How much confidence can you have in the course if whoever is writing the assignment makes such a basic error?

It's very possibly just a simple slip where they typed the wrong thing instead of what they meant to type and didn't realize it. How many of us haven't done the same thing on more than one occasion?

Now, if the TS asks for clarification and the instructor can't provide any (regardless of whether they wrote the question or not), THEN there's a problem. But, even then, they might not recognize it immediately because their brain, like all of ours, is prepped to replace things that don't make sense with things that do within the current context.

 

The question asks for the simulation and frequency response graph of a CE NPN audio amplifier using negative feedback for 10X gain.
Since he mentions no input requiremment, 10 Hertz, and resistors dissipating <= 200mW. It might be a bass booster circuit.
Another assumption might be that since gain 10X and given output, the input 2.2 - 2.4 V

 

It's very possibly just a simple slip where they typed the wrong thing instead of what they meant to type and didn't realize it. How many of us haven't done the same thing on more than one occasion?

You'd think that on something as important as a student assignment, which might affect the student's final degree grade, they would proof-read it, and probably get a colleague to check it.
I was always taught to read the question thoroughly and make sure I answered it exactly as it was written not what I thought it said.

 

The question asks for the simulation and frequency response graph of a CE NPN audio amplifier using negative feedback for 10X gain.
Since he mentions no input requiremment, 10 Hertz, and resistors dissipating <= 200mW. It might be a bass booster circuit.

Then why mention 20 kHz as a cutoff frequency of any kind?

It could be nothing more than an exercise for the student to select components to meet multiple constraints. There's no need to read more into than is necessary.

 

You'd think that on something as important as a student assignment, which might affect the student's final degree grade, they would proof-read it, and probably get a colleague to check it.
I was always taught to read the question thoroughly and make sure I answered it exactly as it was written not what I thought it said.

In a nice, perfect world, that would be great. But even PhD qualifier exam questions are seldom read by anyone other than the person writing the question and they are often writing it at the last minute before it is due to the office for printing. And talk about affecting the student -- in most places, if you fail to get a passing grade on the qualifier after the second attempt, you are eliminated from the program entirely. I tried, at two different schools in three different departments, to get the department to adopt a policy for writing PhD qualifiers in which at least two, preferably more, of the newer assistant professors (who would be closer to the experience level and recency of the candidates) would get together and take the exam under exam conditions and then meet with the authors to discuss and, as necessary, rework the exam problem so that it was clear, workable in the time allotted with the resources allowed, didn't require knowledge and skills that were not the norm for the prerequisite courses at most universities, and at a reasonable scope and degree of difficulty. I was immediately shut down each time, citing the additional burden that such a policy would entail.

It's also stated that this is not an assignment, but rather a sample problem for an exam. Again, in an ideal world, sample questions would receive the same degree of vetting as the exam itself, but in the real world they are usually something that is quickly thrown together and distributed, often without being worked at all. Sample problem sets are often considerably longer than the exam itself, so that students have ample problems they can practice on. Since it's not graded, there's no sense of criticality to get them perfect, especially since the students usually have the opportunity to ask questions about them and get help on them.

 

Anyone can make this simple mistake, even an acute proof reader.
You read high frequency and 20 kHz and you make the valid connection between the two.
You don't realize that high pass frequency takes on the opposite meaning. It should have read high cut-off frequency.

 

View attachment 351036
How should I approach the question with a solution? I don't have much of an idea, I need it urgently. Assume RL resistance is 20k

Since you can assume a constant Beta and constant Vbe, you can use a current controlled current source for the transistor with a small battery to represent Vbe. That's the simplest way to start this even if you decide to get more into the details later.
If you know how to analyze a circuit with those components (as well as resistors) then you can get going with this pretty quick. Do an analysis, think about what some of the values should be. If you really feel up to it, you can use simultaneous equations to solve for many of the values at once.

I don't want to say too much more until you show a little work yourself or at least how you think you should approach this. You don't have to be right at first, but you do have to give it some thought and convey that to the group here. That's the best way to get help anyway.