Anyone else find Verbal solutions/explanations awfully inconsistent?

[87138]

I've noticed this a lot, not only between EK 101 explanations, but between different AAMC exam explanations.

There are plenty of "No, this answer is incorrect because it does not explicitly state this. For this answer to be correct, you would have to know the author's intentions", and then there are plenty of "it should be inferred from the author's tone that they would blah blah blah."

Obviously there are certain situations that warrant extrapolation based upon the author's writing style/subtleties, just as there are situations that warrant direct extraction of a word or phrase from the passage. But it just seems like there are plenty of times where it comes down to whether you think you should be conjecturing or should be restating from the passage. The hardest part is to know when to do which. And often I can tell when I'm at one of those questions before I end up grading it and reviewing the solution. At those times, I sit there and think "ok, which method do the test writers expect/want me to use?"

It just seems awfully wishy-washy.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[halekulani]

I've noticed this a lot, not only between EK 101 explanations, but between different AAMC exam explanations.

There are plenty of "No, this answer is incorrect because it does not explicitly state this. For this answer to be correct, you would have to know the author's intentions", and then there are plenty of "it should be inferred from the author's tone that they would blah blah blah."

Obviously there are certain situations that warrant extrapolation based upon the author's writing style/subtleties, just as there are situations that warrant direct extraction of a word or phrase from the passage. But it just seems like there are plenty of times where it comes down to whether you think you should be conjecturing or should be restating from the passage. The hardest part is to know when to do which. And often I can tell when I'm at one of those questions before I end up grading it and reviewing the solution. At those times, I sit there and think "ok, which method do the test writers expect/want me to use?"

It just seems awfully wishy-washy.

yeah...those problems get me every single time...and the explanations are always the same.

there is some link between evidence in the passage and words in the question such as "assertion", "support", "statement", etc.
i'll figure it out later today hopefully.

 

[MJB]

yes, to put it mildly.

 

[Brandon81081]

there is some link between evidence in the passage and words in the question such as "assertion", "support", "statement", etc.
i'll figure it out later today hopefully.

Let us know when you do

 

[osjx-82]

verbal sucks

 

[deleted106503]

I don't think the answers are too bad. Maybe out of the 60 questions, 3 I don't see completely. The rest usually just take quotes out of the passage to answer the question. I hate this method of explaining because it's implying I should "go back" instead of just using the "main idea."

 

[NewKidin2block]

a few questions in Physical and Biology can go either way, and solution manual doesn't say much about why wrong answer is wrong neither