<p>How about the shift in the argument on lines like 69 or whatever in the Pakistan passage…I know everyones saying it was switching to personal attacks but I didn’t think it was, idk</p>
<p>I did say shift to personal attacks. They were talking about what niece was sicker, but then it became stuff like “niece A is sickers because of YOUR eating junk food with her.” It became an argument of how each aunt’s flaws made the nieces sick</p>
<p>I thought that passage was pretty annoying. Why choose something when two central characters essentially share the same name? Very frustrating to keep track of who was Namina (or whatever it was) and who was Big Namina in such a time constrained test.</p>
<p>So regarding the pedantic/snide debate, can we say that IF the question was “characterize the army,” the answer was pedantic, and IF the question was “characterize the author’s description of the army,” the answer was snide? Because clearly, there’s no reason to argue over it if no one knows the proper wording of the question. </p>
<p>And Person0, I agree. That passage irritated me so much.</p>
<p>^ Agreed.</p>
<p>HAHA for the namina passage, I drew a chart with the grandmothers and their favorites.</p>
<p>can you guys remember the other answer options for the question about the grandma in the doorway? it looks like the general consensus is that its adamant but im pretty sure i put something else, i just cant remember what the other options were.</p>
<p>why is there so much debate on the Anticipate and respond vs parenthetical mocking?</p>
<p>I remember it said “It will be said that they are getting more, when they are infact getting less”</p>
<p>“It will be said” he is anticipating a response, and his comment “They are infact getting less” is a response to “What will be said”, I don’t see how mocking really plays in</p>
<p>For someone who put the “articulates something then mocks” choice, I say I thought mocking because of the tone of the author towards what was being said in the parentheses, and then in the first part of the parentheses it “articulated a point”. What about the answer choice saying like “says a point then refutes it”? I heard some people argue for that one…</p>
<p>I mean in an actual english class, your teacher would not correct you if you were to claim that the tone of that parenthetical was mocking. You could spin it that way. Except college board isn’t testing your ability to think critically. The correct answer will always be the one that is the least creative. And in this case, “anticipates a response and then refutes it” is that answer.</p>
<p>Is there a post with a compilation of the results?</p>
<p>Go back a page or so! The list is there! :)</p>
<p>characterization of spice trade- ironic vs. dramatic
professor- pompous and stuffy
photographs take away from the novelty
question repeated w/ the pakistani people- growing indignant feeling
peremptory/ordeal
circumvent
assiduous
proper is closest to correct
snide
flop
easygoing
neophyte
articulate and mocking position vs predict reaction and respond
tennis spectators- close attention
primacy
disconcerted for the guy who had to extemporize
fundamentally vs solely
peremptory/ideal
method or whatever used in writing- analogous reasoning vs. repetition
grandma was being adamant when she stood in place
grandma was being a bully in the other one
sphinx’s gaze holds
similar thing in both passages- faculty’s role vs coursework can lead to good civil character
assertion followed my comical anecdote
idealistic
realistic
evocative for sphinx
hard to believe
familiar
author 2 asking a q by author 1
library sensory details
ephemereal but powerful
first paragraph provided context
confounded/inscrutable
she left resentfully acknowledged
conflicts
adjust the power instead of using maximum power
reflective but informative
he bought a book electronically while sitting in a library
systematically discredits vs 2 presents view 1 finds objectionable
eludes classification
defining a quality
adequate pinpoint
shortcomings
one of the girls was obedient
he tried to justify his actions
telescope passage represented development
dialogue shifted to personal insults
the senators lacked consensus</p>
<p>50/67 questions</p>
<p>reposted</p>
<p>what do you guys think -4 CR would be? I got 3 wrong, so the .75 → 1 point penalty holds</p>
<p>@swoony I think I’m in a similar situation. I would rate this test’s difficulty as “moderate”…curves for the moderate CR tests have usually ranged from 760-780 for moderate difficulty.</p>
<p>Uh I compiled more before… and I’m sure of mine.Passage 1 and Passage 2</p>
<p>idealistic<br>
realistic
fund./simply
civics/and career of childrens
helping children with their interests
snide
higher education
anticipate/response
repetition
objectionable, systematic</p>
<p>Mini</p>
<p>Dramatic
pivotal to world success</p>
<p>defining a quality
fragile</p>
<p>Mini
question/response
Sensory-
why he had use electric
different perspectives</p>
<p>Long Passage:</p>
<p>obedient bully commanding adamant cooking conflict resent criticism familiar experiences CLOse attention rising indignation</p>
<p>provide a context </p>
<p>Long P:</p>
<p>hard to believe
recent info
novices alike
planets clear
eflective informstive
comical anecdote
emphemeral
simile
LONG P:</p>
<p>novelty
pompous and stuffy
evocative
atypical
correct
holds
understandly unreliable</p>
<p>Sentence ComP :
adequate pinpoint
shortcomings
easygoing
disconcert/furnish
peremptory/ordeal
eludes
assiduous
primacy
trifling
confounded inscrutable
neophyte
circumvent
consensus dislkey</p>
<p>I think the answer is career of children, passage 1 had NOTHING about civics of character…sorry.</p>
<p>@ alarge</p>
<p>what was the question? I’m guessing it was in the section about the goals of higher learning?</p>
<p>I’ll be honest, for that one, I put they both thought that morals/social/etc were as important as education…I know passage 1 was arguing against it, but his argument wasn’t that it was unimportant, it was the it was impractical. he even says that in the last paragraph. idk, none of the answers stuck out to me. I really dont think it was civics though. Passage 1 said nothing about it, b/c i remember rereading the entire passage just for that option. I could be wrong though, it was a difficult question. thoughts?</p>
<p>Yeah, Passage 1 felt civic education had nothing to do with analytical skills and teaching. I’m sure I got this one right it was a question about similar in both passages? I went with focusing on faculty’s role in professional development.</p>
<p>Oh was it the one asking what both passages about higher learning had in common?</p>
<p>I believe it was that they both thought that formal education could improve morals/whatever they were arguing about. Passage 1, though it was against directly aiming to educate students in this way, conceded that formal education could potentially change moral character if material learned/a certain teacher inspired a change. Meanwhile, a part of Passage 2’s argument concerned how formal classes like social studies actually did impact students’ participation as a citizen.</p>
<p>you know professional development means for both personal and career advancement?</p>
<p>@alarge </p>
<p>what question are we discussing…?</p>