In the LEAD Scholar example, what was the primary Task?

In the LEAD Scholar example, what was the primary Task?

• A. To increase attendance by creating engaging events and addressing attendance decline
• B. To raise funds
• C. To expand to another campus
• D. To reduce event costs

Answer: (A)

The main idea being tested is identifying the central objective when a program is facing declining participation. In the LEAD Scholar example, the focus is on reversing the drop in attendance by making events more engaging and directly addressing why people aren’t showing up. This approach targets the measurable outcome you want to improve—attendance—by increasing the perceived value of attending and removing barriers that contribute to disengagement. Why this is the best fit: If the issue is that people aren’t attending, the most effective and direct way to create impact is to make attendance more appealing and accessible. Engaging events help participants see value in showing up, while addressing the reasons behind the decline (such as timing, relevance, or communication gaps) tackles the root cause of lower attendance rather than just treating symptoms like cost or expansion. Why the other options fit less well: Raising funds supports the program but doesn’t inherently increase participation. Expanding to another campus introduces growth without solving the current attendance problem. Reducing event costs can help sustainability, but it doesn’t guarantee higher attendance, which is the core issue described.

The main idea being tested is identifying the central objective when a program is facing declining participation. In the LEAD Scholar example, the focus is on reversing the drop in attendance by making events more engaging and directly addressing why people aren’t showing up. This approach targets the measurable outcome you want to improve—attendance—by increasing the perceived value of attending and removing barriers that contribute to disengagement.

Why this is the best fit: If the issue is that people aren’t attending, the most effective and direct way to create impact is to make attendance more appealing and accessible. Engaging events help participants see value in showing up, while addressing the reasons behind the decline (such as timing, relevance, or communication gaps) tackles the root cause of lower attendance rather than just treating symptoms like cost or expansion.

Why the other options fit less well: Raising funds supports the program but doesn’t inherently increase participation. Expanding to another campus introduces growth without solving the current attendance problem. Reducing event costs can help sustainability, but it doesn’t guarantee higher attendance, which is the core issue described.