<p>Fledging, yes it would be a valid reason. Often there are inexpensive motels lining the back highways, where as the interstate goes through cities that have the pricey hotels.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Alright… but this is a CR passage, after all, and I think we were only supposed to make do with what was in front of our faces rather than what we knew already. 
What about the international students, who might have gotten this test but obviously wouldn’t know about that thing with interstate highways vs. back routes? It would not be a valid reason for choosing the back roads, because the father didn’t even want to make a stop - so how would he consider it a reason for choosing them?</p>
<p>You also referred to a paragraph later on in the passage, so I will as well. The father would tease the drivers going down the highway - drivers who would speed past them(not this phrasing exactly, but was around the card comparison before the part you’re referring to); this would negate faster travel in addition to what has already been said about interstate vs back routes. I do understand where you’re coming from, since I had that answer initially before switching to motels. However, I based my answer on the fact that three cheap things were mentioned.</p>
<p>Does anyone have that link that silverturtle posted to the passage?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think I said something regarding “negating faster travel” earlier: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There was a question about ‘remembering the inspiration’ or something of the scientific work. Some ‘memory’ thing…</p>
<p>Fledgling - my point is mainly that they were going -slower- than those going by highway, not necessarily slow themselves.</p>
<p>Anyone know whether the passage on the mom/son and professor was experimental?</p>
<p>fledgling: “I really don’t remember that it explicitly stated in the text that Earl and Virgil were not going fast, though. It did say that the cars passed them quickly (hence the deck of cards analogy), but I’m not sure if that necessarily means they themselves were going slowly.”</p>
<p>^ It doesn’t matter if “they themselves were going slowly”- the point is that the passage made it explicitly clear that the cars on the turnpike were passing them in a steady, never-ending stream which means the cars on the turnpike were going faster. Faster travel can not be right simply because it is clear taking the back roads was a slower route.</p>
<p>Scenic views is blatantly wrong because it does not meet the description of the list in the passage as “less sentimental”</p>
<p>Less pollution/ less cities are both wrong. I don’t think anyone is arguing either was, but there is nothing in the passage indicating either.</p>
<p>That leaves inexpensive motels. The question was almost exactly this: “Which of the following could BEST be added to the list of reasons given in line x?”
Line x went something like this: “There were other, less sentimental reasons for taking the back roads. Cheaper gas, price-shopping for food, [some other bargain here].”
All the reasons were undeniably economical; therefore “INEXPENSIVE motels” was the best fit.</p>
<p>I can almost guarantee in the explanation for this question, when it comes out, collegeboard will say something about all the reasons being price-related.</p>
<p>
I’m pretty sure it was, because none of the questions from that section as far as I remember are on the consolidated list.</p>
<p>does anybody remember if “fascination” was on the test as an answer choice more than once? I know this is a weird question but it is on the consolidated answer list as an answer to a sci passage question. I know I put it as an answer to something but not necessarily the sci question. It mightve been on the humor question (the hostility/skeptical one)</p>
<p>memory revival appreciated! thx</p>
<p>can someone please explain these</p>
<p>Established/mitigate,
diversity/unpalatable,
negative effects of commercial consideration, (writer passage)
explain a problem that effected the development of the field(cosmology passage)</p>
<p>can someone explain those questions? i just dont remember wat the questions went like at all</p>
<p>Does anyone know the experimental section for the CR?</p>
<p>there were many experimental sections. Mine was about plate tectonics</p>
<p>@ cjester and everyone else: It still seems a little odd that the father would choose the back roads for the sake of more inexpensive motels, because 1) he didn’t want to stop (and thus would not consider them in the first place) and 2) the motel they ultimately stayed at was not indicated as being “inexpensive”. But I’m getting tired of this debate too, so I’ll just close it for now. 
</p>
<p>Now to alihaq717’s question about the astronomy vs. myths question. Again, I don’t remember what I put for that question, but it seems like the reasons provided for choosing the “observable phenomena” answers all have to deal with the fact that there was a sentence in there that explicitly stated that. However, bear in mind that just because there is a sentence saying something does NOT mean that sentence is what the ENTIRE passage was GENERALLY about. </p>
<p>I’m not for or against anyone here since I can’t remember my own answer, but I’m just saying…</p>
<p>@olleger - i didn’t have the plate tetonics section but i had one about laboratory research or something. How do I tell what experimental CR i had or if i even had one at all?</p>
<p>ummm for the novel writer passage, one question was like “what does author of passage 1 consider the most important in writing novels”, was the answer “anticipate reader’s reactions” or “keep readers interested”?</p>
<p>sorry i cannot remember the exact question…</p>
<p>what was the actual sentence for the “precedent for” SC?</p>
<p>^^ “anticipate reader’s response”</p>
<p>^ “There was no _________ the case: it was sure to break new legal ground.” Something along those lines.</p>
<p>fledging:</p>
<p>The passage does say the dad wanted to make it a trip without a motel stop, but it was just wishful thinking - they did end up staying at a motel no? So it’s not right to cross off cheaper motel. Also, iirc, you mentioned there being a need for something to be explicitly mentioned in the text for it to be a valid reasoning. But really, explicit is kind of a subjective term. For example, for a lot of people, including me, it was pretty explicit (obvious and unequivocal) that the list only contained matters dealing with saving money. Just because you failed to understand something, it doesnt meant its implicit - maybe a level of more acute reading is required to understand its meaning.</p>
<p>peace,</p>
<p>3 questions. Was this considered to be a hard? easy?</p>
<p>i got “delineates the consequences” as an answer but can someone tell me the full question and other choices?</p>
<p>And also, i had the CR experimental but i dont remember what the passages were about…anyone care to refresh my memory?</p>
<p>thanks</p>