November 2008 SAT Math

<p>i think (and really hope) it was the weird section with the last problem that had 2 right triangles that had bases on the same line...they both had heights of 8 and the smaller triangle had a base of 8 and they wanted you to find JK (part of the height of the smaller triangle)</p>

<p>i can't remember many others...maybe the question asking what fraction of 2 digit #s formed using 10s digit from one set and 1s digit from another set will be even...i think it was 3/5...</p>

<p>maybe the venn diagram about yellow squares...
do you remember others?</p>

<p>i had that section...was it experimental?
and the triangle with the base on the same line? you mean the one with all the equilateral triangles or the one that had b and b/4 as the sides and it asks you how many of those triangles does it need to cover the box?</p>

<p>no hmmm thats not the question...i remember the first question you're talking about--the answer was 18, but i dont remember the b and b/4 one..?</p>

<p>did you have one with stitches and asked how many stitches would cover a 30x30 blanket?</p>

<p>the one that equaled 3/5 from the two sets forming the number with a tens digit was part of the experimental. But those other two are; i don't remember having them.</p>

<p>i had the 3/5 one, what were the hardest ones from that section? i dont quite recall math bc it was pretty easy</p>

<p>threehit do you mean 3/5 wasn't part of experimental?</p>

<p>what were the answer choices for the one with cube integers between 100-999. was it 56789 or was 4 a choice?</p>

<p>I KNOW FIVE IS THE ANSWER BUT I WANT TO KNOW IF I DID NOT MAKE A STUPID MISTAKE.. WAS FOUR AN ANSWER CHOICE?</p>

<p>93 not 94 you'llsee... ^^^^^^</p>

<p>nope its 94 for sure
i hand counted it from 400 to 374</p>

<p>YOU CANNOT REPEAT LETTERS! 24 is wrong.</p>

<p>Like the above poster, I too read the question a billion times.
It said something to the effect of "organizing the four letters"
If it wanted you to repeat, it would have specified. Trust me, the SAT may be "tricky" but it's always clear. The answer always matches the exact wording of the question. If they want you to note a specific word, they UNDERLINE it. I don't think you understand the sheer amount of angry phone calls from parents and students that CollegeBoard would get if the answer to that question was 24. If it says, "the four letters: a, e, m, and t" right next to the word "organize" or "use," it's right in front of you. Math isn't about guesswork.</p>

<p>^ It was 94, and I didn't need to count it. It was an easy analytical problem.</p>

<p>You have 4 letters in a set. You have 374 letters. Divide that by four. You get 93.5 SETS. Now, each set contains the letter A, so you have AT LEAST 93. Now, what exactly is ".5" of a set? Well, the set is A, B, C, D (in that order). So you have [93 sets]+AB. Therefore, A appears 94 times. End of discussion. Quod erat demonstratum. <em>goes home</em></p>

<p>Or you could set up an equation 1+4(x) where x is equal to 93 to get an answer of 373. The set includes 0, so 1 + 93 = 94... Unfortunatley I forgot to add the one at the end on the real test :(</p>

<p>^ wow that's a clever method, and a completely unfortunate result. My condolences, sir :(</p>

<p>Thou art a gentleman and a scholar :)</p>

<p>Well a 1600 is always a pipe dream.. it just looks like i'm in for a score lower than the 760 I got the last time I took it.</p>

<p>Besides, my equation should have been: 1+4(x-1)..</p>

<p>what was the question that had an answer of 1/9 on the free-response?</p>

<p>^ why lower than 760?? I've never seen an SAT I Math section with a curve worse than -1 = 770</p>

<p>Because I've gotten more than one wrong that I know of so far. I think i'm down to -2~-3 by my last check.</p>

<p>which other ones? ugh I can't remember all my hazy ones.</p>

<p>The f(-x) where the answer was 3+x and I put 3-x because I forgot to do the negative of the x value... There was another, but I can't seem to remember it right now.</p>

<p>I can't seem to eliminate all of my stupid mistakes on the math section and its killing me. I think there should be a -2 curve for an 800 just because of good testers making dumb mistakes. An 800 math seems really hit or miss where I have always thought CR and W were less "tricky".</p>

<p>what would -3 be (1 grid in, 2 mc wrong)? so a raw of 51/54</p>

<p>im thinking like 720? I could live with that.</p>