<p>I’m praying that I got at least a 600(higher would be nice) on critical reading.</p>
<p>Sent from my DROID RAZR using CC</p>
<p>Wait what exactly was the question with ‘three different factors’?
I put 16…crap. I thought it meant 3 different positive factors than that of the example they gave which was ‘6’</p>
<p>Thank God. Maybe I’ll actually get an 800 this time, unless I made another stupid mistake like in October. And with writing, does anyone remember exactly what question 24 was? I think I put no error, and then realized there was one, or maybe it was 23…</p>
<p>Did anyone else put the analogy for rich and poor to a musician playing two instruments equally well??</p>
<p>and what’d you get for the “converging fingers” I was debating humour or play on words</p>
<p>SAT some of these questions I remember but I swear they were only changed slightly such as that one, the triangle one (I swear I had a sq rt 2) and one other too.</p>
<p>The three different factors asked you to find a two digit number with only three factors. This implies the factors are 1, itself, and another number. Because of this, the number must be a perfect square. The answers were 25 or 49. 16 doesn’t work because it has more than 3 factors.</p>
<p>Megan, I am almost certain it as play on words.</p>
<p>I also put the musician, but that was a shot in the dark.</p>
<p>@megan702, I believe the “fingers” question was a play on words, because of the parallelism between that sentence and an earlier one in the paragraph.</p>
<p>damn it…That wording was so stupid
It said “6 has factors 1, 2, 3, 6”. Choose a positive 2-digit integer that has 3 different factors" so I thought 16 would make sense since it has factors 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and three of those factors are different from what they gave</p>
<p>I don’t think it was the “musician” answer; that would imply learning a new skill, which Dorothea Lange did not. She used what skills she had but applied them to a different subject. I don’t remember what answer I chose, though I narrowed it down to the the critic and the film writer I think. If the options were something like that at least.</p>
<p>SAT I swear you and me are right. It totally asked that.</p>
<p>for that to work it would have to be a play on words, which its not. it was humorous. </p>
<p>its like this:
“It’s important that you read your book.” (imagine thats what the naturalist author said).
And I say “All that’s important is that I eat some chicken wings, I’m starving!”</p>
<p>Is that humor or a “play on words” of what was mentioned earlier in the paragraph?</p>
<p>And the two musicians is wrong, it was a horror film director illustrating books; the photographer used the same skills but used it differently.</p>
<p>well I’m still praying it was the musicians because I already got a bunch on CR wrong… :/</p>
<p>Music, it was talking about how the 2 were different entities but kind of the same thing. I really think it was the instruments.</p>
<p>The factors question actually said, “6 is a four-factor number (or whatever term it used), having 4 factors: 1, 2, 3, and 6. What is an example of a two digit three factor number?”</p>
<p>Am I the only one who narrows CR questions down to two answers then picks the wrong one???</p>
<p>@thenerdyjew, humor already started in the sentence fit before that when it said that “what the heck am I doing here”. It wouldnt make sense to make the fingers going together the starting of humor when it started before.</p>
<p>But the question asked what her applying her current photography skills to another subject matter was analogous to. Learning a new instrument to a similar level of proficiency would require new skills altogether.</p>
<p>And @thenerdyjew, you could be right. I eliminated all but those two, and I always forget which one I picked in such scenarious. It’s just something that happens in the moment.</p>
<p>@megan702, STORY OF MY LIFE. I have never missed an answer that I haven’t narrowed it down to. It sucks.</p>
<p>@musicislife
No I think it said something like “two digit number with three different factors”, and I thought the 6 was used to compare the different factors</p>
<p>But there was a “four” involved in there somewhere. I underlined it because I thought it might be important at first.</p>
<p>@prizerebel975, if that was for the early-birds and night-owls question, no. The answer was the passage 2 supports the stuff in passage 1. Vindication maybe was the word in the answer?</p>