Yeah this went completely over my head, I had no idea

This almost got me because of how the stimulus was being phrased

Yeah…. I am gonna need to review this one!!!

I was so close picked the right answer and then changed it to the wrong one. What is getting me is that I do not know what some of these words or phrases mean

It was easy eliminating these answer choices, because who said anything about a judge or survey?!?!?!

Chile me too

A almost got me, but the passage did not say anything about timing

This one got me for sure!!!!!

Me too I love paper test

I thought I did a good job understanding the passage until he broke it down and realized there were a lot of things that I missed.I was able to identify the 3 different perspectives including the others view. I look forward to developing this skills and getting better

170+ here we come!!!

My concern is with predicting * and hunting for the right answer I nay choose the wrong answer because I did not properly analyze the other choices. But if I fully analyze all the choices I may waste time…..

I understand why E is the correct answer but I had a hard time disproving A. That really ate up my time

I understand why E is the correct answer but I had a hard time disproving A. That really ate up my time

@JalenRashid me too friend this conditional logic is really getting me

I am understanding the conditional logic when I read it, but I get confused when it is time to actually translate it in the diagram. Maybe I just need to practice

Wait.. i think i am confusing myself 😅

negation terms “not” confuse me at times. A trick that works for me is anytime I see a double not, I cancel them both out and read the sentence forward

The resultant increase in rush-hour traffic flow would not have occurred had the city not invested in computer modeling technology

The resultant increase in rush-hour traffic flow would have occurred had the city invested in computer modeling technology

Wait are these two sentences the same? Did i change the meaning?

negation terms “not” confuse me at times. A trick that works for me is anytime I see a double not, I cancel them both out and read the sentence forward

The resultant increase in rush-hour traffic flow would not have occurred had the city not invested in computer modeling technology

The resultant increase in rush-hour traffic flow would have occurred had the city invested in computer modeling technology

Wait are these two sentences the same? Did i change the meaning?

I intuitively understand this question and why A is correct, but when mapping out he formula logic. It gets confusing for me. I guess that’s mean I need to work on translating the stimulus into formal logic

Why is this a “or” and not an “And” statement? I interested the stimulus as a “And” Statement. The ‘However in the final paragraph signaled to me that The “Area of studies department” was an exception to this rule

Why is this a “or” and not an “And” statement? I interested the stimulus as a “And” Statement. The ‘However in the final paragraph signaled to me that The “Area of studies department” was an exception to this rule

I eliminated the correct answer and then realized all the options that are left are all incorrect. Time to back track. Then I selected the correct answer. I am ready for more challenging questions

Predicting the conclusion/ correct answer really helps to eliminate wrong answers and identify the correct answer choice quickly!

A question I have is will the answer of be something that is somewhat supported ?

I had no idea what altruism meant. Despite not knowing the meaning of the word I equated altruism as not all moral. This helped lead me to the correct answer