CB反作弊大战重拳出击，推迟考试+惩罚泄题+取消考场+独立考卷
2019年申请的孩子，赶上了SAT考场关闭、考试推迟、出分延迟、留学政策收紧，可以说是最难的一届了。
本文含亚太考区各大考场情况➕香港考卷全部内容回忆➕新西兰卷阅读考试内容回忆。
各考场情况
延迟考试+提前泄题+考场取消+独立考卷
香港考场考试被延迟到11:30，台湾取消了4个考场， 越南取消了1个，马来西亚取消了1个高中考场，印尼和日本也有部分考场取消，迪拜部分考场因为泄题而被取消，新加坡考场正常。
于此同时，新西兰采用了与其他亚太考场不一样的独立试卷。
香港
考试延迟
香港的亚博考场一向是众多亚太考生的优先选择，就在考生们准备9点考试时，香港考试及评核局突然宣布考试延迟至11:30开考，也就是4:30才结束考试（含写作），如果不考写作的话也要4点才能结束。
延迟原因
其实这次考试延迟情况也多少能被预见，最近香港的生活被暴力游行所影响，昨天（周五）晚上尤其厉害，极有可能是因为《禁蒙面法》的出台。香港地铁今天（周六）早上全线关停，平时周末畅通无阻的道路在部分地方也是拥堵不堪。
图为火箭学员微信朋友圈
考场情况
有同学感叹：“我要和一万个人在一起共享3小时空气”
同学们席地而坐等待11:30考试开始
亚博也第一次给家长安排了等待休息区
迪拜
取消部分考场考试
迪拜考场曾经是一些有“非分之想”的人的黄金胜地，但好在政策逐渐收紧。但2019年10月这次的考试有人提前得知“要旧题重考”（和新西兰同一套考卷），并且提前将消息扩散。针对这次泄题事件，CB官方大刀阔斧地取消了迪拜部分考场的考试。
除了迪拜，台湾、越南、印尼和日本也有部分考场取消。
新西兰
考场采用独立试卷
由于时差问题，新西兰考生结束考试的时候，其他亚太区考生基本还没有开始考试，这给跨时区的考试舞弊行为创造了“机会”，CB官方也一直在跟作弊者斗智斗勇，今年8月采取“梅花卷”（同一套卷子使用不同题目顺序），但是依旧没能杜绝作弊。
而本次考试，CB在新西兰采用不同与其他亚太考场的试卷(17年3月北美卷），让利用时差窃题/泄露题目变得毫无意义。本来也采用这套试卷考试的迪拜考场则被在考试当天凌晨取消。
新加坡
一切正常
火箭学院新加坡考团一切顺利，学生准时入场考试。可能稍许有一点晚开场，但是肯定不是像亚博那样晚2个半小时。
带队侯老师与火箭哥对话
10月SAT考情分析讲座内容
1. 本次考试复盘——整体内容与重难点
2. 后面考试是否在题型上会有变化？重难点、curve等预测
3. 不同程度的孩子，怎么开展备考计划？
主讲人
时间
10月6日晚8:00
地点
火箭学院多群联播
听讲座发送106给火箭哥
考试内容回忆（香港卷）
阅读
阅读第1篇 | 当代女性成长代沟话题
作者：Anita Desai
选自：The Artist‘s Life
概要：主人公画画没有得到父母的认同理解。
阅读第2篇 | 社科类话题（双图）
作者：Colleen Haight
标题：The Problem with Fair Trade Coffee
概要：咖啡自由贸易，导致好的越好赚差价，差的越差应付差事。
阅读第3篇 | 科学类（无图）
作者：Paul B Wgnall
标题：The Worst of Times：How Life on Earth Survived Eighty Million Years of Extinctions
概要：通过对于化石的研究得出对于物种多样性的新发现。
阅读第4篇 | 历史类（双篇）
第一篇历史
作者：Colleen Haight
标题：The College, the Market, and the Court; Or Woman's Relation to Education, Labor, and Law
第二篇历史
作者：Sarah Cooper
标题：woman suffrage -cui bono
概要：第一篇强调女性不只要抽象概念上的权利，真正需求是要政府给予实际的公民权利，主要的诉求就是要投票权。
第二篇，女性虽然对于权利的现状是不满的，但是大多数女性对于投票权并没有表现出明显的兴趣也算是一种无声的反抗形式。
阅读第5篇 | 生物科学类（有图）
作者：Seth S Horowitz
标题：
The Universal Sense: How Hearing Shapes the Mind
概要：蝌蚪发育成青蛙过程中的听力问题。
语法
语法总体难度较为简单，文章容易理解，合并句子题和用词的简洁原则考察居多，语法规则里面考到了并列连词以及run-on句型的用法，都是常规考点，词汇题考到了invoke和evoke的区别，属于常见形近词辨析。
没有句子排序，也没有插入题，只有删减，语篇题偏少，比较考察学生语法基本功，大部分都是语法题。没有考很难的词汇，也没有固定搭配。
语法第1篇 | 商业文化类
讲了悠悠球的风靡世界的历史过程。
语法第2篇 | 生态旅游
讲了两个例子，第一个叫ties的在线学习程序，可以给人建议怎么保护环境；第二个阿拉斯加的生态旅游业，阿拉斯加现在虽然还有许多旅游项目，但是只允许有经验导游带领的小团体，而且在阿拉斯加给游客住的营地也使用了节电技术。
语法第3篇 | 生物类
一种叫opah的深海恒温鱼类，调节温度的方式与endotherm恒温动物&exotherm变温动物都不同。
语法第4篇 | 信息技术类
虽然加速播放音频speed listening的软件很流行，但对于听故事来说是非常不利的。
数学
本次数学较为简单，都是常规考点。
统计中有散点图和柱状图的考察，没有考察箱形图，考到了数据变化对中位数和平均数的影响；
几何中考察了一题基本的三角比的内容，相似三角形和圆的基本公式求半径的问题，都较为常规;
代数相关没有出现较难的题型，值得注意的是这次考察了一题概率的基本概念而不是以two way table的形式出现，不过有基本概率知识的同学都能够答对。
写作
考试原文（下滑查看全文）
The fall season in gender-gap news has started early and with a bang. A study released yesterday in the Journal of the American Medical Association shows that male doctors earn over 25% more than female doctors. Why am I not surprised? There is a constant stream of stories showing gender disparities like this: that Obama gave only 35% of Cabinet-level posts to women, that men still write 87% of Wikipedia entries, that they are approximately 80% of local news-television and radio managers, and over 75% of philosophers.
After decades of antidiscrimination laws, diversity initiatives and feminist advocacy, such data leads to an uncomfortable question: Do women actually want equality? The answer seems transparently, blindingly, obvious. Do women want to breathe fresh air? Do they want to avoid rattlesnakes and fatal heart attacks?
But from another perspective, the answer is anything but clear. In fact, there’s good reason to think that women don’t want the sort of equality envisioned by government bureaucrats, academics and many feminist advocates, one imagined strictly by the numbers with the goal of a 50-50 breakdown of men and women in C-suites, law-school dean offices, editorial boards and computer-science departments; equal earnings, equal work hours, equal assets, equal time changing diapers and doing the laundry. “A truly equal world,” Sheryl Sandberg wrote in Lean In, which is still on the best-seller lists months after its spring publication, “would be one where women ran half our countries and companies and men ran half our homes.” It’s a vision of progress that can only be calculated through the spreadsheets of labor economists, demographers and activist groups.
It would be silly to deny that equality-by-the-numbers researchers can deliver figures that could alarm even an Ann Romney. There’s the puny 4.2% of female Fortune 500 CEOs, the mere 23.7% of female state legislators, the paltry 19% of women in Congress. But while “numbers don’t lie,” they can create mirages that convince us we see something we don’t. Take, for example, the JAMA study about the pay gap between male and female doctors. The study seems to capture yet another example of discrimination against women. But because it fails to consider differences in medical specialty or type of workplace, that appearance may well be an illusion. Surgeons and cardiologists, who have long been in the ranks of the top-earning specialties, remain predominantly male. Meanwhile, as women flooded the profession, they disproportionately chose to become psychiatrists and pediatricians, specialties that have always been among the least lucrative.
(MORE: The Pay Gap Is Not as Bad as You Think)
There are reasons for this particular wage gap that are gender-blind. Surgeons need more years of training, perform riskier work (at least that’s how malpractice insurers see it) and put in more unpredictable hours. Unsurprisingly, according to surveys, women who become doctors approach their work differently than men. They spend more time with each patient; when choosing jobs, they are far more likely to cite time for family and flexible hours as “very important” and to prefer limited management responsibilities. Male doctors, on the other hand, are more likely to think about career advancement and income potential.
This hints at the problem with the equality-by-the-numbers approach: it presumes women want absolute parity in all things measurable, and that the average woman wants to work as many hours as the average man, that they want to be CEOs, heads of state, surgeons and Cabinet heads just as much as men do. But a consistent majority of women, including those working full time, say they would prefer to work part time or not at all; among men, the number is 19%. And they’re not just talking; in actual practice, 27% of working women are on the job only part time, compared with 11% of men.
(MORE: Let’s Not Forget, Many Working Moms Want to Work Less)
Now, a lot of people might say that American women are stymied from pursuing their ambitions because of our miserly maternity leave, day care and workplace-flexibility policies. But even women in the world’s most family-friendly countries show little interest in the equality-by-the-numbers ideal. In Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Finland, according to the OECD, women still work fewer hours and earn less money than men; they also remain a rare sight in executive offices, computer-science classrooms and, though the OECD doesn’t say it I’m willing to bet, philosophy conferences. Sweden, the gold standard of gender equality in many minds, has one of the highest percentages of women working part time anywhere in the world. Equality-by-numbers advocates should be thinking about women’s progress in terms of what women show that they want, not what the spreadsheets say they should want.
考试内容回忆（新西兰卷）
阅读
阅读文章属于正常难度，小说是常考性格主线，科学类文章是常考结构，科学双篇是观点类+观点驳斥类文章，历史有些出乎意料，是偏哲学的超验主义大家爱默生的论政治。
阅读第1篇 | 人物类
作者：Ian MacEwan
题目：Atonement
概要：主人公Briony是一个喜欢整洁、收集小东西和秘密的、喜欢写书的小姑娘，小说实线部分比较简洁，围绕人物以及人物关系进行，虚线部分主要是Briony性格特点。
阅读第2篇 | 社会科学类
作者：David Disalvo
题目：What makes your brain happy and why you should do the opposite
概要：文章结构属于研究型结构，通过两个reports 来分析metaphors的作用。
阅读第3篇 | 科学类（研究型结构）
Bone study shows T.Rex Bulked up
阅读第4篇 | 历史类（单篇）
Emerson的Politics
强调三块内容：个人主义的重要性，反对政府，以及畅想的新社会模型—有智慧的人统治世界，偏散文体。
阅读第5篇 | 科学类（双篇）
话题是火星，第一篇所持观点：火星上有足够的水帮助生命形成。第二篇先提及Conventional View，即第一篇观点，接着驳斥，认为火星上的水存在时间不长。
一点建议
1. 绝不参与作弊，理性去听最科学的考前预测
2. 选择稳定的大考场（亚博虽然延迟，但是那么大考场取消的可能性还是比较少；此次表现最稳定的是新加坡考场）
3. 选择最优化的备考方法，强化自身实力，以不变应万变。
图为Chen老师考前阅读冲刺讲解
图为姚老师考前语法冲刺讲解
写在最后
大家虽然是只有十六七岁的孩子，但都是为了梦想努力的一群人，火箭哥想对你们说，一定要坚持住，我们一起加油！
扫描二维码
添加火箭哥为好友
得1V1咨询规划机会