1 Answers
Option 3 : The previous education minister, who was in power four years back, held an undergraduate Electrical Engineering degree.
Option 1 does not weaken the argument, as the previous education minister had poorer academic qualifications, and he also did not take any steps to make any changes as it is mentioned that the 'curriculum has remain unchanged for decades'. Option 2 says nothing about the Nepali Minister's education, and thus cannot be used as a valid argument. Option 3 is correct, as it states that even though the former Minister was well educated, no steps were taken to change the curriculum (It is mentioned that the curriculum was unchanged for decades). Hence, it weakens the argument that education is the problem.
Hence, option 3 is the answer.