the october 2007 sat thread

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
321

<p>did any1 put facetious/earnest for the candy passage/</p>

322

<p>Yeah, he quoted Einstein, I believe.</p>

323

<p>polkahars, your explantion makes sense, but is too analytical for the SAT; he never directly accuses anyone. Plus there is a citation.</p>

324

<p>Yes, it was facetious exclamation/earnest whatever.</p>

325

<p>i put flowerly to the other thing..</p>

<p>now that i think bout it, it's probably wrong..</p>

326

<p>I got flowery. I could have put earnest. I went 50/50.</p>

327

<p>I needed 2100+. Reed and Stanford demand it.</p>

328

<p>i put flowery too. facietious means humoruous and funny
i think he started out flowery.</p>

329

<p>To the Ptolemy question...what was the answer choice?</p>

330

<p>question for those who seemed to have got the experimental (I think) math section in section 2, was there a math section following right after it in section 3 (I forgot, and I am a bit worried).</p>

331

<p>i hope it is flowerly...cuz his phrases were very ornate, and he did not mock the thing..he was just presenting it in a flowerly manner, and then the phrase signifies the change</p>

332

<p>Yes, section 3 was math.</p>

<p>(One of the questions it it, I remember, was the one with 24 employees with a 50% increase in females -- 25% decrease for males.)</p>

333

<p>i put flowery and then the unambiguous assertion or something. it said "blahblahblah, OF COURSE"</p>

334

<p>I got indignant chinu. The author seemed pretty upset about the candy factories...but I'm not sure</p>

335

<p>Yea my I think my experimental math was directly after the essay and was followed by another math section, which I found easier and not as tricky. I specifically remember a weird question about rotating a card with a dot on it in the first one.</p>

336

<p>i dont think that section was experimental, as i had the question with the card and the dot any i had a writing experimental</p>

337

<p>i put indignant as well.</p>

338

<p>it was definitely not indignant..he wasnt so much upset as he was deploring..</p>

339

<p>hey did anyone here get the cr section about how individuals follow the group's pressures? was this one experimental? if not, why did the author include stuff about sociologists and psychologists?</p>

340

<p>im pretty sure indignant is wrong too.. what were the other options</p>