<p>@lepatron
Does mildly generous mean a curve that is probably better than the jan curve? Or the same (ik you got 800 both)?</p>
<p>@lepatron: what did you put for the CR questions about :
- What does the “silence” refer to? (Bijah)
- Which question would most challenge? (Bijah)
- What is the key difference between the two passages? (Acupuncture)
- There was another tough Bijah question…anyone remember it?
- Did you put piecemeal story?</p>
<p>How many can you get wrong on CR and still get a 700, without omitting.</p>
<p>Can somebody predict my score then for math?
Miss 4
Omit 3</p>
<p>@Wimbus1233 Unfortunately, because I can only see my score and not the # wrong, I cannot attest to the exact curve numbers. But I can say from the scores friends have received that I would suspect a “mildly” generous curve on the CR because of difficult vocab and the Bijah passage bogging down scores. That means it might -2 or -3 could still be top (780-800) level scores. </p>
<p>@RunningForLife
- Silence refers to lack of records of activities, not simply lack of activity. How could the author know if there was actually nothing going on? He can’t, he can only observe that there is a lack of records of action.
- I put if Bijah’s wife and kids were still in Deerfield (as the passage stated she was too pregnant to come along to the new plot of land). While I cannot be certain this is wrong, it makes sense to me. Bijah was away, but his family was not. So an excellent challenge to the authors claims would be that if the family was still home, why was nothing documented?
- Don’t remember 100%, but I believe I put that one examines the scientific validity of acupuncture, and other questions the authenticity of the research, something like that.
- Perhaps referring to what would substantiate the claims of the Author regarding the transfer of land? I put the deed to the land…
- No, I put continuing explanation or something like that, if that’s the right question.</p>
<p>Any other questions?</p>
<p>@lepatron What would you predict for a math score that is 3 wrong and 3 omit. And also 4 wrong and 3 omit.</p>
<p>What time are they out? Timezone as well please</p>
<p>@lepatron do you think I could miss 8 and still get a 700 on CR??</p>
<p>@lepatron
Sorry last question what would 5 wrong in reading look like? It was a 730 in Jan. </p>
<p>@lepatron Congratulations on your 800 Reading. Really hoping for a good CR curve myself.</p>
<p>@MadSpaceCow 5 am EST I believe</p>
<p>Edit: Apparently he/she doesn’t know how many wrong. Also, 5 AM.</p>
<p>That’s my timezone. I may just stay up. Give me an excuse to get through the BioShock dlc</p>
<p>@lepatron</p>
<p>It was either piecemeal story, plausible theory, or deepening mystery.
Did you put smell like anise or buzzing of molecules?
Did you put excited or revered plastic?</p>
<p>Like I said before, it comes out at 5:00 AM EST. </p>
<p>lol nvm everyone. 5:00 AM EST is what I meant.</p>
<p>OK, let’s assume this was the sentence: “Although payphones are becoming obsolete, they [had revolutionized/revolutionized] the phone industry when they first came into existence.”</p>
<p>To be honest, it’s a really tough question, and I’m going back and forth a bit. But if I had to fill in an SAT bubble, I would choose “revolutionized” (without “had”). But I wouldn’t feel great about it.</p>
<p>This again?</p>
<p>Got 800 on writing before, and I can tell you pretty confidently that it is revolutionized. The past perfect “had” implies an action preceding another one, and it is pretty unusual to use past perfect with the dependent clause when.</p>
<p>@MisterK I believe the sentence was:
“Although payphones have been becoming obsolete due to new technology, they [had revolutionized/revolutionized] the phone industry when they first came into existence”</p>
<p>5 AM? Probs wont stay up that late…early? Regardless, guess I’ll have to just see it when I wake up.</p>
<p>Hawkace, I don’t think so. The phrase “have been becoming obsolete” would be really God-awful writing, probably the worst error in the sentence…</p>
<p>I believe “revolutionized” without had is right because “had” would indicate past tense in the sentence which can’t happen because of the already established tense by using “becoming”.</p>