It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
reply to post by kaylaluv
if they were simply annoyed they would have just smashed it. They ate it because they were hungry.
here is another that was on one of kids exams:
There is a band leader and 100 other band members. If the band members lined up in rows of 10 how many rows would they have in all?
Originally posted by CaticusMaximus
Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
reply to post by kaylaluv
if they were simply annoyed they would have just smashed it. They ate it because they were hungry.
here is another that was on one of kids exams:
There is a band leader and 100 other band members. If the band members lined up in rows of 10 how many rows would they have in all?
Why waste a good fruit by smashing it though?
To answer this other question that on the test, the answer would be 11. There are 101 band members. One of them is the leader, but is still a member, implied by the word "other". If "other" was missing, it would imply the leader was not a "member", and would not line up with them. 10 rows of 10, and 1 row of 1, is 11.
Thats how I see that, anyway. If Im wrong, Ill blame the test writers lack of clarity
Originally posted by sirhumperdink
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
except we all know what a pineapple is and that they cant move.... it would be more than safe to assume it cant unless the story specifically says otherwise
they make it a point that it cant move by saying it hasnt moved by the end of the race.... and that the other animals eat it (not mentioning any attempt at escape on the part of the pineapple)
the rabbit knew it could win yes but it was tricked into running a race against a PINEAPPLE
the owl however knew the pineapple had no tricks and that there could be no race ...the rabbit would just be running by itself
I forgot to mention, fruits and vegetables were able to speak too
Originally posted by getreadyalready
To address some other comments all at once. In a reading comprehension test, you cannot make assumptions like "wise owl." You have to go by only what is in the text. The hare didn't speak anything important other than to accept the challenge. The moose ended up being wrong about the trick, so by process of elimination the owl spoke the wisest words. The words were true, and they ended up being repeated as the moral of the story. Of course it was the owl.
I was more concerned that the questions were worded so simplistically? Are they afraid to use an important vocabulary word like "chronological?" I had to re-read that question twice because it was dumbed down so far.
I agree with others, there are wonderful works of prose out there, with accepted scholarly opinion, why would they write something from scratch? Why not expose the kids to some classic literature?
Originally posted by pavil
Originally posted by antonia
Which animal spoke the wisest words?
A The hare
B The moose
C The crow
D The owl
It's the owl
It's always the Owl that the wisest eh? Just because he knew how many licks to get to the center of a tootsie pop I reckon? That Smacks of Owl Superiority to me.
And people wonder why our education system is a mess.
Originally posted by grey580
Each and every principal and teacher needs to be fired from their job.
Really? Not sure what the answers were?
Teachers, principals and parents contacted by The News said they weren’t sure what the answers were.
Oddly enough this weekend I was talking to my father in law who's from Equador.
He was telling me that in Equador he was taking Calculus when he was in school.
Before he got to high school.
As a country we are so screwed.
Originally posted by antonia
I found an interview with the author of the passage
blogs.wsj.com...
He says that there are no answers.
Originally posted by CaticusMaximus
Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
reply to post by kaylaluv
if they were simply annoyed they would have just smashed it. They ate it because they were hungry.
here is another that was on one of kids exams:
There is a band leader and 100 other band members. If the band members lined up in rows of 10 how many rows would they have in all?
Why waste a good fruit by smashing it though?
To answer this other question that on the test, the answer would be 11. There are 101 band members. One of them is the leader, but is still a member, implied by the word "other". If "other" was missing, it would imply the leader was not a "member", and would not line up with them. 10 rows of 10, and 1 row of 1, is 11.
Thats how I see that, anyway. If Im wrong, Ill blame the test writers lack of clarity
Originally posted by mwood
Does nobody have an imagination anymore? What is so hard to follow about the story?
Sure it's silly and imaginative but I don't see why people couldn't read it and answer the questions the best they felt they could.
you make a cartoon about a sponge that lives under the sea in a pineapple and has a snail for a pet and a squid for a friend and THAT people understand......
All these ridiculous reality shows people understand...........
I think as time goes on people are just getting stupidyier (I know that's not a word, just trying to fit in)
Originally posted by CaticusMaximus
Originally posted by Sly1one
It made no sense up till the questions.
The questions are easily answerable. The point is to answer the questions not analyze the logical practicality of the "story". They aren't looking for logical or rational explanations of the absurd...
All the questions are easily answerable if you stick to answering the questions and refrain from adding assumptions to what the story "means"...the story doesn't MEAN anything...the story isn't meant to be deconstructed to find meaning or value...its meant to test someones ability to answer the questions by identifying irrelevant information and identifying it as such, discarding it and answering the question without adding assumptions regardless of whether or not they are logical or rational.
I totally understand where they were going with this question and the intent they had behind it.
The debatable part from my stand point is whether or not its appropriate for that age/grade group.
Before reaching page 5, I was going to say something similar. I agree with these thoughts in this post and those following.
I think most of the objections people have over this story are insignificant. The story is a story to test reading comprehension, NOT a story meant to be contrasted with so called "real" life, with the goal to be the pointing out of inconsistency, nor a story meant for the individual to personally interpret.
The prime example being, of course, the question on whose the wisest. Who the individual personally perceives to be the wisest is not relevant, which I think is a severe hang up for most people here, and elsewhere (the problem is separating the contextually objective, from the subjective opinion, which Ive noticed throughout my life is a problem for most people). The question is practically answered for the individual in the final line of the story. Morals of stories are impartments of wisdom, thus the one who most closely reinforced that moral in the story was the most wise IN THE CONTEXT OF THE STORY AND QUESTION, which is the only thing that is relevant.
But since everyone seems to be adding their own take on who was the wisest, Ill add mine. It was the pineapple, because the pineapple, IMO, successfully played everyone else for a fool.
Honestly within the context of the story, the questions to me are easily and logically answerable.edit on 4/23/2012 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)edit on 4/23/2012 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Mr Headshot
No syntax problem. The general rule is that if you were to take out the "you" would the sentence be proper saying "I" or "Me" and leave it as such.
Originally posted by sirhumperdink
its absolutely ridiculous that they hadnt at least been exposed to the idea subways are a big deal in other areas of the world