<p>The word “different” was in the question. I got it right, not reading it in that fashion; however, I do recall seeing the word “different.”</p>
<p>@musicislife
Well that’s just a point in the ambiguity of their question. Omitting the word “different” which indeed was in the question would have solved a lot of problems. Obviously I knew there had to be an answer, but both ways of interpreting the question are completely valid even if one way was more common</p>
<p>I’ll try not to annoy anyone by dragging on this topic further, however if anyone is curious I sent the following email to collegeboard:</p>
<p>Collegeboard,</p>
<p>While taking the SAT yesterday, I encountered a very ambiguously worded grid-in math question. I must have spent almost 10 minutes on this question alone, rereading it and switching back and forth between possible answers simply based on how the question could be interpreted. The grid-in question went something like:</p>
<p>“Given that 6 has four factors: 1, 2, 3, 6. What is one possible positive 2-digit integer that has exactly 3 different factors?”</p>
<p>Answers if interpreting the question asking for TOTAL factors:
25 (1, 5, 25)
49 (1, 7, 49)</p>
<p>Answers if interpreting the question asking for DIFFERENT factors:
16 (1, 2, 4, 8, 16) The 1 and 2 are shared factors = 3 different factors (4, 8, 16)
24 (1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24) The 1, 2, and 6 are shared factors = 3 different factors (4, 12, 24)
35 (1, 5, 7, 35) The 1 is a shared factor = 3 different factors (5, 7, 35)
Possibly a couple others</p>
<p>I understand that the question may have included the information about the factors of 6 simply to clarify that we were supposed to count 1 and itself as factors. Or the word “different” might have been used in the question in order to clarify that you only count a factor once (like counting 4 as a factor of 16 only once rather than twice). However at the same time, this type of clarification may have inadvertently phrased the question so that it was also asking for something completely different.</p>
<p>I solved the question both ways; One way being that we were just supposed to find a number with 3 factors, and the other way in which we find a number with exactly three different factors (from those of 6)</p>
<p>If the intention was to ask for a number with just 3 factors, I don’t believe that the use of the word ‘different’ seemed very clear. It is obvious that a person should only count 4 as one factor since it is clearly one factor. Counting it twice really makes no sense regardless. If the problem had simply omitted the word ‘different’ then the question would have made sense. Then it would go like:</p>
<p>“Given that 6 has four factors: 1, 2, 3, 6. What is one possible positive 2-digit integer that has exactly 3 factors?”</p>
<p>Now THAT seems like it would make clear what is being asked. If people were to count the square twice, then there would be no possible numbers that would fit the question, so I don’t see how a person could get confused. This way it’s just asking for a number with 3 factors while still making it clear that you count 1 and itself. </p>
<p>I hope my explanation made sense, as I think that it seemed like the question was more directly asking for a number with exactly three different factors, which would need to be compared with the given information of the factors of 6. Thank you for taking the time to help!</p>
<p>I hold that none of us has eidetic memory and a response from Collegeboard or a copy of the exact question from QAS is the only way to resolve this problem without needless speculation.</p>
<p>I sent an email as well, and I hope others do the same.</p>
<p>Guys, the question was very clear in what it was asking.</p>
<p>I have a whole list of other questions that were ambiguous, but this was not among them.</p>
<p>Okay well you’re entitled to your opinion. Clearly if you had taken the time to read our arguments/explanations then you would realize that this was indeed an ambiguous question. There were quite a few of us that interpreted the question differently, so there is no reason for you to be so definitive about it</p>
<p>I’m inclined to agree with Preply et al. Many of you may have been unable to interpret the question, but I am inclined to think the break-down there may have been with the readers and not with the wording of the question. </p>
<p>I think a good math student should have known that the question called for a two-digit number that was the square of a prime. I don’t want to get into a fight about this, but I wouldn’t hold out much hope for your appeal.</p>
<p>It’s all just opinion…no need for anyone to get upset and certainly no harm in sending an email. It would help if we had the exact text. For example, people say they remember the word “different” but the much mathier term would have been “distinct”. Is it possible that “distinct” was the word they used? Had they meant the problem as many seem to have interpreted it, I think they would have said something like:</p>
<p>“X has three has exactly 3 distinct factors which are not factors of 6.” </p>
<p>That’s still leaving room for people to mis-read though: some folks (me for instance!) will read that as “X has exactly 3 distinct factors, none of which are factors of 6” and decide that there is no answer…</p>
<p>In any case, I share Preply’s doubts that you will get any traction with the College Board. But no harm in trying. Good luck.</p>
<p>No question, “distinct” is the better word to use. I, too, hope that the question actually said, “three distinct factors.” That would clearly make all the “but it’s also a factor of 6” discussion moot.</p>
<p>@SAT128 u failed the SAT</p>