#help How is the sound quality of a recording the same as the misquotes and half-truths? I understand that we are looking at the recording just as we are looking at the reproduction of a painting, but in the stimulus we are comparing two similar things (accuracy and accuracy), whereas in A we are comparing validity of statements and sound quality of a recording. My explanation for how this makes it a wrong answer is similar to the explanation for E: "We don't know that the prestigious literary prize means that the first one was enthralling." Likewise, we don't know that a shitty sound recording means that the speech was full of inaccuracies.

#help I thought we couldn't choose something like E because we're taking a bold assumption that something that worked at another company would work at this one. That is the reasoning I used to eliminate C as well. I was between B and E, but eventually chose B because it was at least somewhat supported, whereas E took too much of an assumption. Can I please get some more explanation for this problem? #feedback

#help I just want to make sure that I understand: we were able to eliminate C on a shallow dip solely because its subject matter was similar? Or should we hold onto it on a speed run just until we begin a deeper analysis?

@ said:

I would drill every question type without time constraints until you're consistently getting -0/-1 and then start adding time or increasing the difficulty. You really don't want to start taking PT's until you have a good foundational understanding of how to recognize and answer each question type.

I am in the same situation, and I honestly thought that taking the PTs right after the curriculum was best, but this comment changed my mind. I think as long as you are adding timing to your studying, then you are simulating the same thing as a PT--but it might be a bit easier to digest than taking the whole thing at once.

Definitely take a couple of PTs before the actual date, but IMO drilling sounds like the best option for you. Either way, I'm sure that the time constraint is our biggest problem--everyone will always recommend a longer study schedule to the alternative.

#help I was wary about selecting D on the grounds that we already established there were no hard empirical experiments carried out on the subject. Is this answer correct because the studies that represented real trial situations count as the "experimental evidence?" I noticed that the passage said these studies counted as "experimental findings."

And the target time for this is 42 seconds? Wild.

I feel like this question could be completely turned on its head by having the answer choices focus on something like "it fails to consider that people who experience chronic serious back pain no longer consider it serious back pain." That's where I was expecting this to go after some of the other questions we've done!

I had difficulty understanding the stimulus itself. They used sight and sound so interchangeably, I lost track of what exactly was going on in the experiment! I don't even know how to ask a question to help me understand, but I just figured I'd throw it out there that I still got it wrong because it's not so clear to me how these goggles made an impact on their hearing capabilities.

#feedback I always press the check mark when I mean to press the next arrow, since the other "You Try It" questions only have one question. I think it would be helpful to make a pop-up confirm we are ending the set (especially if we have not answered each question), or make the check mark unavailable until we have answered each question, or make the next arrow work as the submission button once we are at the last question. This way I will not be answering one or two questions, just to hit the submit button (out of a force of habit) and lose the progress for the whole set! Not a big issue, but it might be a QoL improvement. :)

#help I really don't understand why D is wrong. If we take that answer to be true, we are assuming that NO student can improve their achievement, right? And if no student improves, how can the entire overall achievement improve? His explanation for why they are not the same level of analysis (or set) makes no sense to me. Now that I know they are not, I see how E is the right answer, but I fail to see how we could possibly say that the overall population can improve even if not a single student improves. Is it because he only looks at the negation when saying this?