<p>mmm the SCs were harder i think.. but the passages were easier</p>
<p>the 2 theories was like "why does the author give the 2 theories?"</p>
<p>Didactic: "intended to teach, particularly in having moral instruction as an ulterior motive." Fits in perfectly.</p>
<p>Ill-conceived: not carefully planned or considered.</p>
<p>Where in the passage does it say that the educational comic books were not carefully planned or considered?</p>
<p>Failure: lack of success.</p>
<p>Where is the actual success of these educational comic books noted? He gave his opinion on the nature of these books.</p>
<p>Foolish: silly, ridiculous.</p>
<p>Wasn't the word ridiculous or a synonym used? That he is using a this type of adjective means that his statement is inherently subjective.</p>
<p>Imitation doesn't need to be defined, but it in reference to the educators poorly trying to imitate comic books. Doesn't he later go on to explain why educational comics don't cover what makes a comic good (action, violence etc...).</p>
<p>It also important to remember the exact wording of the question, did it say "what was implied" or "what did the author think"? If so, then it doubly fits.</p>
<p>That the comic may have been ill-conceived and failed is an assumption or plausible result; the SAT uses these all the time. But neither is supported in the passage.</p>
<p>That said, I think it's foolish imitation.</p>
<p>yeah i don't recognize that question... was it in the experimental section?</p>
<p>i put ironic, because he seemed too mellow to be furious at anything. ironic doesn't seem to make sense though, but i eliminated furious.</p>
<p>well, im off to do some hw for my ap physics c class. i hate it >=[</p>
<p>syn: It said in the passage "half-hearted attempts" ="ill-conceived." </p>
<p>It also said "embarrasing" which does not mean exactly "foolish"</p>
<p>for the trifactorials, i put down 9, then erased it and put 10, then erased it and put 11, then erased that once i realized 0 would screw it up and put 9 again, and i think i got it right... i had math experimental so maybe it wont count for you :)</p>
<p>Again...this question is mentioned in the earlier pages, but I still don't understand. </p>
<p>If the editor question is indeed: Although the claims refuted that the editors were ____<strong><em>, the uneven distribution of the articles some that they were _</em></strong>____. </p>
<p>Shouldn't the answer be judgmental and discriminating? The claims said that the judges did not make decisions upon their own personal decisions. Yet, the uneven distribution shows that the editors favored one type over another. They were discriminatory.</p>
<p>No?</p>
<p>i remember seeing the romanticized thing but I'm pretty sure that wasn't hte question.</p>
<p>The one about theories was a "what is the purpose of this paragraph" question. The answer was "to present two (some adjective) theories." The only things in the paragraph were the descriptions of two theories. Dragonflies and marshes is not romantic. Even if it were, it wasn't the purpose of the paragraph, which is what the question asked for the. The passage was an analysis, not a narrative.</p>
<p>I think it was inclusive, not discriminatory. Inclusive means they even include the bad ones and discriminatory means they discriminate between the good and bad and leave the bad out.</p>
<p>I think I'm grasping at straws. I just don't want to miss the sentence completions. I have never missed on on practice tests and now...it seems like I am missing all the sentence competions. Aiyahhhhhh.</p>
<p>i thought we already clarified this? answer was selective/inclusive.</p>
<p>if he was selective , he wouldnt have had an unequal distribution, obviously that implies that he let some slip through the cracks.</p>
<p>does anyone want to answer my question? did anyone else see "esoteric" like 5 times throughout the test?</p>
<p>Sentence completions were harder and reading was about normal.</p>
<p>I saw esoteric and erudition, but I don't think I wrote them down as any of my answer choices.</p>
<p>Wait a second...was the answer to the question about the second paragraph (describing New York and how there were playgrounds everywhere and shadows and stuff) was that mysterious and uncertain or not?</p>
<p>Esoteric was never a right answer I belive.</p>
<p>CR was quite easy, i had topics that were </p>
<ol>
<li>easy to relate to</li>
<li>easy subject matter</li>
</ol>