<p>How many math sections are we supposed to have? I had section one as math, then section 3 as quantitative comparison and grid-ins, section 4 the same, then a 15-minute math for section 7. Was one of my maths experimental?</p>
<p>yea takeheart..one of the quant comp was experimental</p>
<p>^^^What is weird is that all of the verbal sections I had (except for the short one, which can't be experimental) contained analogies, which aren't going to be used on the new SAT. Even the one with the short passages did :confused: </p>
<p>Also, the Nixon passage was straight from the Nov 03 test - too bad I didn't remember the answers...</p>
<p>few questions</p>
<p>1) what'd u put for the K with the circle around it. asking you how many 2 digit numbers can exist... blah blah:</p>
<p>i said 1 number, since 18 was the only number that i found that could work.</p>
<p>2)the analogy: levity :: seriousness</p>
<p>i put awkwardness :: dexterity ... i eliminated all the other ones... this choice seems weird though....</p>
<p>ahh- im really nervous because i did better on the first quant comp and the second i thought was a little tricky- but at the same time, i also had that weird verbal passage with the short section, two questions, short section, and then two questions-- so i really dont know which was exp for me</p>
<p>I had this format math
verbal<br>
math quant comp
math quant comp.
verbal w/ short 10 line passages
verbal w/ 2 passages
math </p>
<p>this format is very akward. That means there must have been two experimental sections because you can not have two quant comp maths and one of my verbals was the shorter passages only found on the new SAT.</p>
<p>lolboyer</p>
<p>I put 1
That levity one sounds right (Levity is lacking seriousness, awkwardness is lacking dexterity)</p>
<p>yeah was the verbal experimental because you can't have the short passages yet its only November and those don't start until January or whenever the new SAT starts</p>
<p>yea dunkaroo i had something similar except mine went</p>
<p>math (5 mult ch)
verbal
Math quant comp
Math quant comp
verbal (short ten liners)
verbal
math</p>
<p>the verbal must have been real if you only had 3 verbal sections yet still had the short ones</p>
<p>was the short, 1 paragraph reading comp experimental? I remember the first story was about chimpanzee</p>
<p>What did you get for:
1. Platitude:Originality?</p>
<p>i put ... hmm .. i dont remember... but i remember the answer was fairly obvious (do ya remember what u put?)</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The Korean girl's perspective of her grandma (esteem, envy, humility...)?
i said esteem</p></li>
<li><p>For the three dimensional shape where you had to say how many lines can be drawn with segments in the interior?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>i think i put 6... not sure</p>
<p>how was math and verbal? I didn't take it but signed up for it. $40 wasted:(</p>
<p>Fairly obvious for platitude:originality? I agonized over that one! My bridge was A platitude does not have any originality. I remember a few choices: hypothesis : experiment, maxim : verbosity, stereotype : prejudice, and I dont recall the other two.</p>
<p>For the 3-D shape, I put two</p>
<p>lolboyer:
EDIT: it was maxim: verbosity because a maxim is a succinct statement.</p>
<p>I also put esteem for the "voice" or whatever it was.</p>
<p>For the segments in the interior, I put two; only two of the lines actually went through the figure, while all of the other lines could be drawn on the actual face of the figure.</p>
<p>OH YEAH it was maxim : verbosity</p>
<p>it was maxim:verbosity??? YAY! That's what I put but I still don't get it...</p>
<p>actually i might be wrong</p>
<p>BUT</p>
<p>i thought the definition of maxim was: a short statement or something</p>
<p>well that's not encouraging...</p>
<p>was the short, 1 paragraph reading comp experimental? I remember the first story was about chimpanzee</p>