<p>@infraprods Do you remember the question in more detail? I think I need something more specific to jog my memory haha</p>
<p>The question in which the answer was 10^7<x<10^8… 10^5 was on the top</p>
<p>She worked tirelessly to ensure New York historical buildings were designated as landmarks, protected by law, and adequately preserved.</p>
<p>Parallelism says the last part should be “preserved adequately” not adequately preserved. So it was NOT no error on that one right?</p>
<p>I put that it was an error, but I’m not sure anymore with all these people saying the answer was E. D:</p>
<p>Superninja I know I didn’t put no error for that one, but I don’t remember what I put</p>
<p>@superninja are you sure it’s not parallel? I thought it was now error</p>
<p>I had two 25 min writing sections, one in the end had some passage about technological adoption another had a passage about a flute audition…which was experimental?</p>
<p>Here’s my answers and reasoning for a few of the controversial questions. </p>
<ol>
<li><p>Actors passage. Guarded skepticism vs outspoken condemnation. At first I put guarded skepticism because I thought the latter was too extreme to be an SAT answer. I didn’t know what the word caustic meant (my vocab sucks), but I assumed it meant something like harsh because I had heard it used before and I could make an inference based on that. But after thinking about it I changed it to outspoken condemnation. First of all, skepticism makes sense, but to say it’s “guarded” does not because that’s not at all supported by the passage. However, he did write caustically about it, meaning outspoken condemnation would work. That’s not too extreme in this case, rather the former choice is an understatement.</p></li>
<li><p>Japanese passage. Introduce new problems vs underscore predicaments. I put underscore predicaments because the problems were not “new”. They were established previously in the passage, so he was not introducing them with the questions. The questions were emphasizing, or underscoring, the problems.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Technological adoption was the real one. Flute audition is experimental.</p>
<p>@bhchamp i still wonder if that oil to gas question asked for integer answer only</p>
<p>Can someone help me figure out my experimental. I had a math question with n apples cost C. Whats the formula for n+5 apples. But impreety sure it had the parabola in that section HElP. I think i got like 3 wrong in that section so im hoping for a miracle and it be my experimental!!!</p>
<p>hey whatd u guys write about for the essay? i thought it was an awesome essay prompt</p>
<p>also what did u put for the defintion of “wanting” i wish i remembered what passage it was in, maybe cold war? some options were urging, lacking, desiring, i dont remember all of them</p>
<p>I put desiring</p>
<p>the answer was egregious which means rlly bad obseqious means like servile</p>
<p>“wanting” appears to be like the second-most argued question of the whole test. I finished that section kinda early and argued with myself over for like 5 minutes. I ended up putting “lacking”. It seemed right in context…which I can’t recall now.</p>
<p>lacking was my gut feeling
i think i changed it
i felt like desiring was to similar to another answer choice, so i crossed them both off
i really dont remember what i put</p>
<p>what do you guys think a -2/-3 on math, -2 on writing with an essay score of 10 or greater, and a -2 in reading score be? I am so nervous!!!</p>
<p>^aria, Yo that seems like it would be like ~750 M ~770 CR (with a bad curve) ~770 W
or something like that</p>
<p>Did anyone get the question along the lines of “which of the following equations represents the number of odd integers in a list of n positive integers where n>1?”</p>
<p>It may be in the experimental because I had 4 math sections… nevertheless I still can’t get the answer.</p>