2012 April ACT General Discussion

<p>The second to last math one was (A) 1/2 (f(x) - 2) - 4 right</p>

<p>what were the choices?</p>

<p>Was no change leaving the commas?</p>

<p>that’s what I got because there were only two which correctly used the negative sign to indicate a shift to the right and then it had to have been some sort of vertical stretch</p>

<p>does anyone remember the other choices for the first reading passage on what he refused to elaborate on?</p>

<p>Just to clarify, for the arcsin question was the answer: arcsin = 10000/2(5280)</p>

<p>Tony1380: I took an ACT (circa, like, 2008) for practice, I missed two, and I still got a 36 (according to the scale). </p>

<p>That being said, this was a pretty easy reading. I think a -1 is going to be a 35…I just hope things don’t get worse after that. (e.g. -2=33)</p>

<p>Redsfan- I’m pretty sure it was “,called procession,” but then somewhere after that it asked if you should move the sentence and you should have said to move it before the sentence that started with “Procession is blah blah”</p>

<p>Is salmon in general the one where u left the commas?</p>

<p>i said no change but idk if it was the one where u left the commas.</p>

<p>In the question about the salmon pens, I kept the commas.</p>

<p>Thanks @raymondthepro and @friendbynote</p>

<p>does anyone remember the letters of the answer choices to the last 2 questions in science (39 and 40)?</p>

<p>was the author condeming aquafarming? WHy?</p>

<p>If there were an abnormal amount of “A” answers in the last two Science passages, I’d be very appreciative. (My chosen "I didn’t get to read you, so I’ll just put the same letter over and over, answer.)</p>

<p>Raymondthepro: The author presented the upsides and downsides of aquafarming, I thought. :&lt;/p>

<p>@raymond I said no because it offered good and bad equally</p>

<p>39 I believe was"a" on science</p>

<p>what was the exact wording of the answer choice that Battlia didn’t elaborate on?</p>

<p>Who had the tougher job manning the shop</p>

<p>what was the rhetoric of the name change option?</p>