<p>
</p>
<p>Definitely! Three chapters of my school’s book were dedicated to population. Also very little agriculture in the MC and was there any forestry at all? Aside from maybe one clear cutting part of a MC nothing like seed-tree or selective cutting. It seemed like it was really particular on some big subjects (air pollution) so if you knew solidly exactly what it was looking for this year you were good…</p>
<p>Oh well though even if I got in the 70s hopefully my FR will make up for it</p>
<p>Lol I self studied and didn’t label the parts for the FRQ. Any negative effects?</p>
<p>For anyone taking this next year: get the Barron’s book. It’s the only thing that kept me from doing really, really poorly on the test.</p>
<p>what was so hard about the math frq??</p>
<p>the math frq ehh i think i wouldve gotten it if i had more time but i had to spend alot of time rewriting my answers since i wrote answers to question 2,3,4 in the wrong section…lol i just thought i could write them all after another instead of writing them in their designated areas</p>
<p>I thought MC was ok, I didn’t know the diseases. FRQ was fairly easy, but the math was extremely difficult. I spent almost 5 minutes attempting to figure it out, but gave up. BSed a little bit here and there; will I be deducted major points? Need a 3 for credit, probably got a 3 or 4 :/. Calling July 1 to get the score so I have time for it to sink in (if bad) before my parents see! haha</p>
<p>All of it was surprisingly easy for me. The first 15 questions or so tripped me up a little bit (especially the ones regarding the diseases. I’m pretty sure I only got the first of that set right…), but after that it was basically all stuff I understood and took a lot of time to study. I had to BS some of the FRQs, but in the end they all seemed to kind of be common sense. All in all, I think I got a very high 4 if not a 5 on it.</p>
<p>As for the math question, it was a lot easier than it initially seemed. For part one, you just had to multiply the area of the coral reef with the amount it grows yearly (after converting everything to meters). Part 2 I believed was just multiplying the answer from part one with the density they gave. I don’t remember part 3, but it definitely was a breeze once the first two were figured out.</p>
<p>Also also, the laser leveling everything definitely made me laugh out loud and get weird looks from the kids around me.</p>
<p>I didn’t really find laser leveling that funny. Coming from farmland, my closest neighbor used laser leveling on part of their field. Granted they still irrigate like idiots, but whatever. I know exactly which one I found the funniest and I believe it was worded “small pebbles.”</p>
<p>^I answered small pebbles… Wasn’t sure if gravel or small pebbles were bigger (They question was which one had the largest water capacity?)</p>
<p>Soil particle with the highest water holding capacity is clay</p>
<p>
I wasn’t going to be the one to say it</p>
<p>I wasn’t really sure if either of those were the answer, but I based my guess off of the fact that I though clay bordered aquifers and landfills to block water from percolating and larger size particles have more space in between them to hold water.</p>
<p>So wait, it wasn;t clay?</p>
<p>I thought it was definitely clay, but maybe I misread the question</p>
<p>are you kidding me, clay has high water holding capacity!? looking back on it, it makes sense but my review book misled me and said that clay blocks aquifers from percolating.</p>
<p>it is clay</p>