Apparently there have been some, uh, issues regarding my use of the noun "stuff." In my post about the myriad inaccuracies present in the Writing tests of Gruber's PSAT book, I dared to write the following sentence:
There IS lots of stuff that the College Board doesn't test or only tests rarely.
Now, a couple of people have objected -- in less than polite terms, I should add -- to my use of a singular verb in that sentence, on the grounds that the word "stuff" is actually plural. Now granted, the sentence is casual and a bit awkward, but it's not actually wrong. Had I written, "There is lots of things that the College doesn't test or only tests rarely," though, that would have been incorrect.
I believe the confusion is stemming from "stuff's" status as a uncountable or collective noun -- that is, it
represents more than one thing and, in standard usage, has no plural form (technically, "stuffs" does exist, but it's rarely used in American English and even more rarely outside of particular and slightly archaic contexts, e.g. "foodstuffs").
In terms of meaning, however, "stuff" is used interchangeably with "things." The difference is that "things" is countable: you can have two things, five things, twenty-seven things, etc. "Stuff" is not countable. You cannot have two stuffs or five stuffs or twenty-seven stuffs. (Just writing that makes me feel like I'm in a Dr. Seuss book!) And for that reason, you use "a lot" or "much" rather than "many" when qualifying "stuff" -- "a lot" and "much" are used for non-quantifiable amounts, and "many" is used for quantifiable amounts.
Now, the interesting thing is that there is actually a serious philosophical/linguistic debate going on over the quality of collective nouns. Although they take singular verbs (as anyone who has ever missed a collective noun question on the SAT can probably attest), they're conceptually closer to being plural.
None of that matters, in standard usage, however.
One should not say this: There are too much stuff in this room. Or: There are too much stuffs in this room. That's just wrong.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Sunday, August 28, 2011
SAT Grammar vs. ACT Grammar
If you're still on the fence about whether you should take the SAT or the ACT, or if you've been prepping for one test all along and are thinking of taking the other one, here's a very general overview of what you should know about the grammar for each exam:
SAT
The SAT places a very heavy emphasis on the following:
-Subject-verb agreement
-Pronoun agreement
-Verb tense (particularly various forms of the past tense)
-Parallel Structure
-Modification (dangling and misplaced)
And tests the following frequently as well:
-Idiomatic phrasing (prepositions and gerunds vs. infinitives)
-Adjective and adverb usage
-Comparisons
-Logical relationships between clauses (conjunctions)
-Relative pronouns (who, which, in which, etc.)
Diction and Redundancy problems are tested rarely.
Punctuation is covered only minimally: the only two punctuation marks tested are the comma and the semicolon. The former is only tested in regard to using coordinating (FANBOYS) conjunctions to join independent clauses, and to creating non-essential clauses within a sentence. The latter is tested only in regard to joining independent clauses and before certain conjunctive adverbs (however, therefore, moreover, consequently), never to break up excessively length sentences.
Dashes, apostrophes, and colons are not explicitly covered.
For the most part, the SAT tests various grammar rules in isolated sentences. Only in the Fixing Paragraphs section (6 questions) does context come into play. While this does make SAT Writing simpler in some regards, the sentences are also more complex and contain more constructions that high school students are likely to be unfamiliar with (and thus likely to erroneously believe are incorrect). The "No error" option, particularly in the Error-Identification section, means that many test-takers find this section of the SAT to be very tricky.
ACT
The biggest difference between the SAT and and the ACT is the format. All ACT questions are presented in the context of a passage, forcing students to pay close attention to context and to employ both reading and writing skills simultaneously. An answer that is grammatically correct may thus not be the right answer if it is inconsistent with the style or or tense of the surrounding sentences, or does not logically fit in with the information presented in the paragraph or passage in which it appears. In comparison to SAT sentence, which often deal with literary or historical themes, ACT passages tend to focus on more quotidian matters.
Strictly in terms of grammar, however, the ACT is a more punctuation-oriented test than is the SAT. Commas are not only tested extensively in relation to independent and non-essential clauses but also in relation to dependent clauses and adjectives.
Test-takers are also required to identify the incorrect use of commas in many more ways than on the SAT: between compound subjects and objects, between multiple adjectives, before prepositional phrases, between subjects and verbs, and before relative clauses with and without "that" (usually the most difficult for test-takers to identify).
Other punctuation marks tested include the following:
-Semicolons (to separate independent clauses and before the conjunctive adverb "however")
-Colons (before lists and explanations)
-Dashes (to set off non-essential information and explanations)
-Apostrophes (its vs. it's, etc.)
Common non-punctuation concepts tested include:
-Redundancy
-Logical relationship:
-Subject-verb agreement (only a couple of questions per test at the most, usually in the form of subject-prepositional phrase-verb)
-Verb tense and form (often context-dependent)
-Pronoun agreement
-Adjective vs. adverb
-Dangling and misplaced modifiers (only a couple of questions per test)
-Clarity and conciseness
-Diction and register (too casual vs. appropriate for a formal piece of writing)
In short, there is actually a substantial area of overlap between the two tests. Each has its own quirks (some people who are used to taking the SAT find the constant back-and-forth of the ACT disconcerting at first), but the majority of the material covered is similar. Deciding which test to focus on is ultimately a matter of figuring out which one feels more comfortable.
SAT
The SAT places a very heavy emphasis on the following:
-Subject-verb agreement
-Pronoun agreement
-Verb tense (particularly various forms of the past tense)
-Parallel Structure
-Modification (dangling and misplaced)
And tests the following frequently as well:
-Idiomatic phrasing (prepositions and gerunds vs. infinitives)
-Adjective and adverb usage
-Comparisons
-Logical relationships between clauses (conjunctions)
-Relative pronouns (who, which, in which, etc.)
Diction and Redundancy problems are tested rarely.
Punctuation is covered only minimally: the only two punctuation marks tested are the comma and the semicolon. The former is only tested in regard to using coordinating (FANBOYS) conjunctions to join independent clauses, and to creating non-essential clauses within a sentence. The latter is tested only in regard to joining independent clauses and before certain conjunctive adverbs (however, therefore, moreover, consequently), never to break up excessively length sentences.
Dashes, apostrophes, and colons are not explicitly covered.
For the most part, the SAT tests various grammar rules in isolated sentences. Only in the Fixing Paragraphs section (6 questions) does context come into play. While this does make SAT Writing simpler in some regards, the sentences are also more complex and contain more constructions that high school students are likely to be unfamiliar with (and thus likely to erroneously believe are incorrect). The "No error" option, particularly in the Error-Identification section, means that many test-takers find this section of the SAT to be very tricky.
ACT
The biggest difference between the SAT and and the ACT is the format. All ACT questions are presented in the context of a passage, forcing students to pay close attention to context and to employ both reading and writing skills simultaneously. An answer that is grammatically correct may thus not be the right answer if it is inconsistent with the style or or tense of the surrounding sentences, or does not logically fit in with the information presented in the paragraph or passage in which it appears. In comparison to SAT sentence, which often deal with literary or historical themes, ACT passages tend to focus on more quotidian matters.
Strictly in terms of grammar, however, the ACT is a more punctuation-oriented test than is the SAT. Commas are not only tested extensively in relation to independent and non-essential clauses but also in relation to dependent clauses and adjectives.
Test-takers are also required to identify the incorrect use of commas in many more ways than on the SAT: between compound subjects and objects, between multiple adjectives, before prepositional phrases, between subjects and verbs, and before relative clauses with and without "that" (usually the most difficult for test-takers to identify).
Other punctuation marks tested include the following:
-Semicolons (to separate independent clauses and before the conjunctive adverb "however")
-Colons (before lists and explanations)
-Dashes (to set off non-essential information and explanations)
-Apostrophes (its vs. it's, etc.)
Common non-punctuation concepts tested include:
-Redundancy
-Logical relationship:
-Subject-verb agreement (only a couple of questions per test at the most, usually in the form of subject-prepositional phrase-verb)
-Verb tense and form (often context-dependent)
-Pronoun agreement
-Adjective vs. adverb
-Dangling and misplaced modifiers (only a couple of questions per test)
-Clarity and conciseness
-Diction and register (too casual vs. appropriate for a formal piece of writing)
In short, there is actually a substantial area of overlap between the two tests. Each has its own quirks (some people who are used to taking the SAT find the constant back-and-forth of the ACT disconcerting at first), but the majority of the material covered is similar. Deciding which test to focus on is ultimately a matter of figuring out which one feels more comfortable.
Saturday, August 27, 2011
Worry about when you DO need a comma, not when you don't (ACT English)
I think it's fair to say that the ACT really, really likes to test commas. Having never done a statistical analysis, I'm not going to make any conclusive statements about just how many questions per ACT English test deal with comma usage in some form, but I'd wager that it's somewhere around 15-20%. At any rate, it's a lot.
But while the ACT does test commas in many different ways, the reality is that you don't have to know every last rule governing comma usage. As a matter of fact, you're generally better off just mastering the few ways that commas *should* be used -- and if a particular comma doesn't conform to one of those ways, chances are it shouldn't be there.
First, though, a warning: a lot of people learn in school that a comma indicates a place where you would naturally pause in a sentence. While this may be true in some cases, it is not true 100% of the time, and relying on your ear to judge whether a comma a particular comma is correct on the ACT can be disastrous.
So that said, here are the contexts tested on the ACT that require you to absolutely, conclusively use a comma:
1) Before a FANBOYS (coordinating) conjunction when joining two independent clauses
Example: London is a very old city, and it contains buildings from many different eras.
2) To set off a non-essential clause that can be removed from a sentence
Example: London, which is a very old city, contains buildings from many different eras.
3) Between items in a list
Example: London contains buildings from time periods including the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and the Victorian era.
4) To separate multiple adjectives whose order could be reversed
Example: London contains many interesting, eclectic neighborhoods, OR London contains many eclectic, interesting neighborhoods.
So when you see a comma, ask yourself whether it's being used in one of the above ways. If it isn't, you can be pretty certain that you should choose an answer that doesn't include it.
But while the ACT does test commas in many different ways, the reality is that you don't have to know every last rule governing comma usage. As a matter of fact, you're generally better off just mastering the few ways that commas *should* be used -- and if a particular comma doesn't conform to one of those ways, chances are it shouldn't be there.
First, though, a warning: a lot of people learn in school that a comma indicates a place where you would naturally pause in a sentence. While this may be true in some cases, it is not true 100% of the time, and relying on your ear to judge whether a comma a particular comma is correct on the ACT can be disastrous.
So that said, here are the contexts tested on the ACT that require you to absolutely, conclusively use a comma:
1) Before a FANBOYS (coordinating) conjunction when joining two independent clauses
Example: London is a very old city, and it contains buildings from many different eras.
2) To set off a non-essential clause that can be removed from a sentence
Example: London, which is a very old city, contains buildings from many different eras.
3) Between items in a list
Example: London contains buildings from time periods including the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and the Victorian era.
4) To separate multiple adjectives whose order could be reversed
Example: London contains many interesting, eclectic neighborhoods, OR London contains many eclectic, interesting neighborhoods.
So when you see a comma, ask yourself whether it's being used in one of the above ways. If it isn't, you can be pretty certain that you should choose an answer that doesn't include it.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Dealing with Rhetoric Questions on ACT English
Like the Fixing Paragraphs section of the SAT, the ACT English section tests both reading and writing skills simultaneously. And as on the SAT, it is necessary to change your approach based on the type of question you are being asked -- while grammar questions require you to recall specific rules (subjects and verbs must agree even if they are separated by prepositional phrases; a colon must always be preceded by a full, stand-alone thought; semicolons are grammatically identical to periods, etc.), rhetoric questions require you to apply specific concepts about how paragraphs and essays work: what makes an effective transition (what is the logical relationship between two ideas?) ; how a paragraph is most logically developed; and what constitutes relevant vs. irrelevant information.
And unlike grammar questions, rhetoric questions can be absolutely, perfectly grammatically correct yet still be wrong. You can't be fooled by how they sound -- you actually have to think (yes, think) about whether they go along with the main idea of the passage or paragraph in question.
In short, they're reading questions, not writing questions. And because this is the case, you have to treat them like reading questions. That means going back to the passage, figuring out the point of the section you're being asked to deal with, and figuring out what sort of information would be relevant.
One of the biggest mistakes I consistently see people make on rhetoric questions is to start by looking at the answers (and assuming they'll remember the content well enough to sort everything out) rather than going back to the passage and working out the answer for themselves beforehand.
When most people read the passages as they're working through the questions, though, they're usually only really paying attention to grammar rather than content. They're not thinking about main ideas and supporting information but rather about whether that comma in #27 was really supposed to be there. So when they're asked to insert/delete information, they don't really have the full context for it.
Remember: the readings on the English section are pretty simple. It's usually not too hard to figure out their main idea and thus whether a particular sentence or part of a sentence should be used to support it. Yes, it may take a whole 30 seconds, but that's time better spent actually figuring out the answer than staring at two options and trying to decide between them. So to sum up:
1) Read the question and figure out the focus of the information you're being asked to insert or delete.
2) Go back to the passage and read as much as you need to figure out what its main idea (or the main idea of a paragraph) is. If you're dealing with a transition question, you may need to jump ahead and read things you haven't read yet in order to figure out what the focus the paragraph in question is.
3) Ask yourself whether the information in question is relevant to that main idea and why/why not.
4) Look at the answers. The right one should pretty much pop out at you.
And unlike grammar questions, rhetoric questions can be absolutely, perfectly grammatically correct yet still be wrong. You can't be fooled by how they sound -- you actually have to think (yes, think) about whether they go along with the main idea of the passage or paragraph in question.
In short, they're reading questions, not writing questions. And because this is the case, you have to treat them like reading questions. That means going back to the passage, figuring out the point of the section you're being asked to deal with, and figuring out what sort of information would be relevant.
One of the biggest mistakes I consistently see people make on rhetoric questions is to start by looking at the answers (and assuming they'll remember the content well enough to sort everything out) rather than going back to the passage and working out the answer for themselves beforehand.
When most people read the passages as they're working through the questions, though, they're usually only really paying attention to grammar rather than content. They're not thinking about main ideas and supporting information but rather about whether that comma in #27 was really supposed to be there. So when they're asked to insert/delete information, they don't really have the full context for it.
Remember: the readings on the English section are pretty simple. It's usually not too hard to figure out their main idea and thus whether a particular sentence or part of a sentence should be used to support it. Yes, it may take a whole 30 seconds, but that's time better spent actually figuring out the answer than staring at two options and trying to decide between them. So to sum up:
1) Read the question and figure out the focus of the information you're being asked to insert or delete.
2) Go back to the passage and read as much as you need to figure out what its main idea (or the main idea of a paragraph) is. If you're dealing with a transition question, you may need to jump ahead and read things you haven't read yet in order to figure out what the focus the paragraph in question is.
3) Ask yourself whether the information in question is relevant to that main idea and why/why not.
4) Look at the answers. The right one should pretty much pop out at you.
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
A Critique of the Writing Tests in Princeton Review's "Cracking the SAT"
All this tearing apart of Gruber's PSAT book got me thinking. Why not do a systematic critique of the Writing tests in all the major commercially-produced test prep books? After all, I've spent a fair amount of time spouting off about how awful they are. So I'm willing to temporarily put aside my aversion to cliché and put my money where my mouth is, so to speak.
Having been granted some unexpected free time, I decided to take a trip to the bookstore and spend some quality time with the test prep section, which basically involved taking up residence in the middle of the SAT aisle and forcing people to step over my legs for an hour or so. (They don't have tables, what was I supposed to do?) While I'm sure it was a minor inconvenience for them, nothing could possibly compare to the self-restraint I had to exercise in order to NOT tell the poor, unsuspecting teenagers who came to look for SAT prep books that pretty much everything other than the College Board book is of minimal help at best. Not that they would have believed me.
Anyway, I digress. I started with the Princeton Review: Cracking the SAT. True to its "Joe Bloggs" approach, PR aims at the middle. I'll admit that it's probably not that awful a book to get if you're scoring in the mid-500s and are aiming to get up 50-70 points or so. Some of the questions are reasonably accurate, the key word of course being some. On the whole, the tone of the questions comes considerably closer to that of the SAT than do the questions in Gruber's -- at least there's some attempt to be equal opportunity!
But there's also plenty of stuff that gets left out or that doesn't get done quite right.
First, the superficial:
SAT Error-ID questions are always three or four lines long ("No error" may go onto a fifth line, but the actual sentence never does), and Fixing Sentences questions are between two and four. (No, I don't go around paying attention to these things for fun -- I'm writing tests, and I want them to look right!) PR sentences are too long in some places, too long in others. The ones that are too short tend to have errors that stick out too obviously; the ones that are too long tend to sound too deliberately convoluted.
In addition, the register is actually too lofty in certain questions. For example, on p. 506, #14, the word "ascertain" is underlined. The College Board tends to avoid using, well, SAT-level vocabulary on Writing sections. It's a grammar and style test, not a vocabulary test. They don't usually try to trick people with hard words.
And now the more serious errors and omissions:
-Semicolon usage is barely tested in Fixing Sentences, and when it is tested, it appears only in conjunction with "however." Therefore, moreover, and consequently -- the other three conjunctions that the SAT tests with semicolons -- do not appear. (On the other hand, there are way too many semicolons in Error-ID sentences, which virtually never contain them on the real test.)
-Too few dangling modifier questions in Fixing Sentences; too few gerunds and comma splices in wrong answer choices.
-No questions test non-essential clauses (or at least none that I saw). There is pretty much always an FS question (or two, or three) that tests this.
-No prepositional phrase -- verb -- subject questions.
-Only a handful of word pairs are tested; hardly any word pairs are tested in conjunction with parallel structure.
-Too few adjective vs. adverb, gerund vs. infinitive, would vs. will, and simple past vs. present perfect questions in Error-IDs. In addition, questions testing collective nouns are virtually absent, and tense questions do not include dates or time periods.
-On p. 645, #10, "it's vs. its" is tested. To the best of my knowledge, this is one distinction that has never been tested on the SAT.
-The College Board does not really test pronoun case in the context of comparatives (e.g. "He is not as good an athlete as they" vs. "He is not as good an athlete as them"). PR has several of these questions.
Anyway, you get the picture...
Having been granted some unexpected free time, I decided to take a trip to the bookstore and spend some quality time with the test prep section, which basically involved taking up residence in the middle of the SAT aisle and forcing people to step over my legs for an hour or so. (They don't have tables, what was I supposed to do?) While I'm sure it was a minor inconvenience for them, nothing could possibly compare to the self-restraint I had to exercise in order to NOT tell the poor, unsuspecting teenagers who came to look for SAT prep books that pretty much everything other than the College Board book is of minimal help at best. Not that they would have believed me.
Anyway, I digress. I started with the Princeton Review: Cracking the SAT. True to its "Joe Bloggs" approach, PR aims at the middle. I'll admit that it's probably not that awful a book to get if you're scoring in the mid-500s and are aiming to get up 50-70 points or so. Some of the questions are reasonably accurate, the key word of course being some. On the whole, the tone of the questions comes considerably closer to that of the SAT than do the questions in Gruber's -- at least there's some attempt to be equal opportunity!
But there's also plenty of stuff that gets left out or that doesn't get done quite right.
First, the superficial:
SAT Error-ID questions are always three or four lines long ("No error" may go onto a fifth line, but the actual sentence never does), and Fixing Sentences questions are between two and four. (No, I don't go around paying attention to these things for fun -- I'm writing tests, and I want them to look right!) PR sentences are too long in some places, too long in others. The ones that are too short tend to have errors that stick out too obviously; the ones that are too long tend to sound too deliberately convoluted.
In addition, the register is actually too lofty in certain questions. For example, on p. 506, #14, the word "ascertain" is underlined. The College Board tends to avoid using, well, SAT-level vocabulary on Writing sections. It's a grammar and style test, not a vocabulary test. They don't usually try to trick people with hard words.
And now the more serious errors and omissions:
-Semicolon usage is barely tested in Fixing Sentences, and when it is tested, it appears only in conjunction with "however." Therefore, moreover, and consequently -- the other three conjunctions that the SAT tests with semicolons -- do not appear. (On the other hand, there are way too many semicolons in Error-ID sentences, which virtually never contain them on the real test.)
-Too few dangling modifier questions in Fixing Sentences; too few gerunds and comma splices in wrong answer choices.
-No questions test non-essential clauses (or at least none that I saw). There is pretty much always an FS question (or two, or three) that tests this.
-No prepositional phrase -- verb -- subject questions.
-Only a handful of word pairs are tested; hardly any word pairs are tested in conjunction with parallel structure.
-Too few adjective vs. adverb, gerund vs. infinitive, would vs. will, and simple past vs. present perfect questions in Error-IDs. In addition, questions testing collective nouns are virtually absent, and tense questions do not include dates or time periods.
-On p. 645, #10, "it's vs. its" is tested. To the best of my knowledge, this is one distinction that has never been tested on the SAT.
-The College Board does not really test pronoun case in the context of comparatives (e.g. "He is not as good an athlete as they" vs. "He is not as good an athlete as them"). PR has several of these questions.
Anyway, you get the picture...
Sunday, August 21, 2011
In case you were wondering what's actually wrong with Gruber's Writing...
Apparently, I've been challenged. In response to my little rant several days ago about the inaccuracy of Gruber's, someone made the excellent point that a lot of accusations of inaccuracy get thrown around in regard to various books but that there's really no way to judge their validity. So as someone not inclined to make baseless accusations, especially about something as serious as test-prep, I decided to go back through the Gruber's book and compile a random sampling of inaccuracies. I spent about ten minutes and covered two sheets of paper (albeit small ones) with notes. Now, I did not do an exhaustive analysis of every question, so it is possible that there is a little bit more accurate material than what I saw, but still... It's pretty bad.
First, some general observations:
1) The sentences are way too short
Most SAT sentences are about three lines long, occasionally four. They frequently contain multiple clauses and have relatively complex structures. Most Gruberg's sentences are two lines long, sometimes only one. They have much simpler structures that could seriously mislead someone about the level of complexity they'll encounter on the real PSAT.
2) The register and topics are too casual
Part of what makes catching errors in actual (P)SAT sentences so difficult is the relative obscurity of many of the topics for most high schoolers. Tchaikovsky's symphonic setting of the story of Paolo and Francesca? Arguments advanced by feminist critics? Assessing scientific accomplishments? Check to all of these. Random names of (non-famous) people or school-related topics? Occasionally, but usually only in the very easiest questions. Questions that have "I" as the subject? Almost never. Gruber's has a surfeit of the latter two categories and almost none of the former.
3) They do not mention women and minorities
You may laugh at this observation, but the College Board is under a phenomenal amount of pressure to please various special-interest groups. One misstep and they'll be facing millions of dollars in lawsuits. Any test-prep material that does not reflect this fact does not reflect the real test. Gruber's continually contains phrases that revolve around "a man," which is something you will NOT be seeing anytime soon on the PSAT. (Mae Jemison, Maxine Hong Kingston, and Chien-Shiung Wu you will see.) This oversight gives the questions a *very* inauthentic feel and makes Gruber's looks like they couldn't be bothered to do some basic research about what's actually on the test.
Now onto the really serious stuff:
1) There is a serious dearth of subject-verb agreement questions.
This is really major. Subject-verb agreement is the most frequently tested error on the SAT/PSAT. There are lots of questions, particularly lots of questions that contain the structure subject-prepositional phrase-verb. In the couple of sections I looked at, I did not see any of these, nor did I see prepositional phrase-verb-subject sentences, which are often among the hardest the College Board includes.
2) There are lots of other common categories that are barely covered or not covered at all
Word pairs (especially hard word pair/parallelism questions at the end of Fixing Sentences), conjunctions, non-essential clauses, relative pronouns, semicolons and FANBOYS, pronoun case, noun agreement, and adjective vs. adverb barely made an appearance.
Yes, there were lots of antecedent pronoun questions and a bunch of (not very hard) dangling modifier and parallel structure questions. "Which" and "it" without antecedents were covered, but "this" was missing completely. And "this" shows up a whole lot on Fixing sentences.
In addition, the lengths of the answer choices varied too widely -- the CB usually includes answer choices that have only subtle distinctions between them -- and too few wrong answers included gerunds or comma splices.
3) There IS lots of stuff that the College Board doesn't test or only tests rarely
Misplaced modifiers only show up occasionally on College Board tests -- Gruber's has tons of them. They also have several questions tested "affect vs. effect," which to the best of my knowledge has shown up exactly once in several years. They also have questions testing "fewer vs. less" (p. 496 #12); "whomever vs. whichever" (p. 439, #23); "because of vs. due to" (p. 439, #26); and object pronouns (him, them, etc.) vs. possessive pronouns (his, their, etc.) before gerunds. None of these concepts is EVER tested by the College Board.
4) Errors are in the wrong sections and in the wrong places within sections
Suffice it to say that double positives are never tested in Fixing Sentences. Faulty comparison and "hard" word pair/parallelism questions aren't placed at the ends of sections, nor are "hard" subject-verb agreement questions.
I could go on like this ad nauseum, but I suspect that anyone reading this will have had enough by now.
Just keep in mind that I found all of these errors in about ten minutes. I can only imagine what I would have come up with in, say, an hour.
Just to be fair, I have heard that Gruber's is very effective for Math prep. But for Writing... well, I hope you're convinced that you should just stay away.
Friday, August 19, 2011
This and That
On Fixing Sentences, a lot gets made out of the intrinsic wrongness of the word being. Yes, it's awful, yes it's dangerous, yes it's wrong 98% of the time. But it's not the only dangerous word on Fixing Sentences. In fact, I would argue that along with it, which is also wrong a very high percentage of the time, this is probably the next most dangerous word on the Writing section, particularly Fixing sentences. And it really shows up a lot.
If you're looking for a very general rule, here goes:
When this is immediately followed by a noun (e.g. this book, this fact, this idea), it's right; when there's no noun, it's wrong. Usually there won't be a noun.
Now for the explanation.
Like it, this is a singular pronoun, which means that it must refer to a specific singular noun (or pronoun or gerund) that appears in the sentence. If the specific noun to which this refers (the antecedent) does not appear, the sentence is incorrect. For example:
Incorrect: Members of the local government have requested that more traffic lights be installed throughout the city because they believe that this will help to prevent accidents.
What does this refer to? it could refer to the traffic lights, but that's plural. It could also refer to the installation of the traffic lights, but installation is a noun, and only installed, a verb, appears in the sentence.
So there are a couple of ways to fix the sentence. You could provide a plural pronoun that clearly refers to traffic lights:
Correct: The local government has requested the installation of more traffic lights throughout the city because they believe that they will help to prevent accidents.
OR you can simply add a noun after this and specify what it refers to.
Correct: The local government has requested the installation of more traffic lights throughout the city because they believe that this addition will help to prevent accidents.
Now, onto That
Unlike this, that is usually correct when it shows up in a sentence. When it's underlined in Error-IDs, it's usually used this way:
Correct: The local believes that installing more traffic lights throughout the city will help to prevent accidents.
OR
Correct: The additional traffic lights that have recently been installed throughout the city are expected to help prevent accidents.
In the latter case, you might wondering why that rather than which should be used. The short answer is that which is always preceded by a comma and used to set off a non-essential clause (e.g. The additional traffic lights, which have recently been installed throughout the city, are expected to help prevent accidents.) That, on the other hand, is never preceded by a comma.
If you're looking for a very general rule, here goes:
When this is immediately followed by a noun (e.g. this book, this fact, this idea), it's right; when there's no noun, it's wrong. Usually there won't be a noun.
Now for the explanation.
Like it, this is a singular pronoun, which means that it must refer to a specific singular noun (or pronoun or gerund) that appears in the sentence. If the specific noun to which this refers (the antecedent) does not appear, the sentence is incorrect. For example:
Incorrect: Members of the local government have requested that more traffic lights be installed throughout the city because they believe that this will help to prevent accidents.
What does this refer to? it could refer to the traffic lights, but that's plural. It could also refer to the installation of the traffic lights, but installation is a noun, and only installed, a verb, appears in the sentence.
So there are a couple of ways to fix the sentence. You could provide a plural pronoun that clearly refers to traffic lights:
Correct: The local government has requested the installation of more traffic lights throughout the city because they believe that they will help to prevent accidents.
OR you can simply add a noun after this and specify what it refers to.
Correct: The local government has requested the installation of more traffic lights throughout the city because they believe that this addition will help to prevent accidents.
Now, onto That
Unlike this, that is usually correct when it shows up in a sentence. When it's underlined in Error-IDs, it's usually used this way:
Correct: The local believes that installing more traffic lights throughout the city will help to prevent accidents.
OR
Correct: The additional traffic lights that have recently been installed throughout the city are expected to help prevent accidents.
In the latter case, you might wondering why that rather than which should be used. The short answer is that which is always preceded by a comma and used to set off a non-essential clause (e.g. The additional traffic lights, which have recently been installed throughout the city, are expected to help prevent accidents.) That, on the other hand, is never preceded by a comma.
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
If you think answering SAT Writing questions is painful...
Try writing explanations for them.
At a certain point, I realized that there was really no point in publishing a bunch of tests if I wasn't going to write thorough explanations for the answers (duh!). I think I knew it all along, I just didn't want to admit it to myself. Because that is a LOT of work.
Consider this:
49 multiple-choice questions per test
8 tests
49 x 8 = 392
(Look, I did math!)
392 explanations. AND I still have to write Fixing Paragraphs questions for six passages (another 36 questions). At least I got the really hard part over with -- you see, in order to avoid any potential copyright issues, I couldn't just lift the passages from anywhere. I tried asking some of my students for their old papers from, say, eighth grade, but none of it seemed have that ineffably stultifying SAT-like quality. There's a rather substantial difference between how teenagers actually write and how a bunch of adults putting together a test imagine they write.
So as it turned out, I had to write all of the passages myself. Not exactly a thrilling way to spend a weekend, but at least now they're done. All I have to say is, who knew it could take so long to write 15 sentences? When most people look at a typical Fixing Paragraphs passage, their standard reaction is usually something along the lines of, "Wow, what an awful piece of writing." But it's deliberately awful, which is to say that it's only awful insofar as it serves to test particular concepts in particular ways. And writing something that's awful in all the right places and in all the right ways is a lot harder than it looks.
I should know this already. I've been writing tests for more than five years now. But still, to everyone out there studying for the SAT... I feel your pain right now.
At a certain point, I realized that there was really no point in publishing a bunch of tests if I wasn't going to write thorough explanations for the answers (duh!). I think I knew it all along, I just didn't want to admit it to myself. Because that is a LOT of work.
Consider this:
49 multiple-choice questions per test
8 tests
49 x 8 = 392
(Look, I did math!)
392 explanations. AND I still have to write Fixing Paragraphs questions for six passages (another 36 questions). At least I got the really hard part over with -- you see, in order to avoid any potential copyright issues, I couldn't just lift the passages from anywhere. I tried asking some of my students for their old papers from, say, eighth grade, but none of it seemed have that ineffably stultifying SAT-like quality. There's a rather substantial difference between how teenagers actually write and how a bunch of adults putting together a test imagine they write.
So as it turned out, I had to write all of the passages myself. Not exactly a thrilling way to spend a weekend, but at least now they're done. All I have to say is, who knew it could take so long to write 15 sentences? When most people look at a typical Fixing Paragraphs passage, their standard reaction is usually something along the lines of, "Wow, what an awful piece of writing." But it's deliberately awful, which is to say that it's only awful insofar as it serves to test particular concepts in particular ways. And writing something that's awful in all the right places and in all the right ways is a lot harder than it looks.
I should know this already. I've been writing tests for more than five years now. But still, to everyone out there studying for the SAT... I feel your pain right now.
Sunday, August 14, 2011
The Question of the Day is Taking (Another) Hiatus
A couple of days ago, I was doing PSAT prep with someone who happened to have a Gruber's book lying on his desk. Given that looking through commercially-produced SAT prep books and trashing their total, utter inaccuracy is one of my unofficial hobbies (yes, I do lead a very exciting life!), I promptly flipped to the Writing section and started scanning through the questions. Almost instantaneously, I had two reactions:
1) I was horrified.
There were maybe two or three questions that accurately reflected the material on a College Board-produced test. I could not even fathom the level of shock someone who had been prepping with that book would get when they encountered the actual test.
2) I was inspired
You see, about six months ago, when I was in the throes of desperately trying to finish The Ultimate Guide to SAT Grammar, I got the insane idea that I would also write a test book to accompany it. I got about 3/4 the way done with it before I realized that I just needed to focus on the guide if I wanted to get it done anytime in the next decade.
After I saw those Gruber's questions, though, I understood why people are so desperate for accurate prep material. After all, if you don't want to read through a whole huge book and just want to do lots and lots of practice material, you're pretty much stuck once you finish the Blue Book and the online course, although I have some issues with the latter. So why not just go ahead and publish my tests? Perhaps I flatter myself, but I'd like to think that they come closer to what the College Board is doing than just about anything out there. (I'll put up a preview asap so that you can judge for yourself.) At any rate, I KNOW they're closer than Gruber's!
So the bottom line is that for the next week or two, I'm just going to be trying to finish up my test book, and since there's a limit to how much SAT Writing material I can produce on a daily basis, I'm going to have to temporarily sacrifice the QOD. My apologies, but if you're looking for more Writing material to practice with, you may thank me eventually;)
1) I was horrified.
There were maybe two or three questions that accurately reflected the material on a College Board-produced test. I could not even fathom the level of shock someone who had been prepping with that book would get when they encountered the actual test.
2) I was inspired
You see, about six months ago, when I was in the throes of desperately trying to finish The Ultimate Guide to SAT Grammar, I got the insane idea that I would also write a test book to accompany it. I got about 3/4 the way done with it before I realized that I just needed to focus on the guide if I wanted to get it done anytime in the next decade.
After I saw those Gruber's questions, though, I understood why people are so desperate for accurate prep material. After all, if you don't want to read through a whole huge book and just want to do lots and lots of practice material, you're pretty much stuck once you finish the Blue Book and the online course, although I have some issues with the latter. So why not just go ahead and publish my tests? Perhaps I flatter myself, but I'd like to think that they come closer to what the College Board is doing than just about anything out there. (I'll put up a preview asap so that you can judge for yourself.) At any rate, I KNOW they're closer than Gruber's!
So the bottom line is that for the next week or two, I'm just going to be trying to finish up my test book, and since there's a limit to how much SAT Writing material I can produce on a daily basis, I'm going to have to temporarily sacrifice the QOD. My apologies, but if you're looking for more Writing material to practice with, you may thank me eventually;)
Negating Negatives (SAT Sentence Completions)
Sometimes the hardest sentence completions aren't always the ones with the hardest words. Instead, they're the ones that have lots of common words as answer choices but make your head spin when you try to figure out the convoluted logic of the sentence. The words might be straightforward, but the relationships aren't.
One common kind of sentence that tends to create this issue is the one that contains words like "not" or "limited to" -- sentences that contain positive or negative ideas but that require you to fill in words that are exactly the opposite.
Although they may appear relatively simple at first glance, it is often necessary to "map out" their logic in order to be absolutely certain of the answer, just as you would do with a particularly complex Critical Reading question. Or, for that matter, a math question.
One question that many of my students have had trouble with is the following:
After the First World War, a large decrease in Mexican immigration to the United States occurred because the wartime ---- of immigration restriction was ----.
(A) waiver. .rescinded
(B) enactment. .overturned
(C) abolition. .endorsed
(D) repeal. .guaranteed
(E) execution. .relaxed
The sentence essentially requires us to figure out 1) whether the US restricted immigration during World War I, and 2) whether it was continue or ended afterwards.
Let's start with what we know for sure:
After WWI, Mexican immigration to the US decreased
-Now, if immigration decreased after WWI, that means it was higher during Word War I.
-However: the sentence asks us to think about immigration during WWI in terms of restriction -- exactly the opposite of how we instinctively want to think of it here.
-Let's think about logically: if immigration was higher during World War I (positive idea), then restrictions (negative) must have been lowered (negative) at that time. So for the first blank, we're looking for something that tells us that the restrictions went down.
-We're just going to look at the first side for a word that indicates that.
(A) waiver? yes, that indicates the restrictions went down
(B) enactment? no, that's the opposite
(C) abolition? yes, that works
(D) repeal? yes, that works
(E) execution? no, that's the opposite
-So now we're down to A, C, and D. Not bad, but we need to look at the other side.
-Second side: Now, we already know that if immigration restrictions went down during WWI, they must have gone up afterward because immigration went down. So for the second blank, we're looking for something that tells us that that the restriction (negative) was stopped (negative).
(A) rescinded? yes
(C) endorsed? no
(D) guaranteed? no
That leaves us with one possibility: A
One common kind of sentence that tends to create this issue is the one that contains words like "not" or "limited to" -- sentences that contain positive or negative ideas but that require you to fill in words that are exactly the opposite.
Although they may appear relatively simple at first glance, it is often necessary to "map out" their logic in order to be absolutely certain of the answer, just as you would do with a particularly complex Critical Reading question. Or, for that matter, a math question.
One question that many of my students have had trouble with is the following:
After the First World War, a large decrease in Mexican immigration to the United States occurred because the wartime ---- of immigration restriction was ----.
(A) waiver. .rescinded
(B) enactment. .overturned
(C) abolition. .endorsed
(D) repeal. .guaranteed
(E) execution. .relaxed
The sentence essentially requires us to figure out 1) whether the US restricted immigration during World War I, and 2) whether it was continue or ended afterwards.
Let's start with what we know for sure:
After WWI, Mexican immigration to the US decreased
-Now, if immigration decreased after WWI, that means it was higher during Word War I.
-However: the sentence asks us to think about immigration during WWI in terms of restriction -- exactly the opposite of how we instinctively want to think of it here.
-Let's think about logically: if immigration was higher during World War I (positive idea), then restrictions (negative) must have been lowered (negative) at that time. So for the first blank, we're looking for something that tells us that the restrictions went down.
-We're just going to look at the first side for a word that indicates that.
(A) waiver? yes, that indicates the restrictions went down
(B) enactment? no, that's the opposite
(C) abolition? yes, that works
(D) repeal? yes, that works
(E) execution? no, that's the opposite
-So now we're down to A, C, and D. Not bad, but we need to look at the other side.
-Second side: Now, we already know that if immigration restrictions went down during WWI, they must have gone up afterward because immigration went down. So for the second blank, we're looking for something that tells us that that the restriction (negative) was stopped (negative).
(A) rescinded? yes
(C) endorsed? no
(D) guaranteed? no
That leaves us with one possibility: A
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Learn All the Word Pairs (SAT Writing)
There are a few word pairs that show up frequently on the SAT, and usually errors involving them are relatively easy to spot. It's not so hard to remember that neither always goes with nor, as always goes with as, and not only always goes with but also.
These aren't the only word pairs tested, however. In reality, there are a number of word pairs that are tested (though some do appear more frequently than others), and quick recognition of them can help you spot errors almost instantaneously.
In approximate descending order of frequency, they are:
-Either...Or
-Neither...Nor
-Not only...But Also
-As...As
-Both...And
-Between…And
-More...Than/Less..Than
-So/Such…That
-Just as…So
-From...To
-At once...And
-No sooner...Than (very rare)
These aren't the only word pairs tested, however. In reality, there are a number of word pairs that are tested (though some do appear more frequently than others), and quick recognition of them can help you spot errors almost instantaneously.
In approximate descending order of frequency, they are:
-Either...Or
-Neither...Nor
-Not only...But Also
-As...As
-Both...And
-Between…And
-More...Than/Less..Than
-So/Such…That
-Just as…So
-From...To
-At once...And
-No sooner...Than (very rare)
I realize that this looks like a long list -- but consider them additional vocabulary words. It especially pays to learn all of them cold, even the more esoteric ones, because when they show up in Fixing Sentences, often in the last couple of questions, they tend to be paired correctly in only one answer, two at absolute most.
So, for example, if you see "just as" in the non-underlined portion of the sentence, you know that the correct answer absolutely must contain "so" -- there's just no other option. And knowing what you're looking for "so" means that it's the only word you have to hunt for. Using that shortcut allows you to skip reading the full answers and not have to worry about how awful all of the options sound (and sometimes they'll all sound horrendous).
For instance:
Just as flowers attract bees and birds with their colors and scents, so certain rainforest vines attract nectar-feeding bat with their sounds.
(A) so certain rainforest vines attract nectar-feeding bat with their sounds
(B) certain rainforest vines attracting nectar-feeding bat with their sounds
(C) nectar-feeding bats are also attracted by certain rain forest vines
(D) certain rainforest vines, which attract nectar-feeding bats with their sounds
(E) and certain rainforest vines will attract nectar-feeding bat with their sounds
Regardless of how terrible choice A sounds, it's the only option that contains "so." By default, it must therefore be correct.
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
Go Back to the Passage and Read!
Perhaps some of you have heard of Adam Mansbach's surprise best-seller Go the F**k to Sleep. The parent of a toddler, Mansbach wrote the book, which promptly rose to the top of the New York Times best-seller list, to convey the sheer hell of living with a three year-old who simply will not go to sleep.
While I don't deal much with toddlers, there is one frustration I confront regularly that makes me believe I understand Mansbach's exact sentiment -- that is, a student's total and utter unwillingness to go back to a Critical Reading passage and read. And at those moments, after I've said five or six times, "what does the author say?" only to be met with repeated blank stares, or "well, I feel like he's saying...", I do in fact want to say: "Go back to the f**ing passage and tell me, as literally as you possibly can, what it actually says. Not what you think you remember it says. Not what you feel it might be saying. Not what it makes you think of. What is actually says."
I have lost track of the number of times a student, upon discovering that the answer is, say, E rather than B, proclaims that he or she doesn't really feel that the scenario described in E occurs in the passage. At which point I promptly go back to the passage and read an entire paragraph's worth of exactly what was described in E. It's usually so obvious that the student can't even argue.
So newsflash: going back and reading very carefully is the only way to be 100% certain that your answer checks out. If you are not willing to do this, the bottom line is that your score will most likely not improve dramatically (100+ points) regardless of how many practice tests you take. Let me reiterate: if you refuse to go back and read, you have virtually zero chance of getting a score above 750 and a very minimal chance of getting one above 700.
Maybe you've heard about the 700 wall? This is often what it comes down to. I've had many students who came to me scoring in the 600s. Those who were willing to accept that they needed to go back and check everything out -- and who saw that they actually got the answer that way, rather than just playing Russian roulette with process of elimination -- ended up with scores in the 700s, in some cases very high in the 700s.
The ones who kept on insisting they didn't need to check, who consistently refused to try to see the relationship between the correct answer and the specific wording in the text, and who remained perennially stuck on what they thought rather than trying to figure out what the author was saying, simply could not break 700 no matter how hard they tried. It was always hit or miss, not steady improvement. Yes, they got most of the answers right, but they also always got just enough answers wrong so that it really hurt their score. And some of them took literally dozens more practice tests than my higher-scoring students did -- even if both had started out in approximately the same place.
Now, if you're already consistently going back to the passage and having trouble understanding what it's actually saying or are not certain how to locate the information necessary to answer the questions (not necessarily in the line numbers given), that's a different story. You need to either work on building your literal comprehension (learning vocabulary and/or familiarizing yourself with "serious" college/adult-level writing) or on learning the types of words and phrases that you need to look out for.
But if neither of things is an issue for you, just go back and read the f**g passage. Trust me. It works.
While I don't deal much with toddlers, there is one frustration I confront regularly that makes me believe I understand Mansbach's exact sentiment -- that is, a student's total and utter unwillingness to go back to a Critical Reading passage and read. And at those moments, after I've said five or six times, "what does the author say?" only to be met with repeated blank stares, or "well, I feel like he's saying...", I do in fact want to say: "Go back to the f**ing passage and tell me, as literally as you possibly can, what it actually says. Not what you think you remember it says. Not what you feel it might be saying. Not what it makes you think of. What is actually says."
I have lost track of the number of times a student, upon discovering that the answer is, say, E rather than B, proclaims that he or she doesn't really feel that the scenario described in E occurs in the passage. At which point I promptly go back to the passage and read an entire paragraph's worth of exactly what was described in E. It's usually so obvious that the student can't even argue.
So newsflash: going back and reading very carefully is the only way to be 100% certain that your answer checks out. If you are not willing to do this, the bottom line is that your score will most likely not improve dramatically (100+ points) regardless of how many practice tests you take. Let me reiterate: if you refuse to go back and read, you have virtually zero chance of getting a score above 750 and a very minimal chance of getting one above 700.
Maybe you've heard about the 700 wall? This is often what it comes down to. I've had many students who came to me scoring in the 600s. Those who were willing to accept that they needed to go back and check everything out -- and who saw that they actually got the answer that way, rather than just playing Russian roulette with process of elimination -- ended up with scores in the 700s, in some cases very high in the 700s.
The ones who kept on insisting they didn't need to check, who consistently refused to try to see the relationship between the correct answer and the specific wording in the text, and who remained perennially stuck on what they thought rather than trying to figure out what the author was saying, simply could not break 700 no matter how hard they tried. It was always hit or miss, not steady improvement. Yes, they got most of the answers right, but they also always got just enough answers wrong so that it really hurt their score. And some of them took literally dozens more practice tests than my higher-scoring students did -- even if both had started out in approximately the same place.
Now, if you're already consistently going back to the passage and having trouble understanding what it's actually saying or are not certain how to locate the information necessary to answer the questions (not necessarily in the line numbers given), that's a different story. You need to either work on building your literal comprehension (learning vocabulary and/or familiarizing yourself with "serious" college/adult-level writing) or on learning the types of words and phrases that you need to look out for.
But if neither of things is an issue for you, just go back and read the f**g passage. Trust me. It works.
Monday, August 8, 2011
Present Perfect, Simple Past, and Past Perfect (SAT Writing)
Recognizing when each of these three tenses should be used seems to pose a significant challenge for a lot of people on the SAT Writing section. Unfortunately, the uses and abuses of these tenses are tested very frequently on the SAT, and it therefore behooves you (as one of my high school English teachers was wont to say) to learn the differences among them.
As a side note, I feel obligated to issue a complaint that this is something that is almost NEVER covered in high school English classes, so if you don't cover it in a foreign language class, you tend not to cover it at all. (I learned it in French, Latin, Italian, and German -- in that order -- but do not ever recall it being taught in English.) Consequently, it's no surprise that so many of my students have been unclear about when to use these tenses.
So given that the "present perfect vs. simple past vs. past perfect" conversation is one I've had repeatedly over the last several weeks, I figured it was a good idea to post some explanations here. That said, I'm going to try to make this as simple as possible.
Btw, I'm using Leslie Marmon Silko as my example because the College Board *loves* to include Writing sentences about her.
Present Perfect = Has Written
The present perfect is used to describe an action that began in the past and that is continuing into the present. It is usually used in conjunction with the words "for" and "since."
Correct: Leslie Marmon Silko has written best-selling novels since 1977.
Correct: Leslie Marmon Silko has written best-selling novels for more than thirty years.
Although these sentences describe actions that began in the past, they both clearly imply that that Leslie Marmon Silko is *still* a best-selling author.
Simple Past = Wrote
The simple past is used to describe an action that began and ended in the past.
Correct: Leslie Marmon Silko wrote her first best-selling novel in 1977.
OR
Correct: Leslie Marmon Silko was twenty-nine years old when she published her first novel.
OR
Correct: Leslie Marmon Silko was twenty-nine years old when she published her first novel.
On the SAT, sentences that require the simple past typically include a date or time period that clearly indicates a past action or event (e.g. 1815, The Renaissance, etc.).
Past Perfect = Had Written
This is the tense that people tend to have the hardest time with. It is used only under the following circumstances: when you have two finished actions in the past, the past perfect is used to describe the one that happened first -- never the action that happened later. In other words, if a sentence does not clearly indicate two separate actions, you should not use the past perfect!
Correct: Before Leslie Marmon Silko published her first best-selling novel in 1977, she had already written a number of well-regarded short stories.
Action #1: Leslie Marmon Silko published a number of well-regarded short stories.
Action #2: Leslie Marmon Silko wrote her first best-selling novel in 1977.
The past perfect is therefore used to describe the first action.
Under no circumstances is the following correct:
Incorrect: Before Leslie Marmon Silko had published her first best-selling novel in 1977, she wrote a number of well-regarded short stories.
Action #1: Leslie Marmon Silko published a number of well-regarded short stories.
Action #2: Leslie Marmon Silko wrote her first best-selling novel in 1977.
The past perfect is therefore used to describe the first action.
Under no circumstances is the following correct:
Incorrect: Before Leslie Marmon Silko had published her first best-selling novel in 1977, she wrote a number of well-regarded short stories.
Saturday, August 6, 2011
How to Concentrate on Boring Critical Reading Passages
As pretty much anyone with more than five minutes of SAT prep experience knows, Critical Reading passages are not exactly chosen for their phenomenal entertainment value. Ecotourism? Snooze. Whale play? Who cares. Copepods? Even I had to force myself to stay awake for that one. (Incidentally, when I was writing lots of reading material, I used a couple of passages that were so boring I actually had trouble mustering sufficient focus to write questions about them! Having to answer the questions may be bad, but I can assure you that writing them can be far, far more excruciating.)
So yes, while occasionally you'll stumble across a passage on a topic that holds your interest for more than, say, a second-and-a-half, the majority of the time that just won't be the case. Unfortunately, you still have to deal with the questions, regardless of how much of the passage you've tuned out, and if you spend too much time reading and re-reading, desperately trying to absorb everything that's going on, you'll already be behind time-wise when you start the questions. Besides, it doesn't matter how much time you spend reading if you're not really absorbing anything.
So what's the solution? Stop trying to understand the details (at least for the first read-through) and just focus on something else: finding the main idea, the tone, and the stuff that the author indicates is important (explanations, italics, anything with the words "important" or the "the goal," "the point," etc.). If you actively look for something as you read, it's a whole lot harder to tune out as you go through the process.
As I've written about before, the content of most Critical Reading passages is in some ways deeply irrelevant -- that is, provided that you can grasp the basics, it doesn't really matter what the author happens to be saying, only how s/he structures the argument. If you start reading for function, content becomes secondary.
So say you're trying to slog through that awful passage about copepods (or something equally hideous), stop reading carefully as soon as you figure out what the basic idea is, and just start worrying about the role that each new paragraph plays -- and that's information you can get in the first couple of sentences. If you see "for example" or "for instance," that means that the paragraph is pretty much going to support an idea; if you see "however," or "despite," that's a pretty good indicator that the rest of the paragraph is going to refute an idea. Then you can just skim through the rest of it to make sure.
If it helps you to do so, you can also write something like "support" or "refute" or "explain" next to the paragraph, just to keep yourself paying attention and give you an outline of the argument. Furthermore, when you get a question about why the author included a particular piece of information in that paragraph, all you'll have to do is look at your note: if the point of the paragraph is to support, chances are the right answer will start with a positive word; if the point of the paragraph is to disagree, chances are it'll start with a negative word. It won't matter if you haven't gotten every last detail -- you'll have the bit picture, which you can use to make a reasonable guess, and on the SAT that's what really counts.
Will this give you the answer to every question? Of course not. I'm simplifying a bit here. But you might be surprised at how often working this way 1) keeps you focused, and 2) gets you close to the right answer, even if you're not really certain you understood everything you read.
So say you're trying to slog through that awful passage about copepods (or something equally hideous), stop reading carefully as soon as you figure out what the basic idea is, and just start worrying about the role that each new paragraph plays -- and that's information you can get in the first couple of sentences. If you see "for example" or "for instance," that means that the paragraph is pretty much going to support an idea; if you see "however," or "despite," that's a pretty good indicator that the rest of the paragraph is going to refute an idea. Then you can just skim through the rest of it to make sure.
If it helps you to do so, you can also write something like "support" or "refute" or "explain" next to the paragraph, just to keep yourself paying attention and give you an outline of the argument. Furthermore, when you get a question about why the author included a particular piece of information in that paragraph, all you'll have to do is look at your note: if the point of the paragraph is to support, chances are the right answer will start with a positive word; if the point of the paragraph is to disagree, chances are it'll start with a negative word. It won't matter if you haven't gotten every last detail -- you'll have the bit picture, which you can use to make a reasonable guess, and on the SAT that's what really counts.
Will this give you the answer to every question? Of course not. I'm simplifying a bit here. But you might be surprised at how often working this way 1) keeps you focused, and 2) gets you close to the right answer, even if you're not really certain you understood everything you read.
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Shortcut: Play Positive and Negative with Passage 1/Passage 2 Relationship Question
Of all the kinds of questions found on the Critical Reading portion of the SAT, Passage 1/Passage 2 relationship questions probably give people the most trouble. This is hardly a surprise: instead of being forced to contend with just one author's ideas, opinions, and attitudes, you have to deal with those elements for two authors. And if that weren't bad enough, you also have to figure out just where/if those authors agree and where/if they differ -- sometimes in a very, very subtle way. If you don't know how to break the relationships down, it's basically a recipe for confusion.
I've written about some general strategies for approaching Passage 1/Passage 2 passages and questions, as well as about some of the more common Passage 1/Passage 2 relationships, but here I’d like to go a step further and discuss ways to simplify those nasty "relationship” questions that look so complicated. “Look” being the operative word.
The reality is that like many things on the SAT, P1/P2 relationship questions often appear to be much more difficult than they actually are. In fact, if you approach them while keeping only the most general idea of each passage in mind, you can often eliminate multiple answer choices after reading only their first few words.
Let me explain: the single most important thing to determine about the relationship between P1/P2 authors is whether they agree or disagree. That one piece of information will typically be the basis for the vast majority of answers to questions that ask how one author would most likely respond to the other. If the two authors agree, the correct answer will generally indicate a positive relationship; if they disagree, the correct answer will generally indicate a negative relationship.
Say we’re dealing with two passages that discuss the origins of music. The author of Passage 1 argues that music must have developed because it served a social or evolutionary function, and the author of Passage 2 argues that music developed because it was enjoyable but served no evolutionary purpose.
Because the two authors disagree, most of the questions that ask how one would respond to the other will therefore have correct answers indicating a negative relationship. When initially reading through the answers, you therefore only need to figure out whether the answer indicates a negative relationship, and usually you can get that information in the first few words – sometimes even the first word. Anything that’s positive or neutral you can automatically cross out; anything that’s negative stays. That should get you down to two (if you’re lucky), maybe three answers that you can then read closely.
Now, when you go back and read the answers closely, you also need to consider degree – that is, how positive or how negative? If Passage 1 indicates that the author has some questions about a claim made by the author of Passage 2, you’re looking for an answer that includes a mildly negative word like “skeptical.” Anything stronger, like “scornful” or “contemptuous” is going to be wrong. And if you’re choosing between two answers, one of which contains a highly negative word and one of which contains a slightly negative, determining the degree of negativity involved is probably enough to get you to the answer.
I've written about some general strategies for approaching Passage 1/Passage 2 passages and questions, as well as about some of the more common Passage 1/Passage 2 relationships, but here I’d like to go a step further and discuss ways to simplify those nasty "relationship” questions that look so complicated. “Look” being the operative word.
The reality is that like many things on the SAT, P1/P2 relationship questions often appear to be much more difficult than they actually are. In fact, if you approach them while keeping only the most general idea of each passage in mind, you can often eliminate multiple answer choices after reading only their first few words.
Let me explain: the single most important thing to determine about the relationship between P1/P2 authors is whether they agree or disagree. That one piece of information will typically be the basis for the vast majority of answers to questions that ask how one author would most likely respond to the other. If the two authors agree, the correct answer will generally indicate a positive relationship; if they disagree, the correct answer will generally indicate a negative relationship.
Say we’re dealing with two passages that discuss the origins of music. The author of Passage 1 argues that music must have developed because it served a social or evolutionary function, and the author of Passage 2 argues that music developed because it was enjoyable but served no evolutionary purpose.
Because the two authors disagree, most of the questions that ask how one would respond to the other will therefore have correct answers indicating a negative relationship. When initially reading through the answers, you therefore only need to figure out whether the answer indicates a negative relationship, and usually you can get that information in the first few words – sometimes even the first word. Anything that’s positive or neutral you can automatically cross out; anything that’s negative stays. That should get you down to two (if you’re lucky), maybe three answers that you can then read closely.
Now, when you go back and read the answers closely, you also need to consider degree – that is, how positive or how negative? If Passage 1 indicates that the author has some questions about a claim made by the author of Passage 2, you’re looking for an answer that includes a mildly negative word like “skeptical.” Anything stronger, like “scornful” or “contemptuous” is going to be wrong. And if you’re choosing between two answers, one of which contains a highly negative word and one of which contains a slightly negative, determining the degree of negativity involved is probably enough to get you to the answer.
Monday, August 1, 2011
How To Work Through Fixing Sentences Questions
As I wrote about a while back, there are three general rules that should typically govern the elimination and selection of answer choices on Fixing Sentences:
1) Shorter is better
2) Gerunds are bad, especially "being"
3) Passive is bad
In addition, be on the lookout for:
-Comma splices (always wrong)
-Dangling modifiers (always wrong)
-The words it, which, and this (frequently wrong)
-Semicolons (usually indicate a right answer when used correctly, i.e. to separate two independent clauses)
-Non-essential clauses (usually indicate a right answer when used correctly)
I'd like to emphasize that these are only general guidelines and that following them does not guarantee that you will get every question right. Flawed as it may be, the College Board is smart enough to test the same rules (and their exceptions) from various angles on different questions and on different tests, thus making it impossible to get the right answer 100% of the time by plugging in a simple formula.
That said, however, these rules are usually enough to get you close to the right answer on the majority of questions. So let's look at how they apply. I'm going to use some old questions of the day in order to avoid violating the College Board's injunction against distributing materials. All of these, however, are directly based on actual College Board questions, so please be assured that these rules are equally applicable to the real thing.
1. Krill is one of the most abundant species on the planet, being
that it thrives in a wide variety of marine environments, and many
larger creatures consume it as their primary source of food.
(A) planet, being that it thrives in a wide variety of marine
environments, and many larger creatures consume it as
their primary source of food
(B) planet because of it thriving in a wide variety of marine
environments and being consumed by a many larger
creatures as their primary source of food
(C) planet; in this capacity it thrives in a wide variety of
marine environments, and many larger creatures
consume them as their primary source of food
(D) planet because it thrives in a wide variety of marine
environments and serves as the primary source of food
for many larger creatures
(E) planet; since it thrives in a wide variety of marine
environments and serves as the primary source of food
for many larger creatures
Strategy:
Both the original sentence include and choice B include gerunds ("being" and "thriving") so they can be automatically eliminated.
Choice E contains a semicolon that incorrectly separates an independent clause from a dependent clause and can thus be eliminated as well.
C and D are both grammatically correct and contain the same information, but since D is more concise, it is the right answer.
2. Both an actor and a humanitarian, Jeffrey Wright is
the director of a foundation that helps rural communities
in Africa to both develop their resources, and their standard
of living is also improved.
(A) resources, and their standard of living is also
improved
(B) resources, plus improving their standard of living
(C) resources and improve their standard of living
(D) resources, their standard of living is also improved
(E) resources; this also improves their standard of living
Strategy:
The original version of the sentence is grammatically correct, but it contains the passive voice (their standard of living is eliminated) and can therefore be eliminated.
Choice B contains a gerund, so it can be eliminated.
Choice D contains a comma splice, so it can be eliminated.
The semicolon is choice E is correctly used to separate two independent clauses; however, the answer contains the pronoun "this," so it can be eliminated as well.
Which leaves C, the shortest answer.
3. Creative inspiration is a necessary, if elusive, ingredient, in any
form of artistic production.
(A) Creative inspiration is a necessary, if elusive, ingredient
in any form of artistic production.
(B) Creative inspiration is a necessary ingredient in any form
of artistic production, while also being elusive.
(C) Creative inspiration is a necessary ingredient in any form
of artistic production, however it is also elusive.
(D) Creative inspiration is a necessary ingredient in any form
of artistic production, and this is often elusive.
(E) While a necessary ingredient in any form of artistic
production; creative inspiration is also elusive.
Strategy:
Choice B contains "being," so it can be eliminated.
Choice D contains "this," so it can be eliminated.
Choice E contains a semicolon that incorrectly separates a dependent clause and an independent clause, rather than two independent clauses.
Now you're down to A and C. If you can remember that "however" should always be preceded by a semicolon rather than a colon when it's used to begin a clause, you can eliminate C, which gets you A as the correct answer.
Shortcut: The original version of the sentence includes a properly used non-essential clause, and sentences that include properly used non-essential clauses are pretty much always correct. Even though the clause seems oddly placed, the sentence makes complete sense without it ("Creative inspiration is a necessary ingredient in any form of artistic production") and therefore must be right.
1) Shorter is better
2) Gerunds are bad, especially "being"
3) Passive is bad
In addition, be on the lookout for:
-Comma splices (always wrong)
-Dangling modifiers (always wrong)
-The words it, which, and this (frequently wrong)
-Semicolons (usually indicate a right answer when used correctly, i.e. to separate two independent clauses)
-Non-essential clauses (usually indicate a right answer when used correctly)
I'd like to emphasize that these are only general guidelines and that following them does not guarantee that you will get every question right. Flawed as it may be, the College Board is smart enough to test the same rules (and their exceptions) from various angles on different questions and on different tests, thus making it impossible to get the right answer 100% of the time by plugging in a simple formula.
That said, however, these rules are usually enough to get you close to the right answer on the majority of questions. So let's look at how they apply. I'm going to use some old questions of the day in order to avoid violating the College Board's injunction against distributing materials. All of these, however, are directly based on actual College Board questions, so please be assured that these rules are equally applicable to the real thing.
1. Krill is one of the most abundant species on the planet, being
that it thrives in a wide variety of marine environments, and many
larger creatures consume it as their primary source of food.
(A) planet, being that it thrives in a wide variety of marine
environments, and many larger creatures consume it as
their primary source of food
(B) planet because of it thriving in a wide variety of marine
environments and being consumed by a many larger
creatures as their primary source of food
(C) planet; in this capacity it thrives in a wide variety of
marine environments, and many larger creatures
consume them as their primary source of food
(D) planet because it thrives in a wide variety of marine
environments and serves as the primary source of food
for many larger creatures
(E) planet; since it thrives in a wide variety of marine
environments and serves as the primary source of food
for many larger creatures
Both the original sentence include and choice B include gerunds ("being" and "thriving") so they can be automatically eliminated.
Choice E contains a semicolon that incorrectly separates an independent clause from a dependent clause and can thus be eliminated as well.
C and D are both grammatically correct and contain the same information, but since D is more concise, it is the right answer.
2. Both an actor and a humanitarian, Jeffrey Wright is
the director of a foundation that helps rural communities
in Africa to both develop their resources, and their standard
of living is also improved.
(A) resources, and their standard of living is also
improved
(B) resources, plus improving their standard of living
(C) resources and improve their standard of living
(D) resources, their standard of living is also improved
(E) resources; this also improves their standard of living
Strategy:
The original version of the sentence is grammatically correct, but it contains the passive voice (their standard of living is eliminated) and can therefore be eliminated.
Choice B contains a gerund, so it can be eliminated.
Choice D contains a comma splice, so it can be eliminated.
The semicolon is choice E is correctly used to separate two independent clauses; however, the answer contains the pronoun "this," so it can be eliminated as well.
Which leaves C, the shortest answer.
Shortcut: start by checking out the shortest answer. It works grammatically, and it keeps the construction parallel, so you don't even really need to check the other answers.
3. Creative inspiration is a necessary, if elusive, ingredient, in any
form of artistic production.
(A) Creative inspiration is a necessary, if elusive, ingredient
in any form of artistic production.
(B) Creative inspiration is a necessary ingredient in any form
of artistic production, while also being elusive.
(C) Creative inspiration is a necessary ingredient in any form
of artistic production, however it is also elusive.
(D) Creative inspiration is a necessary ingredient in any form
of artistic production, and this is often elusive.
(E) While a necessary ingredient in any form of artistic
production; creative inspiration is also elusive.
Choice B contains "being," so it can be eliminated.
Choice D contains "this," so it can be eliminated.
Choice E contains a semicolon that incorrectly separates a dependent clause and an independent clause, rather than two independent clauses.
Now you're down to A and C. If you can remember that "however" should always be preceded by a semicolon rather than a colon when it's used to begin a clause, you can eliminate C, which gets you A as the correct answer.
Shortcut: The original version of the sentence includes a properly used non-essential clause, and sentences that include properly used non-essential clauses are pretty much always correct. Even though the clause seems oddly placed, the sentence makes complete sense without it ("Creative inspiration is a necessary ingredient in any form of artistic production") and therefore must be right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
