive but do not actually engage the stated cause at all - such as a public relations response or an unrelated administrative change - which aspirants sometimes credit simply because the tone matches the seriousness of the problem, even though the substance of the action does not address it.

Critical Reasoning: Course of Action: answers and explanations

Problem: Several students in a school have been found copying during exams. Courses of action: I. The school should implement stricter invigilation and use multiple examiners per exam hall. II. The school should permanently expel all students who copied, regardless of severity.
Answer: A. Only I follows
Stricter invigilation directly and proportionately addresses the cause of copying. Permanently expelling every student regardless of severity is a disproportionate, one-size-fits-all punishment that a reasonable school would not apply uniformly, so it does not follow.
Problem: The river flowing through the city has become heavily polluted due to industrial waste being dumped into it. Courses of action: I. The government should enforce strict penalties on industries found dumping untreated waste. II. The government should immediately shut down all industries located near the river.
Answer: D. Only I follows
Penalizing violators directly targets the cause of the pollution. Shutting down every industry near the river, including those not responsible for dumping waste, is an excessive and impractical overreaction, so it does not follow.
Problem: The number of road accidents at a particular unmarked intersection has increased sharply in the last year. Courses of action: I. Traffic signals and clear road signage should be installed at the intersection. II. The intersection should be permanently closed to all traffic.
Answer: A. Only I follows
Installing signals and signage directly addresses the likely cause - the lack of clear traffic control. Permanently closing the intersection is a disproportionate step that ignores a far simpler, targeted fix, so it does not follow.
Problem: A large number of employees at a company have complained of eye strain and back pain from long hours at poorly designed workstations. Courses of action: I. The company should conduct an ergonomic assessment and upgrade workstation furniture and lighting. II. The company should reduce the length of lunch breaks to compensate for lost productivity.
Answer: B. Only I follows
An ergonomic upgrade directly targets the stated cause of the physical strain. Reducing lunch breaks does not address workstation design at all and is unrelated to the problem described, so it does not follow.
Problem: A city's public buses are frequently overcrowded during peak morning and evening hours. Courses of action: I. The transport authority should increase the frequency of buses during peak hours. II. The transport authority should introduce additional buses on high-demand routes.
Answer: A. Both I and II follow
Both actions are practical, proportionate, and directly relevant responses to overcrowding - increasing frequency and adding buses on high-demand routes both expand capacity exactly where and when it is needed, so both follow.
Problem: A large number of patients at a government hospital have complained of long waiting times to see a doctor. Courses of action: I. The hospital should hire more doctors and staff to handle patient load. II. The hospital should introduce a token or appointment system to streamline patient flow.
Answer: A. Both I and II follow
Both actions are reasonable and complementary responses to long waiting times - increasing staff capacity and organizing patient flow through a token system both directly reduce waiting times, so both follow.
Problem: Shoplifting incidents have risen at a retail store in the past few months. Courses of action: I. The store should install CCTV cameras and train staff to monitor customers discreetly. II. The store should stop allowing any customer to enter without a security guard performing a full body search.
Answer: C. Only I follows
Installing CCTV and discreet staff monitoring is a standard, proportionate response to rising shoplifting. Mandatory body searches of every customer is an excessive, impractical measure that would alienate customers, so it does not follow.
Problem: A software company has been losing clients due to frequent server downtime. Courses of action: I. The company should invest in better server infrastructure and a backup system. II. The company should publicly blame its internet service provider for all downtime issues.
Answer: A. Only I follows
Investing in infrastructure and backup systems directly addresses the cause of downtime. Publicly blaming a third party does not fix the underlying technical problem and is not a genuine corrective action, so it does not follow.
Problem: A small bakery has seen a decline in daily customers over the past month. Courses of action: I. The bakery owner should immediately shut down the business, as it is clearly failing. II. The bakery owner should drastically increase prices to cover the revenue shortfall from fewer customers.
Answer: B. Neither I nor II follows
Shutting down the business over a single month's decline is a wildly disproportionate overreaction. Drastically raising prices when customers are already declining would likely worsen the problem rather than solve it, so neither action follows.
Problem: Farmers in a region have been suffering significant crop losses due to an ongoing drought. Courses of action: I. The government should provide subsidized irrigation equipment and drought-resistant seeds to affected farmers. II. The government should offer financial compensation and crop insurance payouts to affected farmers.
Answer: C. Both I and II follow
Both actions are standard, practical government responses to drought-related crop loss - one addresses future resilience through irrigation and better seeds, while the other addresses immediate financial harm through compensation, so both follow.

FAQ

What makes a course of action 'too extreme' to follow?

An action is too extreme when its severity is out of proportion to the scale of the problem described - for instance, permanently shutting down an entire facility or banning an entire group in response to an isolated or first-reported incident, when a more targeted, reversible step would reasonably address the same issue.

Does a course of action need to completely solve the problem to 'follow'?

No. It only needs to be a relevant, practical, and proportionate step that reasonably addresses the problem; it does not need to guarantee an immediate or total solution on its own.

Can both suggested courses of action follow at the same time?

Yes, when both actions are independently relevant, feasible, and proportionate responses to the same problem, and are not mutually exclusive, both can be judged to follow together.

Keep practising

Ready to see the full picture?

This micro-test covers one topic. The full CLAT diagnostic covers all five sections in 30 minutes and gives you a section-wise breakdown of where you actually stand.

Take the Full Diagnostic →