- Joined
- Aug 2025
- Subscription
- Free
Admissions profile
Discussions
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated C because I moreso saw this stimulus of needing to know the aftermath of something to make the end true. I was pretty confused with the wording and saw C but was conflicted because the stimulus makes it seem like you can't know all the consequences, only some. Which had me conflicted if I could assume C because it felt like the stimulus wasn't wanting me to think C. I was pretty confused on this one.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose B because I thought it was wanting me to assume since we can know only some of its consequence then we on some occasions can only know what action is morally right. I can see how I could have over assumed on this answer choice though and it may not make sense. I then chose D in my blind review because I saw the stimulus as making us need to assume the aftermath for that to be true which is why I chose D because it goes along with that/ assumes the immediate consequences are relevant.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
Try to make sure I interpret the stimulus more before answering and learn how to better diagram in this scenario
Additional notes:
This one confused me.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated D originally since I was torn between E and D but felt E was better. I wasn't completely sure if I could assume it could make ADD more severe since some words in the stimulus I didn't fully understand such as "exacerbate" and "ameliorated". I did believe exacerbate could mean like intensify though but wasn't 100% so I chose E since I felt that could possibly be true.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose E because I felt the stimulus meant sugars consumed with food doesn't do anything to the sugar so it wouldn't increase it so I felt E could be assumed. I see how it's wrong though because it says "does not substantially increase the level" meaning it could but not much which I wouldn't assume.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can decipher the choices more carefully and take my time better in order to get the correct answer.
Additional notes:
I got the correct answer on my blind review.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated B because when reading the stimulus it says that "some recent grads consider work environment an important factor" but then it says "every recent grad considers vacation policy an important factor" which I took as every university grad then considering vacation policy an important factor and B says at least some do but the stimulus seems to say every grad does so I felt B was wrong since its saying some do when the stimulus says every recent grad does.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose D originally because I was first torn between D and A but felt D was right because, the stimulus says "every recent grade considers vacation policy an important factor" and "all university grads consider salary an important factor". So if every recent grad considers vacation policy important and all recent grads consider salary an important factor I felt D must be true then. In my blind review I chose A for similar reasons because, the stimulus does say "some recent grads consider work environment an important factor but they all consider salary an important factor so I feel like that reasoning sentence makes A must be true.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can look at key words better or words that stick out more like "all, at least some, every". I can also work on diagramming.
Additional notes:
Im confused on how B is right since the stimulus says every recent grads considers vacation policy an important factor so I feel it wouldn't be at least some.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated B because I didn't see much in the passages regarding the groups interests or remember must going over that so I felt it wasn't a strong enough answer because I was uncertain on the wording.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose A because I felt that it was a good principle due to the definitions of the terms seeming to be not formatted strong enough and felt the passages were basically wanting what A was saying. I do see how the wording in A is confusing though because it was even confusing me a bit. I then chose E because I felt that also was a good principle to consider but I was unsure about the "legitimately considered citizens of both countries" aspect and can see how that could be wrong.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can try to understand each answer choice better and not just eliminate it due to small uncertainties.
Additional notes:
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated C originally because I felt that both passages were using problematic as an indicator that the definition was confusing and unclear to the others. I was unsure about the resulting in difficulties aspect because I understood the difficulties part but didn't know about the resulting which is why I eliminated it.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose B because I felt it had established the meaning of problematic in both passages well. When I went back through the passages I felt that could accurately mean what the term problematic meant within them which is why I chose it because I could interpret it that way too.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can try to apply each answer choice to the passages in which the term is used and see what better fits or not be so tunnel vision.
Additional notes:
I got the correct answer on my blind review.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I initially eliminated E because I was torn between it and C and just had felt what C was saying was stronger. I can see how E is right though.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose C because I felt it was expressing the main point accurately and was strong. I can see how it may be wrong though because it may not be too strong now that I look over it again.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can decipher each answer choice better to help me choose the correct answer.
Additional notes:
I chose E in my blind review.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated C initially because I didn't know originally if C would be relevant and I also thought A was stronger which lead me to eliminate it. I can now see how C is write though and how a is wrong. I feel that I originally just did not interpret C correctly but I did choose it and get it right on my blind review.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose A because I felt that it could undermine the last sentence of the passage due to it saying most of the ones infected weren't even cannibalistic which could weaken the fact that they chose to preserve their own lives by not eating the others because they mostly weren't even cannibals.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can try to understand each answer choice better individually before making my selection and make sure I know what the passage is initially saying.
Additional notes:
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated D because I was unsure on the relevancy of this answer originally. I didn't think it aligned with Tutola in that approach and wasn't sure if it would be right to go from original setting to contemporary Irish life setting. I wasn't certain or sure that Tutuola did that in his works and was conflicted so I eliminated it. I was torn between it and the answer I chose on my blind review though since I understood it a bit more but still ended up not choosing it since I was unsure with this answer.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose C because in the passage I understood that Tutola combined different characters from English, idiomatic Nigerian English and Yoruba and felt this answer choice was practically doing the same thing. I felt it went well with what I was looking for in the answer choices which is why I chose it. I then chose E in my blind review because I did know it mentions in the passage Tutuola having a narrator and felt that could align.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can make sure I understand what the answer choices are saying better and try to better interpret what I read in the passage.
Additional notes:
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated B originally because I felt A had explained the main point better and wasn't exactly sure if B was the main point or just a small part of it which is why I in the end eliminated it.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose A because I had felt it summarized the passage the best. I can see how it is wrong though because it doesn't really mention the conflict of people interpreting his works as novels when it's not. It isn't too broad.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can try to move slower and think to myself what the main point is before going through the answer choices and make sure it covers exactly what the main point is.
Additional notes:
I got the correct answer on the blind review.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I originally eliminated A because first off I was torn between it and D. They seemed quite similar and I think I ultimately eliminated it due to me liking keywords like "mislead" that were in answer choice D.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose D due to me feeling that it went well with the argument and what the agent was trying to say. I was torn between it and A but ultimately chose D since I had to choose one and felt it justified the argument well.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can compare and contrast choices better and stop second guessing myself. I can also try to align the answer choices better with the stimulus.
Additional notes:
I got answer A right on the blind review. I now see how it is right though because it is more in-depth and may justify it better than answer D.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated B because I felt originally there wasn't only one possible reason listed because it seemed quite lengthy with explanation, I also looked for a more specific answer I feel. I also felt confused on this question and rushed which may be why I eliminated this answer.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose E originally which I now feel doesn't make sense, I was rushed into just choosing on this one since I ran out of time. I think I chose this one because I saw that there was a comparison between the two. I also chose A in my blind review because, I felt that was what it was doing. They are saying just because you're in the mathematics department does not mean it should be taught by a mathematics professor. I assumed that was saying that just because its a stats course doesn't mean a mathematics teacher should teach it/ could better than a history professor.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can make less assumptions and read each answer choice more thoroughly. Reading through again allowed me to see answer choice B better.
Additional notes:
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I originally eliminated A because, I thought that it was irrelevant or even strengthening at first. I thought that at first that could strengthen the fact that high protein diets are better since low protein diets do that which make them have more body fat than high protein. When I read through again on my blind review I realized than answer choice could be right since it contradicts that eating more protein. shunning carbohydrates helps you lose body fat since the other diet could too, it just makes you have more water weight. So I believe I eliminated A since I misinterpreted it originally.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I first chose B because I felt that does weaken the argument, since its saying if you do have a high protein diet you do gain a lot of body fat which contradicts the fact that to lose body fat you eat much protein.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can move slower in order to interpret things correctly and not move so fast.
Additional notes:
I chose the correct answer on my blind review.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated C because ultimately I was torn between it and A and felt like A may be more true as the assumption. I think the word "never" in C had me contemplating but I also felt that could be true since the system is ever- expanding, overall this question confused me a bit which led me to eliminate C and choose A because I felt that A was more right at the moment since I felt A was true in the stimulus.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose A because, I felt that was exactly what the stimulus seemed to be doing. I can see how it may be incorrect though because I can't always assume that they will do this appeal procedure even after it does everything its supposed to because if they do all that then it should be covered since its ever expanding. I ultimately think I Chos this one because I felt rushed for time and was confused on this answer. I can see how A may not be an assumption now though, I just felt it went well originally.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can not try to rush and read through answers more carefully.
Additional notes:
I chose the right answer on my blind review.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
i originally eliminated D because I was torn between A & D due to them both being similiar answer choices. I was unsure with the "only if" in answer choice D which is what mainly led me to eliminate it.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose A because I felt like I could assume that in order to get to the conclusion. I also felt in went well with what the stimulus was saying.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can analyze key words better and not rule something out just because I'm unsure on a word.
Additional notes:
I got the right answer on the blind review.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated A because when looking at the principle it states that " a police officer is eligible" "if the officer has an exemplary record, but not other wise". So, if the Penn did not have the exemplary record he wouldn't be considered for Mayors Commendation so I took as he wouldn't be able to be considered to receive it like he is in the conclusion so this answer choice didn't align with the principle and conclusion to me.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose E originally because they both have exemplary records so they are eligible to be considered but Franklin did more than what's expected as a police officer and saved someones life but Penn didn't so I felt that would conclude he shouldn't receive the Mayors Commendation due to him not doing what the principle says he should do to receive the reward. So I felt that answer choice aligned well with the principle and conclusion. In my blind review I chose B because similar to E they both have exemplary records so their able to be considered for the reward but only Franklin did what is beyond reasonably expected of a police officer which is why its concluded he should receive it since the principle says you should receive the reward if you do that.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can maybe not overanalyze and not just look for certain things.
Additional notes:
I felt that for the conclusion to even consider Officer Penn for the Mayors Commendation he would automatically have to have an exemplary record as well as Franklin since thats what makes them eligible to be considered. I felt that Penn must have just not had exceeded what was reasonably expected of a police officer or saved someones life.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I originally eliminated C because I was torn between it and B and felt B was better as the flaw. The wording of C confused me a bit and I wasn't 100% sure if it was accurate or not and wasn't certain if it was meaning the critics claim and the authors claim as the two claims in the choice, it was a bit confusing of wording and hard to connect so I chose B.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose B because I felt it could go as a flaw with the authors claim contradicting the fact that the assumption is untrue and showing a hole in the authors reasoning. B's wording was a bit confusing for me as well but I felt it could be a good flaw.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can make sure I understand what the choice is saying before choosing it because all these answers were a bit confusing to me and I feel I didn't fully comprehend them all and they hurt my brain.
Additional notes:
I ended up choosing the correct answer C on my blind review.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated E because, I felt that the flaw was something concerning silencing dissenters so I was mainly just looking for an answer choice involving that. I didn't really see relevance with E since I had tunnel vision on other answer choices which is why I eliminated it.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose A because I felt that a flaw could be them possibly having different purposes in passing this law which could maybe contradict the fact that they are ignorant of history. I then chose C because I felt that answer choice could be a flaw correlating with the end of the passage making it not historically ignorant then.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can not assume so much and have tunnel vision (eliminating things off the bat).
Additional notes:
This question was pretty confusing to me but I do now see how E can be right, I'm even a bit confused with the answers I chose now. I think I overlooked E but now that I look back I see the words (if this is true) meaning that everything really relies on the sentence before that and a flaw could be the fact that they didn't look at the other side of that sentence before. I see how E is right now.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated B because I didn't see the stimulus as saying you should be on side of severe punishments over lenient. I more so saw it as saying just because motives seem good don't decrease or be more lenient with the punishment. I didn't really interpret it as saying to be more on the side of overly severe, just not to be more lenient based on motives.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose C because I interpreted it as not going based off motives but going off of what the consequences of the crime you committed were, like what you did rather than your motives behind it. I can see though that I make a lot of assumptions with this answer choice and it is even confusing me a bit. In my blind review I chose A because I saw psychological states as their thought process behind their actions like their motives. The political theorist didn't want the judges to mitigate punishment on the basis of motive in which the political theorist didn't want that thought process to be in the legal system which is why I chose that answer. I was a bit confused on the psychological states though because I can see how it can be wrong in which it may refer to their mental state rather than motives/ thought process.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can make less assumptions and make sure I know what all the answer choices mean before choosing one. I wasn't 100% sure on what mitigate meant and interpreted as like decrease/ lessen or take away.
Additional notes:
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated D because I saw that answer choice being reflective in Passage A but not as much in Passage B so I wasn't sure if they'd disagree over it because I felt Passage B may think they should do both those things and I didn't know for sure whether they'd disagree with A over that.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose C because I could see A saying jurors are more biased and B not agreeing and saying elected officials could be more biased since in Passage B it did say "these officials can sometimes be overzealous" and the jury can be a safety valve and use its own discretion. It also said the legislators may have competing views. While Passage A went on about how "jury nullification is sometimes based on mercy for the defendant, sometimes on dislike for the victim" So I felt C went well with both passages and would create a disagreement.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can maybe dive in to each answer choice more and not overanalyze and look to into it or create assumptions.
Additional notes:
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated E because I really didn't think of the word general when reading it. When I read through I saw words like "too trivial" or 'too extenuating". I felt that would mean laws justified the use of jury nullification due to the possibility of the case being too complicated or in depth. I didn't really think of the word general when answering this question.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose A because I felt like laws wanted jury nullification and justified it because they knew how complicated a case could be and felt jury nullification was a way of resolution. I felt like complicated went well.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can eliminate answers not so quickly. I can see a little how general could be the answer because the lawmakers create "general laws" so they may justify because they are too general and doing their "general" career tasks.
Additional notes:
This one was a bit confusing for me. I did flag it.
Why did I eliminate the right answer?
I eliminated D originally because I felt the argument could be vulnerable to criticism for the fact that they weren't considering other factors as to why cars without air bags have less of a statistic for being involved in accidents. I was mainly looking at that when deciding my answer and D didn't originally match what I was looking for which is why I originally eliminated it.
Why did I choose this wrong answer?
I chose B because I felt like it was saying what I was thinking. I felt the argument was just assuming that there cars with airbags are no safer without any justification to why those statistics are what they are such as their possibly being other safety features that prevent accidents more in the cars without airbags. I felt B explained what I was thinking which is why I chose it.
What can I do better next time to get this right?
I can not be so tunnel vision on what I'm looking for and more carefully analyze the answer choices one by one.
Additional notes:
I now see why D can be right though, I did choose on my blind review. I originally wasn't considering the aspect of D and was tunnel vision on my own vision which is why I at first chose B.