<p>The author called writing a CATHARTIC experience because it cleansed of his rebellious feelings.</p>
<p>I put AMBIVALENT for the Poet-Policeman passage. The poet had mixed feelings about the Alexanders ie she was content with the way things were but she also believed that a confrontation would benefit her.</p>
<p>HELP on SC PLEASE-
I can’t remember the contexts in which docile and ruminate were used. If anyone remembers the sentences and/or other word choices please post.</p>
<p>docile: the vet being able to handle “docile” dogs instead of aggressive ones
ruminate: the girl “ruminated” regarding an issue, yet had no progress.</p>
<p>The governor->science teacher answer is incorrect. </p>
<p>1) In the passage the traffic engineer went from local to global. He started out in NYC, if I remember correctly, and went on to work in Brazil and France. NYC is clearly the small scale here.</p>
<p>2) You get too hung up on the word ‘teaching’ in the passage. He did not literally teach people in Sao Paulo or Paris anything. He devised rules and that’s how he impacted their behavior. </p>
<p>3) Eno did NOT change occupation. He did not become a social engineer (there’s no such occupation per se), what he did resulted in social engineering.</p>
<p>What were the other answer choices…? I can’t even remember if I chose docile/ruminate or not… So maybe knowing the other choices will spark something</p>
<p>for the photography question that asked for the relationship between the two passages: is it either “passage 1 outlines philosophy and passage 2 elaborates” or “passage 1 promotes a methodology and passage 2 discusses the methodology with certain reservations”? </p>
<p>also for the methodology answer choice: wasn’t it a “medium” the were asking about? rather than a “methodology”…</p>
<p>I put philosophy. I do not remember the question that well, but there was not much in passage 1 that would count as methodology. The lady in passage 1 emphasized having, so to say, emotional or spiritual approach to photography; she said how photography can tell a story etc. These are not the exact words, but I’m sure you get the gist of it, and that’s just not methodology. Methodology is something specified, systematical, it has a lot to do with scientific, regular and rational approach. That’s not what the passage was about.</p>
<p>Edit: Also, in passage 2, the author clearly elaborated on that philosophy, said about fitting photography into historical context. The only reservation he had was the one about being objective, but that was one, and I believe last, sentence. As if that was not enough, objectivity was discussed in passage 1 and even more so there.</p>
<p>@michelle it was definitely methodology. Do you happen to remember which other answer choices were offered for the ruminate sc??</p>
<p>^to offer evidence, the first author said something like- a camera and photographer need to do this and this and ask questions such as who is my subject? Blah blah blah? ← that’s definitely methodology</p>
<p>@michelle
I think you might be right about the answer that had “reservations” in it being paired with some “medium” thing and not “methodology.” if the answer choice was truly “methodology → reservations” i’m pretty sure i would have chosen it, but i actually chose philosophy. and that makes me think that the asnwer choice was actually “posiitve medium that passage 2 has reservations about” or something like that, which is probably wrong because passage 1 didn’t really talk about the medium itself (photography), but rather a philosophy about it. if the choice was “positive medium…reservations” blahblah, then i don’t think it was right. but a lot of people i’ve talked to have said they picked methodology so again, i’m really not sure.
gragh.</p>
<p>also, for anybody still not sure about the phenomenon vs. theory question:
“The extremely controversial question that arose immediately was to what extent this human circadian rhythm was an autonomous mechanism rather than a simple response to external signals such as…”
that is not a theory. that is an inquiry about a phenomenon.
and the “tests” that are discussed later in the passage are summarized by the following:
“it has not been easy to find the answer. in some cases the suspected extraneous cues…were very subtle, but careful experiments on both human and nonhuman subjects at many scientific laboratories have led to the definite conclusion that our body contains an autonomous timekeeper.”
and later it talks more about “answers”
these are answers to a question, not a theory. it does not mention proving or disproving anything, but rather, answering questions about something unknown-ish, which is precisely what a phenomenon is.
and the second part of the phenomenon answer was “resolutions” something. this is not talking about solving a problem. another definition of resolution is to settle something, or to come to a conclusion about something. I think this question was partly testing whether or not we were able to apply that other definition to the answer.</p>
<p>^ and that was my exact reasoning for why that passage was inquisitive and concerned.</p>
<p>@Aznsat </p>
<p>It’s like someone telling you, “to find out who you really are you need to reach deep into your soul” etc. It’s kind of a way of doing something, but you wouldn’t call it methodology, would you? In terms of photography, when I think of methodology I think of more technical approach (perspective, lighting etc.), not emotional side of it.</p>
<p>although the experiments themselves were inquisitive and concerned, I don’t think the passage was. the passage itself was a summary about the whole thing. the people it talked about were inquisitive and concerned, but it itself was not.
eh.
it’s so hard to discuss answers like this. we really don’t know. to be sure of anything, we’ll all have to wait until scores come out i guess.
erg. i really don’t want to do that
such contradictions blah</p>
<p>Yeah, I know I felt confident about a lot of these answers during the test, so I have to trust those in-the-moment feelings more than this post-test guessing game. Who knows.</p>
<p>i could have sworn it was medium lol
i dont really see the “methodology” argument but “medium” seems to make more sense to me in the context. i thought the “medium” was photography, which the author of passage 1 seems to promote as a depictor of the truth, while the author of passage 2 says that photography can actually distort the truth and that the truth might not be the same for everyone.</p>
<p>i think it was a little deeper than just photography. yes, the whole thign was about photography, but both passages were talking about a certain way to photograph things, and that was really their subject, not just plain old photography
goodnight friends</p>
<p>It was methodology.
Case closed.</p>
<p>remember this passage with the family on the chateau? was it the experimental one? it was unusually hard.</p>
<p>chateau was 100% experimental.</p>