October cr: 800 critical reading scorer?

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
101

<p>Caustic didn’t seem like a good choice because it often connotes acidity and strong bitterness, and vehement better corresponds with emphatic - but considering that that paragraph independently and that caustic can mean “severely critical or sarcastic,” it can’t be said that caustic “does not fit at all.”</p>

<p>I don’t think the Chinese miners were on the SAT, but most of the other stuff in there was. There are definitely a handful of ironic statements in that passage, accompanied with facts that criticize coal.</p>

102

<p>Just because there is no subjectivity in the passage, doesn’t mean that it isn’t vehement. Passion can be fact-based and because both authors clearly tried to avoid certain facts and use others while taking an extreme/nearly hyperbolic tone, that implies vehemence.</p>

<p>These passages weren’t caustic in the slightest in my view.</p>

103

<p>off-topic here but if I got an 11/12 on my essay for writing and -1 to -2 wrong, what would my score for writing be?</p>

104

<p>Probably 780-800 (essays from 10-12 are fairly random).</p>

<p>That’s too much of an inference, Radioheadbro, that he was vehement because he selectively cited facts when there was no suggestion of such, and you’re only considering one definition of caustic.</p>

105

<p>an 790-800, most likely</p>

106

<p>Used the thesaurus. Let’s compare:</p>

<p>Caustic: annoying, biting, caustic, cutting, galling, hard to take, hateful, hurtful, nasty, rough, rubbing the wrong way, sharp, spiky, unpleasant, acerbic, biting, caustic , cutting, dry, harsh, hateful, hurtful, mordant, nasty, offensive, sarcastic, sharp, stinging, trenchant, vitriolic</p>

<p>Vehement: angry, ardent, concentrated, delirious, desperate, eager, earnest, emphatic, enthusiastic, exquisite, fervent, fervid, fierce, fiery, forceful, forcible, frantic, furious, hearty, heated, hopped up, hot*, hyper, impassioned, impetuous, inflamed, intense, lively, on the make, potent, powerful, pronounced, rabid, strong, terrible, vicious, violent, wild, zealous</p>

<p>My take: vehement may be a little extreme, but I feel that caustic implies hatred and bitterness DIRECTLY against something/someone. I didn’t get that sense from the passage.</p>

107

<p>yeah for my essay, I think it’s worthy of an 11 or 12. but I’m not sure. It was my first time taking the SATs yesterday…so anyway for my essay this is what I did. for my thesis, I put something like “People need discipline to achieve freedom because it shows one his or her position in the world and strenghtens core values”. something like that…anyway, for my 2 body paragraphs, I didn’t use specific events in history. I used a lot of good vocabulary, which is my strenght, like “monastic” and I can’t remember what else. Opinions on possible essay score?</p>

108

<p>If someone thinks it’s vehement, then cite the specific parts of the paragraph that fit the definition. Everything on the SAT is supported by evidence from the passage.</p>

109

<p>Neither side gave the other view any sort of credence. The nearly hyperbolic claims both passages make imply passion. (tough CR questions are all about implicit meaning anyways)</p>

<p>Keep in mind that these are essays rooted in scientific thought and data, they aren’t going to be as passionate as some grad school student writing about an inherently subjective philosophical topic like the PATRIOT Act. You’re comparing apples and oranges.</p>

110

<p>For my essay, my thesis was something along the lines of “People need discipline to achieve freedom because discipline lets one know his or her position in the world and strenghtens core values”. My 2 body paragraphs weren’t about specific historical events…but a lot of good words like monastic were used. I think it deserves an 11/12, but it was only my first time taking it, and I’m not sure if it would be that. Please give me an opinion. Also consider the fact that I got the vocab questions with “exacerbated” and one other question wrong I think. What should my score on both the essay and complete writing section be?</p>

111

<p>Radiohead, that’s why I want to report this particular question for ambiguity. I can see the critical nature of the passage, but the way he knows so much about it and has so much to say shows his fervor(which is vehement) in his dislike for coal. While I personally now believe caustic is a better choice, I can’t see what is so wrong with vehement. He is passionate with his criticism towards coal.</p>

112

<p>That would probably earn you a 10 or 11 in my view, having strong supports rooted in literature, history or very convincing anecdotes (I bet graders know most are invented but it shows creativity and ability to lie to convince, which shows good writing skills haha) are a huge part of the essay.</p>

113

<p>Wasn’t this question about both passages?</p>

114

<p>If I got a 10/11 on my essay, and 1-2 questions wrong on the writing section, what would my score be? This is best case scenario</p>

115

<p>They’re persuasive pieces. Besides the fact that passage 2 “alludes to a pivotal event” that forms the backbone of opposition to nuclear power, I wouldn’t expect him to give the other view a lot of credence. But the fact that it is persuasive and was written from opinion doesn’t mean that the tone of a specific paragraph is vehement.</p>

<p>For all the use of words like “imply,” “infer,” and “suggest” on the SAT, there are actually no implicit answers - difficult CR answers have to do with specificity and looking at the question in a certain way.</p>

<p>

Fuel to the caustic fire. That paragraph is more factually critical (whether the facts are selective or not) than impassioned.</p>

<p>EDIT: No, this tone question was about one paragraph out of the second passage. There was another tone question about both passages, to which the answer was emphatic.</p>

116

<p>“Burning coal and other fossil fuels is driving climate change, which is blamed for everything from western forest fires and Florida hurricanes to melting polar ice sheets and flooded Himalayan hamlets. On top of that, coal-burning electric power plants have fouled the air with enough heavy metals and other noxious pollutants to cause 15,000 premature deaths annually in the US alone, according to a Harvard School of Public Health study. Believe it or not, a coal-fired plant releases 100 times more radioactive material than an equivalent nuclear reactor - right into the air, too, not into some carefully guarded storage site. (And, by the way, more than 5,200 Chinese coal miners perished in accidents last year.)”</p>

<p>Doesn’t it feel like the author is attempting to bombard you with mind-boggling information? In that way, he is forceful. I feel like he is on a mission to prove a point, not to criticize something sarcastically. Again, I don’t see any element of sarcasm, which leads me to dislike the choice “caustic”. Even when he prefaces this paragraph with the understatement that the results “aren’t pretty”, he is being very stern, in my opinion.</p>

117

<p>-difficult CR answers have to do with specificity and looking at the question in a certain way.-</p>

<p>not true. Difficult(level 5) CR answers require good intuition with the passage. the ones you’re talking about are level 4</p>

118

<p>If I got a 10/11 on my essay, and 1-2 questions wrong on the writing section, what would my score be? This is best case scenario AKA how i think i did</p>

119

<p>Here is another way of why it could be “caustic.” I think we all agree that the last sentence about the chinese miners defintely makes it caustic. It is severely critical towards coal and isn’t in a vehement tone. And we all agree that that sentence WASNT in the passage. So by removing it, ETS makes it much harder for us to judge the tone as “caustic.” </p>

<p>Plus “vehement” was choice A. VERY Potential trap answer.</p>

120

<p>It could go both ways</p>