<p>I’m sure perfect on there. </p>
<p>Absolutely, to me, seemed too strong word to fit into context.</p>
<p>I really hate myself now… I really can’t imagine that I did that badly on the PSAT. (-6 CR, -4 W) realistically. The best is (-5 C, -2 W)</p>
<p>merely can be used to qualify. If you say something, then add a merely, it can mean that there is more, not in new information, but in defining the previous information. Then you proceed to qualify</p>
<p>that’s why he said “NOT absolutely” .So I thikn that a strong word would be okay there. Would someone be so kind as to search the passage online,so that we can decide there? Wait what passage is this about; the dolphin passage? </p>
<p>absolutely didn’t really fit in with the sentence </p>
<p>Don’t hate yourself. This is basically a screwed-up test, not indicative of any real success in the future. Even the College Board agreed in many interviews. In my opinion, the CR section is too opinion-based.</p>
<p>This was my first time taking the PSAT. Are they always this ambiguous?</p>
<p>Does anyone remember the question in the invention passage where it talks about other people/the same motivation or something? </p>
<p>that’s why he said “NOT absolutely” .So I thikn that a strong word would be okay there. Would someone be so kind as to search the passage online,so that we can decide there? Wait what passage is this about; the dolphin passage? </p>
<p>PSAT has always been a screwed up test. Both my SAT and ACT scores have been above my PSAT scores and I know a guy who scored 2370 SAT’s after a 219 PSAT.</p>
<p>PSAT doesn’t actually mean anything unless you care about national merit, colleges don’t look at it. </p>
<p>It’s from the book “Don’t shoot the dog”. Would someone like to buy it from Amazon to clarify things?</p>
<p>“Invention is dissatisfaction with what is already made.”
Exactly. Although the brief passage did come from a New York Time article entitled “Necessity is the Mother Invention” the small passage, stand alone, never implies necessity as being her motives. She was dissatisfied with the tedious pounding of grain and decided to invent the grain mill.
What I feel people missed, is that in passage 1, the idea for “necessity” was for things that are needed to actual survive for the inventor himself. But at the same time, the title of the article allows undermines to possibly be correct.
It should be clear why I feel CollegeBoard really screwed up this test… Questions like that, they are just way too vague.
Another example… Businesslike/Passionate/Indignant… Any of those could be correct, but I felt that that Passionate was best – It was just the feeling I got, which is why I also chose enraged. </p>
<p>PSAT is normally bad in terms of a harsh curve, but the questions are normally nowhere near this tricky and if there are, there are 1 or 2, not the 3 or 4 of this test. College Board is screwing us as usual</p>
<p>Would the author “point out” that that women’s inventions were motivated by the same thing as he was saying (desire I think) or would he say that her inventions aren’t really new compared to the ones they replaced? Something like that</p>
<p>@mathgeek2013 We will probably have our scores by then haha. </p>
<p>Would someone like to write a letter to the college board to complain? But first, we have to reproduce the passages of the questions. </p>
<p>did anyone remember from which passage is the simply from?</p>
<p>Does psat screw up anything else other than nmsqt? Like will getting nmsqt finalist qualify you for other scholarships and additional financial aid?</p>
<p>Btw, this paragraph is clearly annoyed</p>
<p>I know of no other modern body of scientific information that has been so vilified, misunderstood, misinterpreted, overinterpreted, and misused. The very name of Skinner arouses ire in those who champion “free will” as a characteristic that separates man from beast. To people schooled in the humanistic tradition, the manipulation of human behavior by some sort of conscious technique seems incorrigibly wicked, in spite of the obvious fact that we all go around trying to manipulate one another’s behavior all the time, by whatever means come to hand.</p>
<p>No. I have talking a bunch of past ones and the wrong answers were CLEARLY wrong. I was easy to cite evidence from the passage to support or disprove any answer choice. </p>