 just want to really focus on how the questions are structured. Like I said, most of the time it's going to be things like verbs and pronouns and a little bit of the possessive stuff or things like the sentence structure, those ones where they're asking to go ahead and shorten sentences. So those are the things you want to practice the most. Yeah, it's kind of more or less what I look at. I feel like the grammar stuff is one of the easiest things to improve quickly, though, which is a good thing. And we can maybe do some more practice on that when we get to our last couple of classes where we can look at what you all want to work on the most. So good to see you, Esteban, Camila, Nicolás. I see you here, too. All right, it's 5.35, so we're going to get started. Today, I want to just go over the supporting claims homework that I left you from last week. And then we're going to talk about two other kinds of questions today, the paired passages and also the sentence function questions. I don't think these are particularly difficult types of questions, but it's good to go over them anyway and get comfortable with how we handle those. So that's what we're going to do. So if you want to open up your support claims questions, the set one that I left for homework will start there. And you know what to do, go ahead and send me your answers in the chat so I can see what you got. So these supporting claims questions typically, I find that these can be some of the more difficult questions on the test because you have to process more information and sometimes your answer choices can be long. I think there's two kinds of supporting claims questions, which we will see in this exercise. You have some that are just a general idea of what kind of evidence is good evidence or what kind of support is the best support. And then you have somewhere it's more specific to the content of the paragraph and I think we'll see a couple of those because I've noticed at least like if you get more easy modules, it seems like some of the easy questions in this kind are more related to just in general, like what is good evidence in general? What is good support? And then there's ones that really get into the, like the hard ones really get into the scientific claims or the specific claims that are in the text and you have to pick something that matches those well. So we'll take a look at both of those as we go through this. So send those answers, get them over here. Let's go. Thank you, Nicolas. Give you another minute to send those over and then we'll check them out. Let's try to move quick because I want to get through some other stuff. All right, thank you, Stavon. Got Peras, got Nicole, thanks guys. All right, cool. Let me start sharing the screen and we'll get into these. So the first one here for supporting claims, again, we always want to look at our question first. It says, which statement, if true, would most directly support Laura's plan to use JT's photography? Okay, so Laura has a plan to use JT's photography and I'm just looking for a good reason for her to do that. That's all this is. And so I want to just take a quick look at what's going on at the beginning here. They tell me who JT is. He documented an uncontacted drive on the Amazon, that's pretty cool. And tells me a little bit about his work that it was showcasing his ability to capture powerful images of people. All right, cool. All right, he went and visited an uncontacted drive suite. Now what about Laura? I just want to scan for Laura. Usually that's going to be at the end of the paragraph. So I see here, Laura wants to use one for her upcoming class discussion about documenting remote cultures around the world. So I have this detail from Laura and I got these details about his work, right, JT's work. That's really all I need to answer this question. So I think everybody here has this one correct. If I look at my choices real quick, again, this is a good example of a general supporting claims question. Like we're not even really worrying so much about the specifics of Laura's situation or the class. We're really just looking at like, what would be a good reason to use this person's photography for this assignment? And so if we have a class discussion about remote cultures, we know this guy documented an uncontacted tribe. So it's a pretty good example. And so let's look at what each of these answers focuses on. I think that helps to just understand why some are better than others, right? So like the first one here says, JT's pictures are detailed, captured unique characteristics of the tribe. Okay, so this focuses on the pictures themselves, right? We got the pictures. Laura has received permission, all right? Despite his work being praised, there's some who question the ethic. Okay, so this one actually has people like questioning it. Maybe there's something not so good about this. I think we could immediately rule this out as a, you wouldn't wanna bring up the ethical questions here to support your idea. Other students have also expressed interest in using these photos. Okay, so let's break down these reasons. One here is focusing on the content itself, the pictures, that would be the best reason because that's what we're gonna do. We're gonna bring his photos into a class. And so obviously the photo itself is really the thing I should focus on. This would be a great reason to choose his photography. Having permission or not is really kind of irrelevant. It doesn't matter if he gave me permission if the photos don't actually accomplish the purpose that was set out by the class. Like the class is having a discussion about remote cultures. If his photographs don't do that, it doesn't matter if he gave me permission. So that's irrelevant. We already said C doesn't work because there's this ethical dilemma which would not support perhaps the reason for doing this. And then other students in the photography class, this will always be wrong. It does not matter what other people do. Just because it's popular doesn't mean you should do it. So this would be a bad answer too. So really that's why I say this is like a general question. We're really just looking at like what's a good reason to use his work? And the best reason would focus on the work itself and its qualities. And so that's why A is the best answer. Looks like everybody got that right? In fact, I see most people seem like you got the same answers for most things. That's pretty cool. There's a little bit of debate on a couple of these. Let's see. All right, so another one, quotation from interviews illustrates her claim. So again, I just wanna focus on the claim. What is like her claim, right? What is she kind of doing here? I look at the first sentence and she says she's getting people's opinions about lab grown meat. Pretty good. I don't know if anyone here has tried lab grown meat. I have. It's pretty good in a burrito. Not gonna lie. So she spoke to people, okay. And now here's where it says, okay, something like right here in the middle. Again, I'm just kind of scanning for what she has concluded here. So people are open to the idea if the costs can be reduced and that people are open to trying these if they have surances about safety and sustainability. So this is the stuff that matters right here. We're talking about lab grown meat and she found that a lot of people were cool with it if the production costs can be reduced because right now it's more expensive and if they can make sure it's safe and sustainable which is like the whole point of doing this, right? So all I need to do is just pick a text that matches up with those ideas. And really you don't have to read much. Don't get lost in reading all of this. As soon as you read something that doesn't work, get rid of it. It's hard to say for sure. That's gonna be a wrong answer. Cause like this is a very middle indecisive answer. It's not gonna be the best quote. Is it natural? I don't trust food that comes from a laboratory. Yeah, that's not the right answer either. And then I think it could be a great alternative, okay. Giving it a try if the cost is right. That is one of the things she said. And then more information available about how the products are made and safety standards. Okay, perfect. So this hits all the things that we want. We're gonna mark C and just move on. We do not need to even worry about D. C is your best answer. So that's all we gotta do here. Just if you see big answer choices, don't spend your whole time reading all of these. As soon as we read something that does not work, we really should just discard it and keep going until we find the one where, you know, I start with this, I go, okay, I'll keep reading. I'm opening to, all right, cost, cool, let's keep reading. And I keep reading, I get to the end and I go, okay, all of this works, sees the right answer. All right, now how about number three? I see a lot of different answers for number three. So I see some A's, I see some C's, interesting. Let's take a look. All right, so we're looking for archeological evidence would support Dr. Jan Smith's theory. Let's look for his theory. Let's see. We got the information about the guy studying Easter Island. He disagrees with the conventional wisdom that their population decline was due to overpopulation and resource depletion, arguing instead, okay, here's his key point. It was caused by infectious diseases brought in by European explorers. Perfect, okay. So we're looking for archeological evidence of this. I think that's an important detail that we wanna keep an eye on. And this is his main theory that it's caused by infectious diseases brought in by European explorers. So let's take a look at these. Skeletal remains showing evidence of European introduced. Skeletal remains would be archeological evidence and we are seeing European diseases. So this seems like a really solid answer. I'm already leaning towards this, but let's check the others real quick. Resource depletion, no, that's the original theory. He disagrees with the conventional wisdom. That's not the answer. A journal entry from a European explorer detailing their interactions and mentions of the illnesses. Now, okay, this also could be good evidence for his claim. And we also got paintings and carvings depicting scenes of sickness and death that could be attributed to foreign diseases. And all right, so there's a couple of things here that could work. Again, this goes down to the question of what is the best evidence and what is the right kind of evidence? Here he says we want archeological evidence and that means that some dude wearing khaki, dug in the ground and found things and then documented it and examined it and studied it and that is what we see really with A. Now C and D do provide some evidence for this but C is anecdotal evidence. This is just like somebody's journal. Like how do we know he was right? Also, like it's a European explorer from a long time ago. Maybe he didn't fully understand the situation. Like yeah, okay, his journal entry might be useful but it isn't necessarily hard archeological evidence. So I wouldn't wanna choose this one especially knowing that they're asking for archeological evidence. They want that kind of evidence. So I should know that A is a better choice. Same thing with D, like D, you could argue that that's archeological. If I go into a cave and I see paintings and carvings of like people with horrible diseases, okay, that's some evidence. But the question is like, is that necessarily the European diseases and things? Like it could be attributed but that's not very strong evidence to me. So I'm very confident that A would be the best answer here because we've got skeletal remains and specific European diseases that were mentioned here. So this is a really good choice. So we wanna go with A. And then number four, let me see what you all have. I see some D, I see some B. Interesting, I like the variety. All right, let's see. Okay, so the research is findings. I gotta figure out what his findings were. Okay, so recent study conducted that they follow keto diet are likely experienced in improvements over health. Okay, so this is the main thesis. If you follow a keto diet for 30 days you're gonna have improvements in health and then they tell us some specific things about that. Reductions in body weight, cholesterol. Okay, and then the people felt more energized and more mental clarity. Okay, so basically just lots of good things happen if you go in the keto diet. People on a keto diet will tell you that. So let's see which evidence would most directly support the findings. Now, participant testimonials who've seen positive change. I mean, okay, that's kind of what we already have here. You know, testimonials and things. Participants reported feeling more energized. Like that kind of feels similar to what, you know, I have right here. Results of an online survey, that's kind of similar. Although this says more fatigued. So no, that's not gonna be it. Anecdotal evidence from friends and family members. Okay, I mean, it's kind of similar to this first one. Quantifiable data showing the people following a keto diet experience reduced total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol levels when compared to baseline measurements taken at the start of the study. Okay, this is your best answer right here. Has to be. D is better. All right, what makes D better? Why is D better than the other answers? Can anyone tell me why? Yeah, can you hear me? You're a little quiet. Niko, can you? Yeah, I'm using my computer, not my phone too. Okay, that sounds a little better. Can you read those to my mic? I think it is D because usually evidence from studies is better from comparing results between each other. And it's quantifiable and D is kind of not professional because it says family and friends. Okay, good. Yeah, I think the key thing is here is this, right? The quantifiable data part. The fact that this is like numbers, like hard data that we can look at, right? And we have measurements before and after. We've got evidence at the start of the study and after the 30 days. So we get the true picture of how they transformed or what changed, right? I mean, sure testimonials from individuals and family and friends and online surveys could be useful, but it's not the same as like measuring something before you start an experiment and then measuring it after. That's just good science. And so D is really the best choice because that's the scientific data that we're looking for. So again, this kind of goes under that general idea of like what would be good evidence? Good evidence is scientific evidence. Something that is measurable, something we can repeat, something where it's very controlled, where we don't have a bunch of other variables. We talked about that a little bit at the end of last week's class. And also again, whenever it's making specific references to things in the text, that's a good sign because this says total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol and it did say that they had these levels were better. They were reductions in these levels. So that would be a good thing. So that's also calling back to the paragraph and that's another good sign that we should probably choose that answer. Now let's go to the last one. So looking at your responses. It looks like everybody got this right or at least got the same answer on this. Let's see if it's right. So okay, again, hypothesis I need to figure this out. So he hypothesizes, there's the word. That's what I wanna look at. Okay, this decrease, I need to read before this. Researchers studying fish population has noticed a decline in cyanopsosilatus. I don't know what that is, but okay, he hypothesized that it may be due to an increase in predators. Okay, so his argument is that there's more predators which means there's less of this thing, this fish. Okay, and so he's gonna conduct surveys of predator populations around the area including species like the tiger sharks and bluefin tuna which would be the things I guess that would eat this. Okay, so let's see. Survey appears, or it was an increase in tiger sharks and bluefin tuna. Okay, that seems good. However, they appear to, okay, so because of this however, I know it's already gonna be wrong. They're eating something else that doesn't help us. Survey shows a decrease in tiger shark and bluefin population. Well no, that doesn't make sense then because if there's less things that eat the thing then that's bad. The number of, okay, has increased. All right, this seems like the right answer, right? There's more predators and so that would confirm his hypothesis. Increase in the number of predators that don't eat this thing. Yeah, that wouldn't work either. So okay, C is pretty clearly the right answer. I think that one's pretty straightforward. Lovely. Any questions on any of these? If not, then let's start getting into some fresh new stuff. We're gonna cover two other kinds of questions today. We're almost through most of the questions and then we'll start going over kind of some of the ones that you feel that you need more help with. And so that's where also, I had asked everybody to do a practice test. I got a couple of responses back. If you haven't, please do it. It helps me, helps you. The more you practice, the better you're gonna get at this. And it's really important to make sure you take that time to practice. So please make sure you get those practice tests done. We're gonna go into the paired passage questions today. Now, I don't feel like these are that common. I've only seen like three, maybe four on a whole test. If you took a practice test, you might have seen a couple of them. They don't seem to appear that often on the new SAT model, which is nice because I used to hate these. I always thought these were the hardest questions. You used to actually have two full paired passages and then like 11 questions about the two and it was a pain. And it often came at the end of the test when you were like tired and miserable. So it's nice that these are simplified now. But basically, we're gonna do a little bit of practice with these and get a little more comfortable with those. So identifying these really easy. If you see two texts, you've got paired passages, like there's really no great mystery here. And what I always encourage everybody to do with the strategy is just to make sure you take your time and understand it clearly because you gotta read the question very carefully. If you don't know, like the question will ask you what one author would say about the other author generally. And so you gotta make sure you know who is who and that you're answering for the right text because it could be easy to get mixed up. And if you get mixed up, it's gonna give you problems. So you gotta make sure you read the question carefully. You're gonna find the information you need from the one text compared to the information from the other. And I encourage you to think about the relationship between the two passages. Like are they agreeing with each other or not? Can we infer that by the little bit that we need to read? And again, we don't really have to read the whole thing. We can actually just kind of read just the pieces that we need. But we gotta make sure that we understand the question really carefully if we're gonna get anywhere with this. Okay, so let's take a look at an example. This example here, let me get this sized a little bit better for you, it's pretty big. All right, so with this example, I'm gonna look at the question first. I see I have two texts, I just look at the question. It says, how would Foccarelli and Panetta, which is text two, most likely respond to fans' findings in text one? So what I wanna do first here is think about what information I need to read. And I'm gonna start by looking at fans' findings. I think I wanna start with the first text, like what would they respond to in the first place, right? So I take a look here and I'm just gonna look at the end of this because I see the word found in there. The word found matches with findings, found that subscription prices would rise following a merger. Okay, so fans says that when there's a merger, the prices go up. So now I wanna look at what Foccarelli and Panetta say, and I can get that right at the beginning of their text. I see that it says they've argued that research on the effects of mergers on prices has focused excessively on short-term effects, which tend to be adverse for consumers. Okay, there's a key word in that second paragraph that I emphasized a little bit, right? It says excessively. What does that tell us about the relationship between these two passages? Do you think they agree with each other, or do you think they will disagree with each other? Opposite of each other? That's what I'm thinking too, right? It's kinda gonna go the opposite direction. Like, that word excessively really tells me that because it's saying, okay, text one, you're talking about the short-term prices, like the price will rise following a merger, right after the merger, the short-term, you're saying it's gonna rise, and these guys are saying you're focusing too much on the short-term. So that tells me that they're gonna present an alternative that would be more like maybe things would be better in the long-term. Don't focus on the short-term. And so just with that information, without reading all the rest of this, I'm gonna look at my answer choices and probably be able to determine which one is the correct one, okay? So looking at the options, right? I see A, over the long-term, expenses would also increase. That doesn't sound like that would be kind of agreeing that this is bad for the consumer. And the first one is saying short-term prices would rise. If these guys say long-term prices rise, then eventually they're basically saying the same thing. So that doesn't really make for a good answer. B says they would recommend that fan compare the near-term effect in the Minneapolis area with the effect of another market. Okay, so maybe saying you need to compare different areas, but that's not what this text said. Text two says they focus excessively on short-term effects, not local effects or like, they don't consider the whole market. Like it didn't say that. So B probably isn't the right answer. They would encourage fan to investigate whether the projected effect persists over an extended period. Now that feels like that could be the right answer because they're saying you're focusing excessively on the short-term, so therefore you should look at the long-term and I bet what they wanna say is that the long-term is probably better. So that might be good. D, they would claim that mergers have a different effect on consumer prices in the newspaper industry than in most other industries. That doesn't really feel like the right choice either. Like they would have to point out something about that here that like they ignore, like it doesn't ever mention newspapers at the start of text two. Like I don't see any good evidence for that. So I think my final choice would be C. That's the one I would go with. And again, I'm just looking at what I need to read. So all I did was look for the word findings, see what she found, look at the first line of the next one. I see their position. And by interpreting that focused excessively on short-term effects, I can tell that like, okay, they're thinking that you should look at the long-term, that maybe the long-term's not as bad. And that's precisely what C is telling us. So I don't think these are particularly difficult if you approach them this way. It's just important that you make sure you understand the question really clearly. Cause like, if it's reversed, if it's how would fan respond to Foccarelli and Panetta, you have a completely different answer. So you wanna make sure that you're interpreting that correctly and identifying who's opinion am I trying to get, right? And generally I like to look at the second one that's mentioned in the question first, you know, cause you're responding to somebody. So I think it's important to know what they said in order to understand how you would respond. So for me, that's how I like to do it. Feel free to try other things. But that's essentially the way to handle these. It's not that difficult. Don't get caught up in all the other details. Try to just focus on the key ideas. And in this case, they want me to just respond to the findings and just looking at the last sentence of the first one and the first sentence of the second one. I got my answer. Make sense? Yes. Sweet. All right, let's see if you can do some. So I'm gonna hit you with a little practice for these. So this kind of questions occur two times in each model or two times in the whole test? I've, so when I did my experiments with the test, when I took the hard module, like I got the second hard module, I only saw it twice and it was in like the first module when I did it. When I deliberately did the first module kind of so-so to get an easier one, I saw more. So it seems to me that they put more of these in the test, if it's an easy test, if you get the easier modules. But I think the most I saw in any one test was four. So there's not a lot of these. And so, as well, I don't wanna spend too much time on them but I think it's good to just go over them a little bit. Mm-hmm, okay. So yeah, I just sent that file, which everybody can also grab in the student materials folder if you need it there. It's paired passages set one. And so we've got five questions of paired passages, right? And so, yeah, I'm gonna give you, let's give it six minutes to do those five. All right, so everybody should have the file. I'm gonna start the timer then, six minutes, and then we'll check these out together. Let's take a look at these. So now it's gotta be down here. Publication.kato, okay, there's kato. All right, kato's here. So, continental direction climate change. This one's weird. Okay, proving series and here's findings. Okay, so, Seales Rose, right, okay. Should this guy confirm that guy? And then if that guy publishes another thing, what would he say? Yeah, okay, let's see if I can find slides. Oh, but hang on, wait, what's that about that? Okay, there is something about that. This might be it. Nah, that's not about climate change. It's about tectonic activity, so this is wrong. Yeah, text to, let's see what answers. Okay, complacency and lack of motivation. Okay, and then this person's saying that competition outside kingdoms, uh-huh, okay. Okay, ancient text is just pretty much Italy. All right, so we have two different views. So, this guy would disprove this. Yeah, I mean, this seems like it. No, that's a fair point, but I don't know that that's what he would, let's do extremes, A or C, it's probably A. Yeah, sweet. How are we doing on time, people? Do we need a couple more minutes? Are we good? I just, I finished right at six minutes. I'm in the fifth one. All right, I'll give you another minute. Yeah, Nicole, stay on, you're looking for some more time. Cool, take another minute. And then when you do finish, just send your answers to me in the chat and then we can take a look at what we got. I got Camilo's, thank you very much. Hi, Sophia. Hi. Sorry, my internet connection's not very good. Oh, sorry to hear that. Sometimes it do be like that. All right, I got you as Nicole, thank you. What are we doing, sorry. We are doing paired passages. I just sent it into the group chat like 10 minutes ago. I was just explaining kind of, we're doing a little practice after I explained how to do paired passages. So, if you wanna grab that file, follow along as we go through it. All right, let's take a look at what we got. If you haven't finished, send me what you do have. Because I wanna see what your answers are. All right, thank you, stay on. Get that here, I don't know why that's making noises when I tell them not to make noises. I always tell them to stop making noises. All right, so let's look at the first one. So, the very first one here is just asking us how would Strauss and Lars's lair respond to Gershawf and Durand? All right, so Gershawf and Durand are the second people and we're gonna see how these guys would respond to these guys. And in this case, they kind of give me the claim in the question, which is really nice of them. So, I don't really need to read anything down here. In fact, I'm gonna ignore most of this because it says physical discipline has been linked to mental health issues. So, all I really, like this is the specific claim it's included in the question. So, if that's the case, I don't really gotta bother with this paragraph. I'm gonna ignore it and just focus on this. What did these guys say about it? And I'm looking through and they say that they found physical discipline when used appropriately and in moderation. I think that's kind of key there, can positively influence a child's development. All right, and that academic performance, okay. So, that's not really related to mental health issues. I think that there might be a key point here though, this here. So, let me take a look at my responses and looking at what you all have said. I think we all agree that D is probably the best answer and looking at these options, I don't think they would discredit them completely. That doesn't seem like the right way to go. They could disagree. And while there's some truth to that, teaching them without any, this is the key part, without any negative consequences, like when I see those absolute answers, we know that we need to say no to those answers. Anytime it's an absolute, without any negative consequences, that's usually not true. So, I'm gonna avoid those answers. And then, same thing here, we actually have the same exact problem with C. And so, that's why I don't like B or C right away. Here they say, okay, could be, right, if used inappropriately. So, that's a key point. That matches up with this key idea from their text. And so, I think that would make D the best answer. So, good job everybody. Now, number two, you'll see I highlighted a little bit more on this one. Again, we're looking at how Gilbert Melkeff, which is this guy would respond to these guys. And so, I wanna see what Dr. Olivia Deschenes had to say. He says that carbon taxes can be a powerful incentive to reduce emissions without stifling economic growth and also provide needed revenue for other projects. So, basically, carbon taxes are good. They make money. They help us do green things. And then, what does this guy say? That they could be too high for some economies because of their regressive nature and they impact low-income households. So, that's bad. He says they might not lead to any real reduction because they'll just pass the cost onto you, right? Instead of the company actually going green, they'll just make you pay more money and say they're doing green stuff. So, okay. So, looking at your answers, it looks like everybody picked C and I would agree with you. That's the one I ended up highlighting here because of this key detail. And again, we see some absolutes here that don't work. It's not futile. That seems like no, there's no point in doing it at all. Jurassic increase in global temperature. Like the thing is, what he said here is true, but that doesn't necessarily correlate to the global temperatures. Like, yeah, they're regressive and impact poor people, but that doesn't have to do with global temperatures. That's more to do with what the industrial companies are doing, that's this part, not this part. So, A doesn't work because it's connecting the wrong points. And then this here, the cost could potentially exceed any advantages. Yeah, this matches up with his point of view, so it's probably C. And that, no, he's against these, so no. So, it's gotta be C. Yeah. All right, good job. I have a question here. Sure, tell me. So, in C answer, they say that like why carbon taxes may generate income, but income for who? Like, what do they mean? Because in the meantime, they say that like the prices are gonna be high for developing countries. So, I like... That's a fair point. I think that the increase income aspect could be like acknowledged in the sense that he's saying that kind of indirectly here when he says that, you know, firms may pass on the cost to consumers. So, it's implied that that cost is getting picked up by someone and somewhere and so there's some income for somebody, right? Like the taxes, I mean taxes, generally you understand taxes provide income to the government, right? So, I think that's implied without, you know, him explicitly talking about where that goes. I think that it's understood mutually here that it would be going to the governments and that, but his point is that, you know, there could be other costs that are more important to consider like other effects of those. I think it also qualifies the statement by putting the May in here, like saying, hey, May generate income, sure, might get you some money and that might lower emissions, that might, you know, increase costs on companies, but then they pass that on to consumers and it'll end up having this negative impact on people with low incomes. Like I think all of this is coherent with what he said. And what eliminates option D? D, okay, so an excellent way to reduce emissions and generate much needed revenue. That right there is the reason this is wrong because he doesn't seem to think of it as being excellent. Like he calls them far from a perfect solution. So that's clear, like he doesn't love them that much. Yeah, okay. Make sense? Yep. Yeah, so I think, you know, D, like when you're going through some of these items, you know, keep in mind some of these might be implied, but some of them will be more explicit. So like I saw this as being very explicit and so that made me lean towards this answer. And I think he established this whole idea that like the cost could potentially exceed any advantages. And he even did seem to give them some support when he says they may reduce emissions. Like, so he acknowledges that there might be some positive benefits of these taxes, but that the negative consequences are greater. And so I see that that, you know, is kind of that same logic is kept here with C with the same reasons. Thanks for the question. All right, moving on to three. I'm taking a look at yours. Yeah, looks like I must, I only see a couple here with some debate. So let's look at three. So this guy responds to this guy. Keith Hampton is the first one. So let's see what he said. He says social media can have positive effects on individuals such as increasing their sense of belonging and connectedness to others. Notice that there's like other people saying other things in these paragraphs. So again, don't read this. Please don't waste your time with this. Jean Twenge or whatever said things here too. Don't care. Not what they're asking me for. She could have had the greatest insights in the world, not interested. So I'm only worried about what these people have to say. So again, remember, just read what you need. So this guy says that there's positive effects, belonging and connectedness to others. This guy says it could end up becoming addiction and that you would actually like become reliant on these things for that sense of connection instead of real human connection, fair point. So look at my answers. I marked this one also, I think I agree with all of you. We'd likely acknowledge the potential benefits, but he would also caution against relying on it too heavily to avoid potential negative mental health outcomes. And that seems to be excessive use is something that he said right here. So that matches up really good. I think that would be the right choice. I think that this one goes too extreme. They pale in comparison to the risks. I think that this would be, he would have to be much more extreme in this. Like if he talked about people, I don't know, becoming extremely depressed or needing therapy or something after it, then maybe I could make an argument for A. I feel like this is a little too strong right here, too extreme. Deny that there are any again. We don't really like to choose these answers. Anytime we avoid absolutes, we always avoid absolutes. And then reject the idea that it can create a sense of belonging. That doesn't actually make sense because he says that you become reliant on those sites for that sensation. So he acknowledges that you can feel that, but you would be only getting it from the websites, from social media. So this isn't technically true. Like he does acknowledge that you can have that feeling. And that's why you might get addicted. So B is definitely the right choice. All right, I think this was the trickiest one that we got in here. And this one actually took me an extra bit to kind of process. So again, make sure you process this question carefully. So how would Onuma respond to a subsequent publication by Cato claiming to have completely proven his theory using Onuma's findings? Now there's a clue in this question. And that is this. We just have said that we don't like absolutes. And so Cato is saying I have absolutely figured it out using your work, Onuma. And I have taken my work and your work and I have completely proven this theory. So what I wanna look at is where is the theory not complete? Like there's gotta be something wrong with this. Cause we know that absolutes are bad. So I should be already reading this and going, all right, Onuma is gonna be like close, but wait, there's still something you haven't considered. Cause we know there's no absolutes. He's not just gonna say good job, buddy. Like he's gonna say, hold on, there's still this other detail we gotta figure out. And I can interpret that just from the question. Just knowing what I know about these things. Like I know that we're never gonna completely prove these things. There's always gonna be a little bit of something else that we have to investigate. That's just how science works. So what I gotta figure out is what that detail is, right? What would it be? Looking at like these two choices, right? I'll take a little look at what we got. So we're talking about the evolution of P. Japanica is the result of continental drift and climate changed. And that sea levels rose due to tectonic activities which caused populations on Sakhalin Island in Russia to move to Honshu Island in Japan. Okay, so basically sea level rose. This creature went to another island and therefore it evolved differently. Cool. Now Onuma said that he found fossil evidence on Honshu Island. So that goes back to this much time ago which is during the Myocene period towards the end of it. That checks out and it confirms the presence. So essentially he's saying I have found fossils that support your theory. Cool. Now, then what would be the thing that is not yet resolved? What is the thing that's not completely understood yet? I guess would be the question. And so looking at these options, like A says he would be pleased with Kato's work and welcome the confirmation of his own findings. Like this is just a little too perfect, you know? Again, I know there's no absolutes. Something's gotta be missing. And these are scientists. They would be like, well, hang on, good job. But there's still something else we gotta figure out. And that's why I don't love this answer. It feels a little too good to be true. Second answer says he would likely point out that while Kato's theory may provide some insight into the evolution of Pijaponica, its origins in Russia are still unconfirmed. And more research needs to be done. See, this feels right, origins in Russia. And it mentioned that it caused populations on this island in Russia to move to this island in Japan. How did they get to that first island? Like where did they really come from? Were they, like there's still some information we don't have. And so that's why I'm leaning towards B as the best answer. Take issue and expect the Kato credit. I don't think that's true because it just seems like that's, no. Question, the validity of the climate change theory. I mean, he seems to have kind of confirmed that because he says it provides strong evidence for Kato's hypothesis. So like this kind of contradicts the whole premise. Like Onuma provided evidence for Kato. So I don't think he would question the validity of the theory because he already confirmed part of it or provided some evidence for it. So I think the key thing here is what is the missing piece if we wanna completely prove this, we also need to get to the root of what happened in Russia. And that's why that would be your best answer, B. Yup, all right. So yeah, I think that was the most divisive one out of all the options. Again, we don't like absolutes. Just remember that rule. We don't like absolutes. Anything that says all, any, none, never, always, we should be careful about it. And seeing that in the question was like a red flag for me that said you should slow down and look for like what piece of information is not confirmed or not fully understood yet. And the fact that there was a question, a response, you know, telling me about that was like a good clue that that would be a good choice. And the last one here looks like we're in agreement on A. So Peter Heather, text two, address text one. So I'm gonna start with text one. Fall of Rome was due to its own internal moral decay and complacency among Roman citizens, a lack of motivation. Oh, the Romans got so lazy. And this person is saying, nope, it's competition with outside kingdoms. And there's ancient texts describing how invading armies destroyed much of Italy. All right, so basically two competing theories, they're gonna disagree, right? Now, I don't think that necessarily one disproves the other, they're just two different takes on the same situations. So look at it, A, I liked A right away. He would argue that internal moral decay was not the primary cause and instead point to external forces. Like that is what he's saying. He's like, look, I've studied this. I think it's the external forces. I think it's these other groups like Persia and Germania. Like that's basically summarizing the relationship between these two passages. That seems like a great choice. He would not argue that it's the primary cause because that would be agreeing with the first text and they don't agree. Prioritize written evidence over archeological evidence. I don't know that one is necessarily a lot better than the other here. And I don't think that this would be the right choice because they each have support and like why is one person's support better than the other? If, I mean, written texts could also be considered a form of archeological evidence if you found them, you know, like, eh, highlight the immense power of the external forces, completely, see again, completely disregarding any role is not usually the right answer. Like I don't wanna go with that absolute answer. I wanna choose an answer that's more reasonable with these things. So yeah, A checks out. A seems like the best choice. Lovely. Any questions? No questions. All good? Splendid. I got a few more of these in the folder if you wanna do any more for practice. Like I said, I don't feel like we need to spend too much time on them and from your answers, it looks like you're getting most of these right anyway. So that's good. I think the hardest one was in fact, number four, which I definitely intentionally made to be really hard. I think that's probably harder than what you usually would see on the SAT anyway. So don't sweat it if you missed number four. Looks like everybody else got the rest of these just fine. So I think we're good. Like I said, these are not very frequent. They're not super common on the test. So I wouldn't think you need to worry about them too much. But it is good to go over the strategies a little bit. And again, you notice, I'm always trying to play that rule of read what you need. I'm really just trying to look for the key details that I need. And like in this case, it gave me the claim. So I'm not gonna read this paragraph. I'm not gonna waste my time. In this case, yeah, I had to scan around a little bit more to kind of see what each person said. That was, this one took a little more effort. This one, I filtered out so much because it wasn't from these people. It was different authors in the paragraphs. So I just eliminate all this and I don't read it. And this was the one that took me probably the longest. I did sit here for like a good 90 seconds and look at this one to process it carefully because this was a bit of a confusing question, right? But again, this little detail kind of helped me understand. So that's why I always wanna make sure I understand the question completely and really analyze the question because this is what helped me find this answer. If it wasn't for this, I would have had a hard time. And the last one, again, I think was pretty quick. I'm just looking for the key details, like, and a lot of that's in the first sentence, right? First sentence, competition with outside kingdoms due to internal moral decay. I really didn't need to read much more than that. I did scan a little bit more forward to see if I could find any other details, but this was the key debate and then it's just about picking the right answer, which doesn't go too far to one side or the other. So yeah, process of elimination is definitely your friend here and we wanna avoid those absolutes because we can eliminate those very quickly. All right, let's get to another kind of question. We're gonna talk about some sentence function. I think these are pretty straightforward too. These are not that difficult. We'll knock out a few of these. Sentence function questions. Okay, so these are also generally considered easy questions. I typically have seen a couple of these on the first module and then when I got the hard module, I never saw these again. So I can tell that they seem to think that they are easy questions. When I deliberately butchered the first module and got the easy second module, I saw more of these questions. So from what I can tell, this seems like easy stuff according to the SAT people, right, like they think it's easy at least. So that means we wanna make sure we get these right because from what I can tell, also easy questions hurt you more if you miss them, so we wanna make sure we're doing these well. But again, I don't think we're gonna see a lot of these on the tests when we take it. So a couple of key words to keep in mind here, purpose, function. Whenever you see those terms, you are dealing with this kind of question. And basically what they do is give you a portion of the paragraph. They underline one sentence and they ask you the function or the purpose of that sentence. And so we can really just answer these very simply by doing what we always do. Read what you need, okay? I wanna read the underline sentence and I wanna read what comes before and what comes after. And that's really all I gotta do. If I read just what comes before and what comes after, I should be able to answer the question in most cases. So let's take a look. So there's what you'll see, right? We've got this is an example from the practice test. You see the second sentence is underlined here, right? And it's asking the function of that sentence in the overall structure of the text. This is a fancy way of asking, what does this sentence do? Why is this sentence here? That's all it really is. It don't overcomplicate this. It's a simple question really. It's what is this sentence for? Why is it here? What does it do? So let me look at that sentence. All right, so knowing that I wanna read the one that comes before and the one that comes after, I'm just gonna look at those. I'll start from the top, right? All right, the star beetle juice will eventually consume all the helium in its core and explode in a supernova, sweet. They're much less confident, however, about when this will happen since that depends on internal characteristics of beetle juice that are largely unknown. Okay, so they're telling me the star is gonna explode but then they're also telling me they're not sure when. And then astrophysicist, Seraphina L. Badrinance and colleagues recently investigated whether acoustic waves are gonna start to be used to, okay, so this sentence is telling me the thing they're trying to understand, the thing they don't know. So I can use that understanding right there to find my answer, all right? Again, all I'm doing here is looking at the question, seeing the function, knowing that I gotta look at this underlined part and expanding my search out to read a little bit more. I don't even really need to read all the way to the end, although like I say, if you wanna follow my sentence before a sentence after rule, that would include all of this cause it really is just three sentences. But like, I got it already. It's that sentence is telling me what they don't know. That's all it is, that's why it's there. They know that the thing is gonna explode, they just don't know when and that's the information they're giving me. So I can look at these answers and pretty easily choose the right one. It doesn't explain how the work was received. It doesn't explain the central finding, there is no finding, this is a problem. It identifies the problem they wanted to solve and did not, that's gotta be the right answer. That's it. That's all it is, they're telling me what they don't know which is the problem they want to solve, they want to know when this will happen. So it's gotta be this, simple as that. These are pretty straightforward in that sense. They're really just, what I like to do is sort of express it in my own words. What is this sentence doing? What is it telling me? What is it adding to the paragraph? And for me, it's like, okay, they're just telling me what they don't know. And logically they're scientists and so if they don't know something, they're gonna try to figure it out. And I could read all the way to the end and find that they did not solve this problem. But I don't even really have to do that because I can look at the other answers and see that none of them focus on this problem that they were trying to solve, which is what that is. This is telling us the thing they wanted to figure out. So it's really, really not that difficult. Any questions about this? Let's see. I think it's pretty clear. Well then, let's see you do some. All right, so I'm sending that to you all. Again, you can just go in the folder and grab that two sentence function set one. I got a lot of stuff in this folder now. And Nicholas, I do wanna do a break. Let's do it right after we finish this, okay? Cause I wanted to do something totally different. So let's just knock this out first and then we'll do a break. This shouldn't take us long. I'm gonna put a five minute timer on this and we'll just go through these quickly and then we can take a break. All right, so yeah, five minutes on the clock and go. Okay. Okay, so it's explaining inflation. Okay, so, yeah. It's D, right? Yep, uh-huh. And then, Collie is on this. All right, it's playing some terms. Yeah. And then he's using those terms again, okay. I don't know if that's totally true though. Cause he doesn't actually use this term ever again in the paragraph, so that's not right. So it's gotta be to come. Yep, let's see, uh-huh. And then the fourth sentence, that was massive, okay. These are a lot of different specific proposals. What are her proposals? Yeah, it's gotta be this quickly. Yep, fifth sentence is this one. Okay, we're talking about D-Day. Okay, costly victory. I don't think it's really just to generate sympathy. Yeah, yeah, easy peasy, all right. Send those answers over as soon as you got them. I got Camilas, thank you, that was five minutes. Should be able to answer five of these in five minutes. That's the target, that's the goal. Send me what you got, all right. Thank you, Nico. Thank you, Esteban. We got some different answers here, interesting. All right, we got our answers, responses coming in. Trying to kill a bug. Just landing on my screen, get out of here. All right, let's take a look at what we have. Let me share my screen with you. Boom, we got it. Okay, so the first one here, function in the third sentence. All right, so we have this information about Ben Franklin. It was one of the first pioneers who conducted experiments related to intellectual, all right, and created hypothesis on their behavior. Okay, so they're telling me things that he did. He conducted experiments, created hypotheses, and that helped pave the way for further exploration. All right, so right away, an example of his contributions to electricity research, that sounds pretty good to me. They're telling me what he did, that he did these experiments and created hypotheses. Like he's one of the first guys to kind of like start presenting ideas about this. Seems like that's a good example. Like, I mean, yeah, I'm probably gonna go with A. Again, just looking at this, I mean, they tell us, okay, few scientists were beginning to understand how this phenomenon worked, and there's that. And then as I read the next one, I see that it gets into somebody else, Alessandro Volta. And that's where I know I can totally stop reading because we're focusing on this guy, Ben Franklin, because he's in the third sentence. That's what I wanna focus on. So, like, look at my options. While this is true kind of, that's not exactly the right answer because providing example of how these things were invented using his findings. Like, not quite because it's really, you know, other researchers did this stuff. They started developing these things, right? Like, it doesn't directly happen because of Ben Franklin. It doesn't establish a causal relationship between the two. And really it's just telling us what he did. Like, why he contributed. It's really all it is. So, I feel like A is the best answer here. Nothing about modern day stuff and nothing about this guy because that's not who's in the third sentence. So, yeah, we're gonna say A, final answer. Looking at number two, see most people are between A and D, looks like. All right, fourth sentence. So, currency devaluation may also lead to consumers demanding more foreign currencies, resulting in for the price increases as domestic money loses purchasing power relative abroad. All right, so I need to know just the general topic of this real quick. And I'm looking at the first sentence that says inflation is a complex phenomenon, cool. So, we're talking about inflation, lovely. And then I'm assuming that what's in here because this says furthermore is giving me other explanations of like how inflation can happen. So, this is just one specific case of like how inflation can occur. And looking at my choices, it's not really, I mean, it's not supply and demand per se. It is kind of with regards to currency, but I think there's a more specific answer here. It's not about, doesn't mention the banks, doesn't mention government spending here. It just says how currency devaluation can lead to inflation, yeah. This is explaining how because it kind of explains it here. So, it's giving different reasons for inflation. One of them is currency devaluation and it explains how that works. So, D is the right answer. Simple as that. Looks like everybody got that right. Number three. Okay. His writing laid out, all right. First sentence tells me communism is from German philosopher Karl Marx. His rate out the concept of class struggle between those who own capital, the bourgeoisie, and working classes proletariat. Okay. Look at these options. Like, initially, I'm attracted to this first one. It defines terms that are important for understanding the rest of the paragraph. Seems like that could be a good answer because it does give us these terms in parentheses. Having said that, I would wanna test that because it says the rest of the paragraph. Do I see these words appear in the rest of the paragraph? And if I look, I see proletariat says it is here, but then bourgeoisie does not appear in the rest of this. I'm scanning for those words. I'm just trying to find the words bourgeoisie and proletariat and I don't see bourgeoisie. So this isn't totally true. Now, that's not, it had nothing to do with that. Nothing to do with that, but it does explain his concept of conflict, the idea of class struggle. So C is your best answer for sure. Looking at number four, I'm seeing some B's, I'm seeing some A's. Interesting, all right. So, let's see. Let's describe the function of the four cents. Okay, so this is a very long sentence. This is a very long sentence. I gotta be careful not to read too much against this. All right, so we have some information about Nancy Pelosi. It says that she's pushed hard against Republican attempts to appeal Obamacare, cool. Instead, she proposes all these things and I don't really need to know what all this says. All I need to know is that these are her proposals. Like, I'm not reading all of this. All I understand, I'm focusing on the structure of this sentence. It says, okay, she's pushed against Republican attempts to repeal this Obamacare and instead she proposes all these other things. Most of this sentence is her proposals. So, if I look at what I see here, A says, describes how she has opposed Republican attempts. It doesn't do that. It just tells me that she has pushed hard against them but it doesn't tell me how, it doesn't tell me what she's done. It's really telling me what she would like to do. It's her proposals. So, explains her stance on healthcare legislation with specific examples of policy proposals. It totally does that. It does that a lot. It's way more of this than it is this. And again, it doesn't really tell me the exact way that she has opposed those attempts. So, instead, it just says that she doesn't agree with them. Instead, she presents all these other ideas. I don't think that there's anything necessarily radical about her ideas here or how different they are because it doesn't compare the Republican proposals either. It just, no, so it's gotta be, it's gotta be B. Yep. All right, and then the last one, looks like everybody kind of agrees on this one. Fifth sentence. So, right here, as incredible as this victory may have been, it came with a heavy price. I'm reading this. I'll just read a little bit before to kind of see, you know, they say here, okay, three months in invasion, Germany was forced to surrender, World War II was brought to an end. Okay, so this was a big deal. Big victory, it was D-Day. All right, and we remember those who made the ultimate sacrifice on that faithful day so long ago. Okay, so basically what they're trying to establish here is that this was an extremely important victory in the war, but it also cost a lot of people. A lot of people died on this day. So remind readers that D-Day was a costly victory feels like the right answer to me. The only other option that really got my attention was to generate sympathy for the individuals who died, but I actually think that is more in this sentence. This matches with D really well, because we remember those people who made the ultimate sacrifice. Like the way it's phrased in that sentence, but this sentence just tells us how many people were killed there. So A is the best answer, definitely is. All right, any questions? All right, if not, let's take 10 minutes. Thank you for your patience, and we'll come back and we're gonna do a little bit of a vocabulary practice in a different style today. So I will see you in 10 minutes. For those who are here, I just wanna say thank you for being here. Appreciate you so much while we go on break here. Feel free to check out the folder that is linked in the description. I've added a bunch of new material to that folder. So you can go in there. I added like seven or eight more grammar exercises. There's a bunch more punctuation exercises as well. I added like two or three more supporting claims exercises because I know those tend to be really hard for people. And I got more stuff that I'm working through. I've got a backlog of material that just needed to be checked. And I wanna give a shout out to Malik for helping me check that stuff. Malik is a channel viewer and fan, and he volunteered to help me go through some of that material and just like big love, big love all the way. Thank you so much. So yeah, there's more material for you in the folder. Go ahead and check that out. Feel free to use it. Hit me up if you have any questions. We'll be back in a few. Alrighty. I'm sending a link to the chat. We're going to play a little game. I'm gonna test your vocabulary. Remember, vocabulary is 30% of the test. You can open this in another browser or on your phone or whatever. Put that link in the chat. So go ahead and open that up and get in there. All right, a statement's in there, an equivalence is in there. See you. Yeah, you're buzzing already? Trying it out. Yeah, we'll do a practice run on the buzzer so you can see what's going on here. All right, I see Firas in the house. All right, Camilo, Sofia, if you can hop in there. That link is in the chat. In the zoom is what we got. Now this is a very simple, simple thing. I'm gonna share my screen. I'm gonna show you a word and I want you to buzz in if you know the definition and can tell me the definition of that word. Simple as that. It's real simple. All right, we'll do a little practice run. I want to get everybody in here first though. So still missing a couple of people. You know, competition with three is okay but it'd be nice if everybody was in here. I feel like it does work better on your phone because then you can just be like, you know, like you can spam the button when you're ready. Obviously, you know, there may be some unfair advantages with latency and internet connections. We'll see how that plays out. I have seen that happen before. We're like the one dude that has fiber optic at home is just like whooping everybody and it's not fair. But, you know, we do the best we can with circumstances, so okay. Wait, so how does this work? I'll show you real quick. So right now, like I just reset all the buzzers, right? So you should have the option to buzz. The stable just buzzed in, for example. So stable, you're the first person to buzz. I would ask you what the definition of the word is. All right, I'm gonna put on the screen in just a minute, like words, okay? Any ideas for you to buzz in? If you can give me the correct definition of the word, we're gonna see what you guys know. So that's how this goes. So, all right. By talking or by writing down? I'd like, yeah, you can just open your mic and say it and we'll see what you got and then we'll proceed. Man, this stable is quick on the draw. All right, so I'm gonna reset. Don't buzz in just yet, all right? I'm gonna share my screen. In fact, I'm gonna deliberately be sneaky with it because I don't want you to like just jump on it just yet. All right, so let me move my things around here. Okay, so you're looking at my slides. I'm gonna switch tabs and you're gonna see a word, buzz in if you know it and say the answer or tell me the definition to the best of your ability. All right? Boom, word, doesn't even know it. All right, stay on your first, go ahead, tell me. I mean, I got a synonym, like does it, like does fantasy work? Fantasy, it's not exactly- Or fantastic. It's not quite like fantasy or fantastic. All right, Camila, what do you got? You're the next, also the rest of you guys can buzz in if you think you got it and we'll just go in order. God, Camila, tell me what you think. I think illusory is something that's not real. Okay, I think you're getting, yeah. I think that's a lot closer, right? Illusory, something that's kind of like hard to see or hard to understand maybe could be something that's not real, like an illusion. We'll see what it says, right? Not real based on an illusion. So yeah, I think your definition was the best. All right, so good stuff. Makes sense, this is how we do. So, and yeah, like I said, you can feel free to buzz in late if you want and then we'll just keep going through the people. So let's try the next one, boom. Nicholas. It could be referred to something being alive, like being, I don't know, like kind of energetic, I'm not sure how to describe it. Okay, kind of like very alive, energetic. That could be good. I would accept that. Yeah, but just always, would you say there? Maybe like, what was the last thing you said? Could also be used to describe right colors. Yes, okay, I think that's the context it's usually used in. Yeah, when we think about like vivid colors, like very strong colors, let's see what we got. I think, yeah, strong images, colors. I also agree with your first point, like you could say like a vivid, I mean, you could just use it to describe a person possibly. I do think generally it is gonna be associated with colors. So all right, solid answer. Let's see what comes next. I haven't done this deck in a while. Okay, this should be pretty straightforward. All right, Nicholas is quick, go for it. Being tired? Yeah, tired exhaustion, right? Something related to that, that dig, extreme tiredness, perhaps from too much work. All right, good stuff. Okay, Camila. I'm not sure, but I think it was like, to like move back from certain point. Okay, I think that's a good way to explain it, right? Move back, yeah. To recede, to kind of withdraw to move backwards from a point, yeah. I think that's a good way to describe it. Go back to a previous position, could even be, I think one, yeah. I like this example. Before a tsunami hits, the water recedes. So yeah, it implies, right, comes out, maybe comes back. I always see this word used in the context of men's hair. You have a receding hairline, because like it starts here when you're young and it just keeps going back and back until you look like me. So yeah, I'm familiar with this term for personal reasons. All right, solid ailment. All right, Nicholas. A sickness? Yup, that's it. It's just a synonym for illness, sickness, something along those lines, a small sickness or cause of physical discomfort, and ailment, you know? Yeah, I guess that's true. It's usually minor. It's usually not, like you wouldn't refer to like a heart attack as an ailment. You would, you know, this is, an ailment is not great, but it's also not like, you know, the end of the world. So usually you would assume this is kind of a small thing that doesn't bother you too much. All right, good answer. Let's go to the next one. A delusion. All right, Nicholas. Being short like being crazy. Okay, kind of like being crazy. I think there might be a little more to it than that. I want to hear it for us, things on this one. Yeah, I think it's like illusion. Like an illusion? Okay, so kind of like, you're, there's something unreal. I would agree with that. Esteban, do you got anything else you could add to this? I thought something misleading. Okay, I think that's actually getting a little closer to the right answer here. So when I think of delusion, I think of like, there is a similarity to illusion in that there is something that is not real. At the same time, it's like, maybe like a wrong belief or like an incorrect, like bad logic got you to this idea. I get where you were coming from Nicholas on the crazy idea, because sometimes we do associate it with someone who is delusional, is someone who's like, got a lot of wrong ideas, but maybe not going as far as to say crazy. So an incorrect idea that somebody believes strongly, I think that's a really good way to express it, better than I could do. Yeah, his dream of living in wealthy Beverly Hills is a delusion. Like, yeah, so you have this like belief that's really not accurate, but you really believe it and maybe you take it too far. So I think there's elements of truth in what all of you said. Someone who is delusional is like, acting on these kind of broken beliefs that don't make any sense. But to that person, it seems perfectly logical. All right, interesting one, I like that. To dissipate, what's the name to dissipate? It's an action, stay by. Maybe banish or dissolve, I don't know. Okay, I think those could be pretty good options for it. Yeah, like to banish something, like make it go away. Camila, what are you thinking? Same thing. Yeah, same idea. Okay, yeah. I usually think of this as like a gradual thing. If something dissipates, it goes away, right? But kind of like, maybe not instantly, it says to completely separate in all directions. Okay, I guess that's fair. Three days after I accidentally cooked a mouse that, whoa, this is a dark example. Geez, accidentally cooked a mouse that had crawled in my oven, the smell still hasn't dissipated. Dang man, that took a turn. Not the best example. Yeah, I'm curious, it's oddly specific. Like you gotta wonder if this actually happened to the guy who was working on these examples and he was like just drawing from personal experience. Having said that, as someone who's, I had a house fire and it is true, the smell of smoke never really dissipates. It just stays there for kind of forever until even if you do crazy amounts of cleaning. All right, so yeah, disperse similar concept to go away in different directions. I sort of think of it as like fading out, gradually going away. They're saying kind of in all directions, like to completely go away. All right, let's try the next one. To plead. That's a good English word, plead. Think of what it might sound like. Kind of similar to another word that we use a lot, which might sort of take you in the right direction. Nicolas. Based on what you said, I think it should be like being thankful. You're on the other end of it. But also, I was also thinking that I think that plead is used when you have to pay some amount of money to get out of jail. That's an interesting, so you're kind of on, you're like in the neighborhood of it. You're in the neighborhood, but not quite at the destination. Any other ideas on this one before I go into it? I think something like supplicate. Okay. Oh, sorry, I didn't listen. That's all right. Yeah, you said like supplicate for that. That's what were you gonna say? Yeah, it's like to claim something in the court. They use it in the court, as I know. Okay, so I'm glad you brought that up because that is actually a similar word, but it is different. So plead with a D is an action, and it means to ask for something, basically to kind of beg or ask for a favor. Usually it's more intense than just asking, right? It's kind of like similar to begging, like I plead with you for something, right? And so when you think about the court stuff, that's plea without the D. So your plea, the noun, is what you're asking. Like, and so in court we often say you plead guilty or he plead innocent. And so yeah, you're asking them to find you this way. So you're right. So it does have a legal context or application, but it does sort of change the meaning a little bit. So usually when we say plead, we plead with someone to do something. So it's to ask for emotionally to beg, right? Pleaded with the officer not to give her a speeding ticket, right? And yeah, the other context would be in the court system. So A, guilty plea or you can plead with a D guilty, like as the action. So yeah, you're all in the neighborhood with that one. Let's try a couple more. Anomaly, it's an anomaly. Nicolás. Something not normal. Yeah, something not normal, right? Something unusual, something out of the ordinary, something that is not normal standard or expected. Her experiment on the effects of caffeine on turtles. I like these examples. I like the idea of giving turtles a bunch of red bull and seeing what happens. That's the kind of science I would wanna do if I was a scientist. Can turtles move faster if I give the monster energy drink sponsored by monster? All right, propagate. Taking you a second. All right. Nicolás. I think it is just tread or to multiply around. Multiply around. Yeah, spread is a good, yeah. Spread is probably the best synonym for this, I think. I think you summed it up pretty well. Yeah, we think of this as something growing, spreading, expanding, spread widely, create more of, yeah. And it could be with something physical or it could be something like a concept like propagate the idea that you say here. So yeah, I think spread was a good answer for this. All right, Mohamed's in the house, too nice. All right, so let's see what the next one is. A relic. Any uncharted fans in the house? Camila. A bit of antique, but also with great value. Okay, good, something antique, great value. I would agree, yeah. Usually we think of this in the context of history or ancient civilizations or something, like a relic from another time. Yeah, a highly valued object from a very long time ago. I think you pretty much summed that up beautifully. All right, good stuff, light. Not the movie series or the books. Has nothing to do with attractive guys that become vampires or werewolves or whatever. Nobody's buzzing in. Surprising, okay. Maybe we need to learn this one. All right, Esteban, what do you think? Like when the sun goes down in noon? Is that right? It's in the evening part, basically, yeah. Like this is kind of like that last part before nighttime is the twilight, usually. The time of evening before complete darkness. So like, yeah, the sun's down, but there's still some of that like light curving around the earth. And there's still a little, like you can still kind of see the color of the sky and kind of like, you know, so that's the twilight, that period of time before it goes completely dark. Yeah, it's a time of day. All right, let's try another one. Grave, this can have multiple meanings. Could be an adjective, could be a noun. Muhammad, what do you got? Grave could be like a tomb. Okay. Or you can like grave, you can like grave some food. Ah, okay, you're close on that one. Actually, that's crave with a C. Yeah, similar sound, similar sound, but it's a crave with a C. So, when you crave something with, yeah, that's like a strong desire. Grave, your first answer was absolutely right. You could use it to say like a tomb, right? Somewhere where someone rests after they die. There's also an adjective meaning of this, which is kind of similar in Spanish actually, is for those from Peru here, you probably might have an easier time than that. Fidass, did you have another idea? Yeah, I think the adjective one would be that it's pretty serious. Yeah. Grave something very... Exactly, you got it. So yeah, that's what they were looking for in this particular case, very serious, but yes, both of those are true. So as a noun, it is the place where someone is after they die, where they're buried. As an adjective, it's something very serious. A grave situation, it's something that's a big deal. So you have to take it seriously. So yeah, that would be both good answers, nice. All right, let's do one more. Ooh, that's a good word, meticulous. All right, Nicolas. Being cautious and taking care of pretty much everything you do. Okay, being cautious, taking care of what you do, I like that. I think that's pretty accurate. Camila, what do you think on this one? I was thinking a bit more about precision and I'm looking into details. That's kind of where I go with it too, a little bit more. I think that's similar to what Nicolas is saying, but I agree with your word detail. I feel like detail is the key word here. Like meticulous implies a lot of attention to detail and being very precise with your actions. I like your definition. I think it's pretty good. Yeah, let's see what they tell us. Yep, with careful attention to details. So I think what Nicolas said was a pretty good general and I think you specified it just a little bit more. I would encourage everybody to check out this page and use it. It's in my slides actually linked in the vocabulary links in here, but there are several decks. You can log in and create an account and it will remember your progress on these. If I close this and come back, it won't, but if I log in, it will. And the ones that you mark with, like if you do this word and you say, oh, I didn't know what this is, then it will come back, it'll keep recycling it so that you get more comfortable with it and it will eventually pass it back on to you. So that's recommended. And I would encourage you to start with the hard words. Now, these are ostensibly for TOEFL, but I find that what's good for the TOEFL is also good for the SAT. Like everything from hard words to very hard words, these like one, two, three, four, five, seven decks are all really good to use. I feel like the hard words are very common SAT words. The very hard words, you sometimes see them, I think in the text, not always as answer choices, but you do see them. So really like if you wanna get good at vocab, practice all of these seriously. Like just spend 10, 15 minutes a day and go through as many as you can because I guarantee it will help you get better. And one of the last things I wanted to talk about today and this is just kind of talk about our homework as well. I wanna talk a little bit about reading in English and why it's really important. And I just wanna take our last two minutes to talk about this. I think something that's easy to miss when we do this test is that now that there are no long readings, it can be tempting to think that we don't need to read as much in English. And I think that the opposite is very true. I think it's still really important to read every day in English if you want to get better at this test. Reading short stories, articles, books, read something in English, whether you wanna get a fiction book or you wanna like get, I don't know, a book about a topic you like, get something, doesn't have to be physical, could be an e-book, whatever, but read, trust me. Like if there's one thing I would advise people who want to improve on English, it is read more in English. Especially considering how we're kinda short on SAT material right now, like reading more is gonna help you so much. And I think there's three things that reading really does that makes you stronger. First of all, it really helps you get faster at understanding text. When you are constantly feeding yourself text, it gets easier to process. So it's repetitions. The more you read, the easier it will become to read, it will become more natural. You're gonna be able to scan text faster, skim things faster for the main ideas. You're gonna develop more of an instinct as to what you need to read. And that brings me to the second thing, like the second thing is it really helps you understand your paragraph structure, because as you read a lot of paragraphs, you get more comfortable with that structure. And that's what we need to know for this test, is paragraph structure. So like that one we did with the sentence function where it was about Nancy Pelosi, and I just started, I stopped reading because I know, okay, based on these words and what I've seen, I know that they're just gonna give me a bunch of specific examples of her policies. So I don't need to know what they all are. I just need to know that there is a bunch of policies here. And then I see an answer that matches that and I'm done. So instead of trying to read every single one and make sure I understand it all, I can quickly understand because of the structure of the paragraph, because I've read so much, that like I know what goes in there. And that's gonna help you I think in a third way as well as getting an instinct of what a good paragraph looks like. And that helps you with grammar, that helps you with punctuation so much. That helps you with sentence completion, like knowing what a good paragraph feels like and looks like is gonna help you a lot. So if you're struggling a little bit with English right now, if you're feeling like you're not making enough progress on English, read, like read as much as you can. And I'm gonna leave you with a short story. It's four pages long, but two of the pages are all dialogue, so it actually goes by really fast. It's like not even really four pages in honesty. And I'm gonna give you some SAT style questions about it next week, but I want you to read that story for homework. And it's a short Hemingway story, but I think it's, so it's really easy to read because it's Hemingway. He's like super simple writing, but really good at, you know, I think giving you those things that you need to understand, like paragraph structure, context clues, you know, use of dialogue, like all the stuff that you're gonna see on the test is in there. Granted, it's all in there together, but it's good for you to read stuff. So I really would encourage you like read books, read articles, read short stories. If you have questions or you want suggestions on what to read, I've got a bookshelf full of stuff. I can tell you some of my favorites, but that would be my biggest piece of advice. Like if you want to get good, read, you know, like it's, there's no substitute for reading in English. So I will send that over to you and it's also in our materials folder already. It's called the end of something. The title is kind of a clue as to what it's about. I think it's a pretty good story. Very relatable for everybody. And then we'll do a little bit of work on that when we come back next week, okay? As a reminder, there is no Class Friday because Friday we have Semana Santa, like Holy Week stuff going on here in Peru. So Thursday and Friday are holidays here, so we won't have Class Friday. That's already been accounted for, so no worries there. And so you'll have math on Wednesday and then I will see you next Monday. All right, so if you have any questions, feel free to let me know. Otherwise, I'll see you next week. Bye, thank you. Bye. All right, see you guys. Thank you so much. Happy holiday. You too. Happy holidays. Thank you. Happy holidays. See ya. All righty, everybody. Thank you so much for checking out the stream today. I really appreciate that. If you have any questions about what we went through today, please feel free to leave them in the comments below. Love you guys coming back every week. And if you need any more material, again, I've added a bunch of stuff to the folder, so please check it out. Looking to add even more, and I know I promised practice tests eventually and I'm getting close to the point where I have enough material for that. I have a couple more things I need to do. I'm getting close, so I will have some full English practice tests for people available soon that are exclusively with our content so that you have a little bit more than the four tests that you get from College Board. So yeah, keep coming back. I really appreciate everybody checking this out and leaving your comments. Thank you so much. See you next week.