<p>I’m not one to discuss specific answer choices (remember, you all signed the back in cursive swearing not to talk about questions, and you all are currently violating that contract. You probably won’t be punished, but I for one won’t take the chance), but the consensus seems to be this was a more difficult reading question. Some answers seemed to have two legitimate solutions, or none at all that were really justified in the reading. So as a general consensus with the CC community, my fellow high school community, and with my own experience (I have a 770CR missing 1 hard vocab question, took the SAT 3 times, and usually find CR easy), this was a slightly harder test. The vocab seemed a step higher then usual with some uncharacteristic words being tested, and as previously mentioned some answers were tricky. I think the curve will be generous. My estimate:
-1 800
-2 770
-3 750
-4 730
-5 710 ect. </p>
<p>And that’s being conservative. What do you all think about the June test’s curve?</p>
<p>Btw, neuromajor, that is harsher than any of like 20 curves in the Panda Sat thing lol. Honestly a good curve is -2 800, a really good one is -3 800 like bmonticello said but -3 800 is rare. </p>
<p>Anyway… Why is it that on this thread self-assurance is the consensus whereas optimism is the consensus on the all SAT stuff thread lol? Honestly, I thought optimism bc she said how she wanted to go back to India and how she was wistful. Then in the lines, she all of a sudden is like well “at least” blah blah blah. “At least” is key. Btw, self-assurance means self-confidence. (Merriam-Webster Dic) She’s not saying how confident she is in herself. Just that at least her family is eating the healthy, fresh-cooked food.</p>
<p>Also, anyone put unjustifiable for the rover stuff? I remembered it wasn’t unpopular cause that had nothing to do with the passage. Ugh looking at a 2-6 wrong right now. Really depends on these 50/50 questions where everyone is debating on. Oh well. That’s what I get for waiting till the last week to cram. *** late AP tests. Hopefully, 4-5 wrong or something then I got somewhere around 2330.</p>
<p>@bmonticello Hopefully those two are right so I’m at least (well technically speaking since this is SAT, at most, lol) -4. </p>
<p>@Gottagetthat I’m taking Swaying/Astonishing and Knowledgeable Fan/Meticulous Analyst as 50/50 because the posters are literally 50/50 lol. No complete consensus yet since they were prob hardest questions.</p>
<p>I don’t know this is my first SAT. I’m just hoping to get it over with lol XD. June 20th. I’m so ambivalent about it and July 1st. I get to see my scores but then I have less Summer time left rofl. I guess it’s a necessary evil</p>
<p>I mean they have the SAS, where they give you the numbers you got right and wrong. If you remember which section that question was in and what # it was, you’ll find out. But that’s pretty much the only way of finding out :/</p>
<p>For the relationship between passage 1 and 2 of rovers, I said something to the extent of: passage 1 introduces a problem and passage 2 builds to a solution…</p>
<p>I didn’t see it as 1 advocating a solution while 2 presenting it as impractical… Both generally seemed to want humans to go into space, 2 just analyzed issues with cost and such or said how to fix that issue, while 1 just ended on the point that we need humans to go into space to boost the public morale</p>
<p>It is “astonishing” for the quilt question. The definition for astonish is to surprise or impress (someone) greatly while sway is to control or influence. The passage said that her quilts “rock”-ed critics. A definition of the verb “rock” is to cause great shock to. Rock does not have a definition even close to controlling or influencing. And, the passage doesn’t discuss how the lady’s quilts influenced her critics, but instead that the quilts surprised or impressed them greatly, especially since the critics usually did not appreciate quilt art. Rock has a strong connotation, as does astonish, but sway has a weak connotation (ex. “the speaker rocked/astonished the audience” [strong], “the speaker swayed the audience” [weak])</p>
<p>As for the violin one, the author is a knowledgeable fan. She is apparently knowledgeable of stradivarius violins and the musicians who played them and is also a fan of the stradivarius violin since she knows so much about it, lauds the violin and the famous musicians who played it, and played the instrument herself. The answer cannot be meticulous analyst because the connotation of analyst is rather objective and almost cold, such as in “a business analyst” not an “artistic analyst”. An analyst “examines (something) methodically” (dictionary definition) or, in other words, “examines according to a systematic form of procedure”. There was no evident “systematic form of procedure” in the author’s article about Stradivarius violins. What systematic procedure was she following? none. Therefore, knowledgeable fan is the only right answer. QED :)</p>
and i feel the same way about the optimism lol ppl on here make no sense lol.</p>