<p>
</p>
<p>Having a consolidated list helps me just as much as it helps you, so I didn’t mind helping put one together at all. Glad you found it useful.</p>
<p>7-8 wrong is lower 700s?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I hope. Seems a bit over-optimistic though.</p>
<p>what vocabulary question had ‘characterless’ as the correct answer?</p>
<p>^ Something about a new building which could be placed anywhere and which could have any function</p>
<p>so if i looked on the SAT score conversion table, for my raw score should i look at the higher or lower number because the test was hard?</p>
<p>Hmm, what do you think -5(4 wrong) is? 760,750, or 740? I wish I hadn’t changed unpretentious to imitable. Rah.</p>
<p>Overall, I’d say that this CR had both easy passages and hard passages. Those will probably even eachother out, but there were also slightly harder sentence completions. It may not be enough to make a difference, but I’d say if anything, the scale will be a little more lenient than it usually is.</p>
<p>This answer: "films shouldn’t simply be judged based on fidelity. "</p>
<p>Isn’t that wrong? Wouldn’t the second author disagree with this completely? The answer should be: “Both authors agree that extensive study of the original material is necessary” or something along those lines.</p>
<p>@alihaq717 </p>
<p>that’s what I got! but I think passage 2 said something like fidelity is almost impossible and trivial</p>
<p>^Yes, but that doesn’t have anything to do with the judgment of a film.</p>
<p>No, the first author said that the filmmaker should be faithful but understands that it can’t be exactly the same. The second author said that fidelity should be discarded because there is no way for a secondary reproduction to be “more faithful” than the original; instead, the reproduction should strive to be different.</p>
<p>So they both agreed that you can’t judge only on fidelity. The second author would not agree that an extensive study of the original material is necessary.</p>
<p>@ali</p>
<p>Nah. “Films shouldn’t simply be judged based on fidelity” is the correct answer I believe. “Simply” = only. Even the author of passage one (who was obsessed with fidelity) doesn’t believe that films should solely be based on fidelity.</p>
<p>But doesn’t the first author say that “fidelity should still not be disregarded”?</p>
<p>Also, why would the answer I put be incorrect?</p>
<p>The second author thought fidelity was unimportant.</p>
<p>@alihaq717: idk maybe I just got a difficult experimental and let it bog me down or I wasn’t as focused but some other pretty smart ppl I’ve talked to have agreed that the CR put to shame the math and writing</p>
<p>No! That makes -2… agh… I don’t know if I got that 800CR anymore.</p>
<p>-2 is probably still 800.</p>
<p>Both authors agreed that fidelity wasn’t the <em>only</em> thing.</p>
<p>Author 1 thought it had some value, but other metrics are needed. Author 2 disregarded it entirely.</p>
<p>-9 (7 questions wrong) according to Blue Book tests 1-3 is in the 700s, so why is it optimistic?</p>
<p>The Blue Book tests 1-3 are previously administered, so those are a decent measure of what you can expect here.</p>