# data[].attributes.body
This problem stumped me at first because I didn't understand why there was an exclamation point after the 5. But after I viewed the example problem, I learned that you have to multiply 5 by all the numbers that are less than it. For example, in this case, you would multiply 5 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 1 which would equal 120.

# data[].attributes.body
This question stumped me because I thought I had to find the item with the lesser value. I didn't know I had to find the unit price for both, and then compare which value had a smaller unit price. If I were to solve this problem again, the correct answer would be the 3-kilogram bag because the unit price for this value is $5.45. The unit price for the 8-kilogram bag is $5.49. The unit price for the 3-kilogram bag is cheaper, which is why it's the better buy.

# data[].attributes.body
This question stumped me because I didn't realize the shape on the right had 2 dashes on the sides while the shape on the left had one dash on each side. Although the angles seem to be the same, the lengths aren't. If the shape on the right had one dash on each side, then they would be congruent.

# data[].attributes.body
This question stumped me because I thought that it meant to find the square root of the whole thing, not having to distribute it and then find the square root of that. Since I have to distribute it, I would rewrite the equation as, (2s+3)(2s+3) and then use the FOIL method to multiply the like terms and then simplify.

# data[].attributes.body
In this problem, I chose angle VUX and angle WXU. The correct answer was angle VUS and angle WXZ. I got this problem wrong because I got mixed up with alternate exterior vs alternate interior. The answer I chose, was alternate interior because they both share the line XU/UX. The difference between alternate interior and alternate exterior is that alternate exterior doesn't share a line with the other angle while alternate interior does.

# data[].attributes.body
This problem stumped me because I didn't know that when they used the word "36 OTHER performers," it meant that I had to add the amount of dancers and the other performers TOGETHER because the dancers also counted as performers. Therefore, if I add 10 to 36, I would get in total 46 performers and 10 of those performers would be dancers so I would then get the fraction 10/46 which is simplified to 5/23.

# data[].attributes.body
At first, this problem stumped me because I didn't really know how to solve it and I didn't know what "centered at the origin" meant. But I learned that if you want to decrease the size of the image, the scale factor would be less than one, or a fraction. If you want to increase the size of the image, the scale factor would be greater than one just like this problem. If we want to increase the point Q by a scale factor of 4, we would multiply the coordinates (2,0) by 4. Therefore, you would get (8,0) which is where point Q would be after the dilation.

# data[].attributes.body
In this problem, instead of finding the other endpoint, I just found the midpoint of the two points that were given. But since I have to find the other endpoint, the answer should've been farther away from point V. From this problem, I figured out that if I roughly graph in on paper, it's actually makes it easier to visualize the problem and notice which point I have to solve that makes sense.

# data[].attributes.headline
Multiply Numbers Written in Scientific Notation

# data[].attributes.subject
Multiply Numbers Written in Scientific Notation

# data[].attributes.body
This problem sort of stumped me because I didn't know what I did wrong, but after looking back, I figured it out. In my original answer, I put 13.6. But instead of writing the number like this, I could actually shift the decimal to the left, getting rid of the 10 in the 13, and instead putting that in the exponent. Therefore, the -6 exponent would turn into a -5 because I'm adding one more 10 which I got from the decimal.

# data[].attributes.body
At first, I didn't understand this problem because I didn't know if 0 was a rational number or not. But I learned that 0 can be a rational number because it can be represented as 0/1, or 0/2, and in the end, they both equal 0.