guys the new ui is quite rough. it's not intuitive i have to say. I'm helping my students print out preptests because they will be taking it with pen and paper and after trying for a long time and following threads like this

i couldn't find it -- i tried going through practice: drills, sections, ptests

etc

no option to have obsolete format and drilling mode toggle

even going through analytics is much rougher. and creating custom problem sets is ???

there is no advanced drill builder anymore -- there is no option to view sections or ptests

guys this is a nightmare switch

in the new 7sage could i get step by step instructions to pass on to my student for him to print out his tests to mimic test taking conditions through this new UI?

Is E wrong because it says

Nothing can justify the intended outcome of an action except the value of that action's actual outcomes.

two things to say here:

1. E begins by saying what can justify intended outcomes whereas the stimulus only tells me what will justify a means

2. E says what WILL justify this is that action's ACTUAL outcomes

the first sentence in the stimulus seems to indicate that actual outcomes don't make entirely the end of an action

i.e. "end of an action is" intended outcome, not just the by-product (actual outcome)

if i'm correct in equating by-product with actual outcome, then E doesn't make sense because it emphasizes actual outcomes instead of intended outcomes.

e.g. let's not just look at the outcome, but what the intentions were as well.

My first question is: am i correct in my interpretation for point 2?

My second question is: the first sentence of the stimulus saying "end of an action is intended outcome AND by-products? or is it saying that end of action is JUST intended outcome.

is it open-ended or clear-cut in regards to this question? it seemed open-ended to me, therefore is answer choice C correct if I interpret it to mean

One can justify an action only by appeal to the value of its intended outcome

JUSTIFY ACTION --> MUST look at value of intended outcome (as well as by-products)

in other words, C just gives us one necessary condition, but not the only necessary condition?

#help

so I got this one wrong when I was taking it on the curriculum, but got it correct on blind review.

It helps if you make up simple numbers for these kinds of problems.

Try to break down the stimulus into pieces when you're reading it. Then identify the question stem and see what kind of answer you're looking for. In this case, it's Most Strongly Supported, so ideally we would want to look for a softer answer choice.

We can get rid of A-C pretty quickly because A-B talks about things we have no concrete knowledge of from the stimulus and C is counter to what we read. That leaves us with D and E, which we try to break down and see which one best gets at our objective. If you notice, D is pretty soft, whereas E is a stronger statement which if we break down makes us accountable for a lot.

Approach these problems in steps

--> starting from stimulus comprehension to question stem and answer choices (e.g. did I know what kind of answer I was looking for? / did I tackle answer choices efficiently, etc.)

--> what step took up the most time and what can I do better next time?

In my case I got to D vs E pretty quickly, but then thought of a scenario where E was true. The problem is since we don't have much information, we can make the opposite of E also be true and D is the much softer answer that also factually is supported by what we have.

You got this!! Keep at it and it will get easier!!

interested! scoring in the same range and have the same goals

So prior to the bolded part we have that four exceptions have a common feature: each of these four exceptions is a notional possession by the person out of actual possession (i take this to mean an abstract idea of ownership out of an ACTUAL ownership of something)

the bolded part tells us that: through my owning something through another person, or where this is a gap in the official ownership title there leaves open the chance for someone to sue me

So B is basically saying: The complex duties assigned to the new employees is the reason they are being paid more than usual

_

notice how this is really not what we're looking for in this necessary assumption question stem._

the stimulus gives us:

two new employees have a salary that is 1) higher than the salary new employees are usually given to

do simple tasks

2) as well as job duties that are much harder than

inexperienced workers get

it then concludes: salary and complexity of job duties of these two new guys must be reduced.

Necessary Assumption Question Stem --> Which of these answer choices is essential for the argument to *hold up

*

Going back to B) the reason as to why these guys are being paid doesn't really matter in holding up this argument. If we negate B, we get "It is not true that complex duties was the reason these two new guys got paid more"

okay, so that's not the reason. does our argument fall apart?

_whereas if we negate C) "It is not true that these two are not experienced.." in other words, they are experienced

2) we noted above becomes irrelevant then and the author's argument doesn't hold as much weight anymore

_

hope this helps clarify a little!

Hey guys! I would love to join if there's any space. Currently signed up for April and June.

Hi guys! I would love to join if there's space!

Johnwang2018@lulu341.northwestern.edu

Congratulations!! Keep up the good fight!!

Sent you guys messages :D

JY you're amazing for coming up with this analogy

Thank you so much!! This distinction was key in helping me understand this question.

just because she never won a tournament doesn't mean she has entered them

Therefore

She = Quantum Mechanics and the statement reads as: "your Quantum Mechanics is great, but it hasn't solved everything; therefore it will not solve everything."

so choosing E isn't as attractive due to its conclusion being on the whole group (body of physic theories).

I realized E made that error during the test, but I didn't interpret C in a favorable way in terms of figuring out the subject of sister matching to anything to justify my choosing it.