@somanglee239718 said:

I think you'd be better off focusing on the specific experience you think is the most impactful, even if it's from before college. I'm no expert, but from my understanding, it's fine to talk about a past experience as long as you show how it's still relevant to your life or how it's shaped who you are now. UChicago Law has examples of "admissions essays that worked." In the first one, the author describes an experience that seems to be from high school and then in the last paragraph, describes how it's still relevant now.

Link to UChicago essays: https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/their-own-words-admissions-essays-worked

Thank you for your comment and the link! My essay and the first essay do have a lot of things in common, and it comforts me to know that her essay also does not address anything about higher education either. I do feel more comfortable sticking with my current focus, and I'm not sure if I would be able to write a compelling description of my years at college either. Thanks again!

A is kind of flipped. It is absolutely necessary that making a promise is counts as the "ought."

Or else the counterexample falls apart. So you can think about a promise being a subset of the "ought" superset or as promise → ought.

But that does not mean "ought failed → promise failed." This is not the contrapositive of promise → ought.

The correct contrapositive is that if it's not ought, then it's not a promise.

Failing of a promise, and something not being a promise to begin with are two different things.

Kudos to the writers of this question.

Completely bypassed C thinking it's taken care of with "the similar illnesses".

But the stim isn't saying the two hospitals only treat the similar illnesses, but rather that the recovery rate for the similar illnesses are similar.

I conflated P1 and P2 in my head.

Went into the answer choices thinking I need to something that questions that 'trauma is the cause for high cortisol level'.

I picked B because it attributes a specific use for cortisol, which complicates the whole picture.

Even though I didn't understand how exactly B weakens, it was providing an additional information that made me question that cortisol level is simply higher due to trauma.

What is the paradox that you're seeing in the stimulus?

#help (Added by Admin)

It was breezy for 99% of the time. My internet did disconnect two times, but each came back within 10 seconds and I was not super distracted by it.

I believe I've PMed everyone. Let me know if I missed you!

Thank you so much for this neat summary!

When I reached them about it vis email, they said we couldn't. Whether it's Flex or not, you have to physically be in that country you are registered for.

The very long causal chain reminds me of 71.1.12.

I learned from that question that even if A caused B, and B caused C, you can't always say A caused C.

E is the only answer choice that doesn't jump around the chain of causality, but only talks about the causality between strong El Nino and draught (supported in the stim).

If this makes you feel any better, my LR started suffering significantly from PT82 and onwards too. It sucked and I didn't completely recover from it, but you're not alone!

I started to notice that the language in LR for the latest tests seem a little different and requires a bit more assumption to get to the right answer. I remember some questions that included sentences in the stim that sounded relevant, but just being huge distractors instead. It seems like they reward really really meticulous reading more than ever, and having less of the cookie cutter answer choices. And with the exams being Flex, some tests were from earlier years' undisclosed tests, so the latest trends in LR might not even be applicable. Try not to stress out too much!

Here's my two reasons to eliminate E!

1. Is it true that Mexican American writers are concerned that the importance of Mexico WILL BE diminished? Here, I believe that they're talking about the importance of Mexico IN GENERAL. Like you said, the importance of Mexico FOR THE MEXICAN AMERICAN WRITERS could be diminishing as they create a new identity by combining the contemporary social realities of the US. But there's no evidence here of the Mexican American writers are concerned about the importance of Mexico decreasing in general (maybe politically, economically, socially).

2. So let's say that the first reason doesn't work for you, and you still think that the importance of Mexico is tied to the perception of the writers. Here, the author believes that what's so great about the Mexican American writers is how they forged a new identity. Like you said, the writers are recognizing the diminishing importance. Their writing reflects elements of both Mexico and the US. The diminishing importance is precisely what allows the forging of the new identity, which enriches Mexican American lit instead of being impoverished as a result.

Hope this helps!!

I had a really hard time choosing between A and C. Picked A in first run, then changed to C last minute. I changed it back to A during BR.

I did underline the word 'unique', but I didn't realize that unique plant = unique pollen. I thought two different unique plants could have the same pollen, which made C a lot more attractive than it should have been.

most realistic (most truthful) =/= the best (most beautiful)

-------------------------------------------------------------------

truth =/= beauty

Interested. Averaging around 167 and -2 ~ -5 on LR!

Saw that we need the P → C, but I overlooked E for too long because I didn't think in contrapositive.

Contrapositive!!!

I had the same doubt as you, but here's how I've reconciled.

In the stimulus, the only premise we get for the conclusion (this practice should be acceptable) is the prevention of price rise.

This is translated to price rise → acceptable. Could you agree with this unstated assumption? If yes, then let's look at E.

Yes, your negation of E is correct. Where to focus is the "NOT ALL" bit. This completely wrecks the argument because the whole stimulus is dependent on the P → C link. In other words, ALL P are C. Even one counterexample of that wrecks the argument.

Since the unstated assumption is that ALL practices that fall under the umbrella are acceptable, it can't let any one such practice slip through. Hope this helps!

You can extend at 'Extensions' under the 'Course' tab.

If you found C) attractive, you could have brought in your outside assumption that if something is false, it's rational not to pursue that thing. Fell for this trap during timed condition.

Thank you for this very detailed post!

Just got done w the international flex.

LR (26) - RC - LG

LR included questions about breast milk, mountain climbing??

RC was drilling for waste disposal, tricksters, plagiarism (comp; it was suuuper hard and I basically guessed all 7 questions), and civil vs. criminal law

LG: playing for concert? (jazz, orchestra, solo), morning afternoon and night shift was the last game

Overall LR felt fair, and LG on the easier side

w/ super hard RC for me.

Fellow intl' flex takers pls share your sentiments!!

Yup it's how many you could get wrong to get 170.

I chose C because I overlooked the referential phrasing: "this relationship". C is irrelevant because we are already talking about elderly Singaporeans of Indian ethnicity who regularly eat curry vs. who don't. The fact that most Indian Singaporeans eat curry regularly doesn't matter!!!