<p>Could you please repost the answer choices for the “limited in life” or w/e question? What was the other choice that made it highly debated?</p>
<p>Wait, so that math question with A, B, and X points was 1 other point? I don’t remember exactly what the question was…</p>
<p>^Yes. The question was rather intuitive. This should be posted in the SAT pet peeves thread: When you take a test and review your incorrect responses, you realize the ■■■■■■■■ mistakes you make.</p>
<p>I still dont understand why it cant be two?</p>
<p>I got it right so Im not complaining tho :)</p>
<p>^Granted there are two points to achieve the result of x being 5 from A and 3 from B, but there is only one OTHER point for which this condition is acceptable.</p>
<p>This is all form W questions right? IF so, anyone with form S information please do not be shy!!</p>
<p>Saturday -2 writing = 70?</p>
<p>thats really harsh…</p>
<p>@fresh OOOOOOOOOO ok</p>
<p>I see now. CB really does make u read extremely carefully.</p>
<p>^Well the Sat. one was easier.</p>
<p>Does anyone know what -2 on Writing is for Form W?</p>
<p>Also, fresh101, can you elaborate on what you said in post #120?</p>
<p>"Saturday -2 writing = 70?</p>
<p>thats really harsh…"</p>
<p>That’s incredibly hard to believe. In the last four years of PSAT administrations, -2 has ranged from 72-78.</p>
<p>This discussion is making me a little worried. Based on fresh101’s answers, I got a couple wrong in writing and at probably 2 wrong in CR. Meaning I need the wednesday’s writing curve to give 67-68 range for -4 since I missed 3 questions…hopefully, that curve isn’t as bad as the saturday one.</p>
<ul>
<li>“That was supposedly the explanation for their misdeeds.”
Based on the above, it seems that “for” is the correct form because the scientists can allow explain what the phenomenon is (explanation of it), but they can’t explain why it occurs (explanation for it). </li>
</ul>
<p>Well, based on the statement you said which followed your examples, I know that you were leaning towards using the “for” because of unexplained phenomena. However, i used the exampe you provided, “That was supposedly the explanation for their misdeeds.” , to counterargue your statement by saying that nothing in that example suggests that the misdeeds were unexplained yet still the example uses “for” following “explanation”. Therefore, it is perfectly acceptable to use “for” or to not use “for”</p>
<p>Fresh - There was a debated question in writing about “Discoveries”. Do you recall this one? I don’t remember the specifics about it. I think people were leaning toward NE.</p>
<p>I didn’t mean to imply that a lack of previous explanation for a phenomenon was necessary to make “for” the proper use. I was trying to establish that in the question’s sentence, it was evident that the scientists already had an explanation of (i.e., a description of) the phenomenon; they, however, lacked an explanation for it (i.e., why it occurs).</p>
<p>Here’s where I am right now in my assessment:</p>
<p>Math: -0 (80)
CR: at least -1; probably more (79-80 best case)
Writing: -2 (most likely 74-75)
Total: At most, 233-235</p>
<p>can somebody please establishe the curve for each section</p>
<p>can somebody please establish the curve for each section. it may be possible for me to break 200. silver, what is “so to speak” question???</p>
<p>“so to speak”</p>
<p>Edit: Wait, do you want the answer or an explanation of the question (or, an explanation for the answer :))?</p>
<p>@silverturtle–oh i see. </p>
<p>I envy you.</p>