<p>I'm pretty sure that section was experimental, cause people are saying that they had 4 verbal and 3 math and that section wasnt on their test.</p>
<p>Anyway, it was a simple problem but I didn't have the time. The midpoints of each side were 5, creating a square with 4 trapezoids surrounding them. I just didn't have the time to do it. The triangles at the sides also needed to be taken into account.</p>
<p>I put 7 too.</p>
<p>Hi Alex Martin, </p>
<p>That may be true, however the scale varies for each test. I have indeed seen one exam that went 800 to 780 so it is a remote possibilty. However for the sake of our scores, I hope you are correct</p>
<p>let's just hope...eh, it's going to really bother me :|...i don't know if i should take it again..i just want my score close to 1400..maybe even at 1400...which i don't think i did this time, verbal killed me. I'm sending to NYU and BU, so i should probably be fine with those scores.</p>
<p>yes it was 7</p>
<p>spetulla, the scale could have been 800, 790, 770, 750. You could have gotton 3 wrong raw if you guessed on a QC. How did you know 1 wrong was 780?</p>
<p>thats such a rough scale thou</p>
<p>I think we will get a very nice curve in both sections if your schools were like mine. We had most of the dumbest seniors there. Very few intelligent juniors and no seniors that are in the highest level classes.</p>
<p>joke, was that in reply to my question: was the math section with the hexagon an experimental? it had the hexagon divided into 2 different triangles because it does not sound like the same problem. the one i'm talking about asked about proportion of the triangles.</p>
<p>For the person who asked if they could get a math-700+</p>
<p>For october math, I got a 700 </p>
<p>3 omits, 4 wrong (1 of which didnt subtract 1/4 pt cause it was geometric reasoning)</p>
<p>meaning about a 800-70 minus another 10 for those which I got wrong. Which was a 720 raw, apparently the scale downgraded me 20 pts.</p>
<p>re: spetulla, the scale could have been 800, 790, 770, 750. You could have gotton 3 wrong raw if you guessed on a QC. How did you know 1 wrong was 780?</p>
<p>i only got two wrong raw and i know 1 wrong was 780 because it gave a distribution chart.</p>
<p>did anyone get 7 lines for the circle problem? That looks like the only one i could have missed if it is not seven</p>
<p>it was 7 lines</p>
<p>my theory is that curve will be decent b/c:</p>
<p>1) most of the "smart" seniors kids who did EA or SCEA or ED are already done. by smart i mean those who got their stuff done early
2) a lot of semi qualified juniors were there bc they want to do the old SAT before the new one comes out. wanted time to retake in Jan if they failed.</p>
<p>lion123- I wasnt talking about that same exact question, but yes, the one you are talking about WAS in that section and that section was experimental.</p>
<p>thank you...i was worrying about that section all day</p>
<p>Whatever. The test must have been like what's 5 + 5!!!!</p>
<p>anyone remember the problem....a guy is giving calculators(?) to his class and if he doubles the amount then he will have 6 left over--was that experimental or not</p>
<p>also in the critical reading--it gave a quote and asked what the significance of it was? it was one of the first questions for the slavery interview passage</p>
<p>did anyone get like 13.333 or 40/3 for that one asking what x was given two points with the same slope?</p>
<p>"2) a lot of semi qualified juniors were there bc they want to do the old SAT before the new one comes out. wanted time to retake in Jan if they failed."</p>
<p>I'm one of those semi qualified juniors. And I got raped by this test. >_<</p>