<p>For the why are teachers censuring I put:</p>
<p>To protect from negative influences</p>
<p>And -1 will almost certainly be an 800, if not, it would be the first time ever. -2 is also more than likely, as it is an 800 on ~80% of tests.</p>
<p>crap. why is it designated?</p>
<p>tagged = labelled = designated</p>
<p>YES I put designated! :DD</p>
<p>For this question
Symbiotic relationship between Apple and Bee. What is this paragraph?
it was not define the term through an illustration
it was developing the counterargument from the previous paragraph
the planter was arguing against the idea that flowers were passive objects in its relationship with the bee
at least this is what i thought the answer was…any agree?</p>
<p>no it was clearly defining coevolution.</p>
<p>@SAT12345, how nice are u at CR?</p>
<ol>
<li><p>what was the ratio one? awnsers were like 1 to 3, 3 to 1, 2 to 3 or something</p></li>
<li><p>What was the pen to pencils, pencils to pen average = 1.4?? or 1.5 1.6 1.7</p></li>
</ol>
<p>actually, it was highlighting an unlikely relationship</p>
<p>iiBoGo, wrong thread but 2:1 and 1.6</p>
<p>iiBoGo. 2:1, 1.6</p>
<p>@ etennis12</p>
<p>i got an 800 on the March 2011 SAT, so i guess i am fairly good at it. however, i felt that the critical reading today was harder than the March one</p>
<p>agreed. the term wasn’t defined, it was merely mentioned. the rest of the paragraph was about the bees and the trees and how they help each other – which is developing the counterargument from the previous paragraph</p>
<p>^Alright, i agree with you on the counterargument, i feel there is a great bandwagon effect</p>
<p>nothing about the relationship is unlikely. Most 3 year olds are aware of the relationship between plants and bees.</p>
<p>And nothing about it was an argument.</p>
<p>It was clearly illustrating the concept of coevolution.</p>
<p>@ pdawggy</p>
<p>that was what i put first, but the question said something along the lines as to “what the function of the paragraph was in the context of the whole passage”, not “what the paragraph itself was doing”, unless i misread and misunderstood the question itself. also, there wasn’t really an illustration in the paragraph… idk, i could be wrong, not saying i am 100% correct</p>
<p>Guys what do u think a -5/-6 would be -6/-7 raw?</p>
<p>Can someone explain these two answer choices and their question/reasoning? </p>
<p>-Teachers rejecting their own choices.</p>
<p>-it is easier to teach adults, not children </p>
<p>what were the questions and the other answer choices to each?</p>
<p>Does anyone know whether the answer was emotional or moralistic? (Moralistic seems right, but I remember one specfic line talking about feelings? and i picked emotional)</p>
<p>And which one of the choices did the story not have? (appeal to authority, or elongated analogy)?</p>
<p>I think the Teacher rejecting their own choices thing is wrong. nothing indicated that. I thought protecting from negative influences was right. </p>
<p>The answer choice actually didn’t say it is easier to teach. It said it is easier to apply, which is what the whole couple of sentence about it be murkier for students was saying.</p>
<p>And SAT12345, you weren’t 100%, but I am. The function of the paragraph was to define a term through illustration.</p>