<p>ok yea it is berlin conf. b/c the scramble pertained only to 1880s - 1914, so livinstone was wayyyy before then. im so low now that getting one more wrong doesnt even hurt anymore...sigh. screw this hhaha.</p>
<p>Yes Thank You!!!</p>
<p>hey everybody guess what? the only way to prepare for world history is to read a ****ing textbook. twice. so dont take it. unless youseriously suck in chem or math or sthing. heed my warning rofl for the future peeps. rofl.</p>
<p>wendyling...maybe your score is better than you think it is...don't lose hope!</p>
<p>Eh? That test was only passively challenging to me. Some of the questions surprised me, like Kush, but most of the stuff was pretty easy if you studied your history.</p>
<p>tm2000:
It can't have been Kipling. His famous poem about the White man's burden is <em>satire</em>.</p>
<p>And I'm almost 100% sure now that the Scramble for Africa thing is David Livingstone. (I read about him in a book my father gave me as a kid, although it never remarked on his importance in geopolitics.) His exploration of Africa contributed to the West's understanding of Africa's importance. Also, from the Wikipedia article surge posted: "The scramble for Africa led Bismarck to propose the 1884-85 Berlin Conference." The Berlin Conference was <em>caused by</em> the scramble for Africa. I knew that answer choice didn't make sense, simply because the Western powers divvied up Africa for themselves at the conference, since they were clashing over who owned which. That showed the scramble was well under way before that.</p>
<p>johnleemk i had the same thot process as you...but every source i looked at, the scramble began in late 1800s. livinstone was 30's and now that i check, the conference put out rules, but didnt actually divide countries, so after the conf, they started "scrambling". but they actually ignored the rules of the conf.</p>
<p>The Scramble for Africa is typically defined as occurring between the 1880s and World War I, so...damn, you could be right. Well, actually you are right. According to Wikipedia (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Conference%5B/url%5D):">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Conference):</a> "Called for by Bismarck, the first Chancellor of Germany, its outcome, the General Act of the Berlin Conference, is often seen as the formalization of the Scramble for Africa." <em>curses the College Board and ETS</em></p>
<p>deleted. </p>
<p>so ill have to wait till june 26. @#$asdfajl!!! (times 10)</p>
<p>ok this is my last post. i swear. im going to sleep and forget about this...until i wake up in a cold sweat screaming "680!!" that is. actually no. this is it. no more stressing about these absolute bs questions that test nothing but how much of a word-for-word-memorizer you are. in conclusion, just wanna say: why are all you ppl so frickin smart??? how'd you memorize every single WORD in chronological order...</p>
<p>wah. :/ enjoy the 800s...and i will go enjoy chocolate. which is so much cooler than argentina. gosh. i hate argentina.</p>
<p>How on earth are you supposed to prepare for a World History SAT?</p>
<p>Shouldn't we move on to the next questions? We've been discussing the David Livingston for quite a while here. At least we know that the answer is either David or the Berlin Conference. </p>
<p>how about this question; The three maps. Was it the expansion of Western knowledge?</p>
<p>For all of you who recently took the World History SAT 2, what advice would you give someone who will be taking it next year? What did you do right in your preparation? And what - if anything - do you wish you had done? Thanks.</p>
<p>I put expansion of Western knowledge, because none of the others fit.</p>
<p>Most people in Sub-Saharan Africa followed what religion?</p>
<p>I put local origin.</p>
<p>Same, surge. I was torn between local origin and Islam.</p>
<p>Man, my 800 hopes are shattered. I'm still hoping for high 700s now. :( I have ~13 wrong. I got some of the easiest questions wrong...</p>
<p>I'm thinking of retaking. How does that look on a score report?</p>
<p>My main problem was that I blew through the test way too fast. Missed most of the important details in the questions.</p>
<p>I never keep tabs of how many I get wrong for tests that I found difficult, because I know it's morale-shattering. I think I got a similar number, though. I was never expecting an 800 for world history or literature anyway. When it comes to the humanities, testing a subjective subject objectively is all but impossible.</p>
<p>I need the third SATs II. I'm deciding b/w either studing chemistry from scratch or WH from scratch. Any suggestions?</p>
<p>How about that question on Algeria and why it took a while to be free from France or something like that?</p>