<p>also in the paragraph improvement, there was a sentence where you had to insert it. was it before 15 or 14 ?</p>
<p>@amregysat - That question was heavily debated in the March thread. IMO ‘had’ makes it imply that payphones had already revolutionized the industry when they first came into existence which obviously can’t be true.</p>
<p>‘We’ definitely seems redundant, although I don’t remember any such question on the SAT.</p>
<p>And is your last comment referring to the Soviet-US paragraph? I don’t think 14 and 15 were answer choices in that question.</p>
<p>@lostint so what was the answer “before 12”</p>
<p>Soviet-US wasn’t experimental ?</p>
<p>@Dimcik I don’t believe so </p>
<p>Did anyone realise an answer pattern of C,C,E,C,C?</p>
<p>The writing experimental was the one about the orchestra audition.
The Soviet USA space race was real.</p>
<p>@Sharecentury Do you mean that the writing section about US and Soviet Union was experimental? If yes, how can you say that?</p>
<p>When I looked through the March thread, I found that “evaluate objectively” was a correct answer for the acupuncture essay, nevertheless I didn’t remember that I had chosen this answer. Can anybody help me recall the question and other choices for this question？</p>
<p>The option was “evaluate objectivity” IIRC. It asked something about what the author of the second passage would want to do, and that was the answer since he claimed the acupuncture patients were probably not objective.</p>
<p>OK, the question is what author of P2 want to say or do. It seems that “data in P1 are fradulent” is another choice. I just don’t remember which one I choose.</p>
<p>It was didint get it</p>
<p>O hsorry i forgot , i acurally took that one!!!</p>
<p>Fraudulent is wrong. The test subjects didn’t intentionally lie, they just weren’t objective.</p>
<p>Agreed</p>
<p>Does anyone have a df or a way we can see the test? Like a google documents etc?</p>
<p>Yes, I know that’s the correct answer. I just don’t remember what my choice is. Gosh!! I think sec 2 is really hard… I’m pretty depressed after viewing March thread.<br>
As for the question concerned with the last paragraph of Prince, what did you guys choose? Continue explanation or deepen mystery or reveal discrepancy?</p>
<p>Did any one realise an answer succession of C,C,E,C,C in the first math section AKA(20 question one)?</p>
<p>@TohsakaRin I think I put continue explanation for that; the other ones don’t make sense. The continuation just added to the author’s theory, strengthening it, so it’s not a mystery or a discrepancy. In fact it’s the opposite.</p>
<p>@NOCEMSAWY no idea…</p>
<p>@avix215 What about author’s attitude toward the research result? piecemeal story or plausible theory?</p>