My mistake: While looking at I, my first thought was about continuity.

While it’s true that the

function would be discontinuous because the limit does not equal f(1), the limit still does exist. I
chose B because of this mistake. From this problem, I have learned that it’s very important to
separate the idea of the limit existing and the function being continuous.
My mistake: This problem I just made a silly error – near the end I mixed up the negatives and
ended up with two -3x’s instead of a -3x and a 3x, which is why I picked E instead of A. What I
learned is to keep better track of negatives and their distribution in the future.
My mistake: here, I think I just wasn’t looking at it correctly. I can’t say for certain why, but here
I think I just put in the y coordinate of the point given in the problem (which is why I picked C).
The correct way to solve this problem is below, and I’ve learned to take my time a little bit more
when trying to figure out a problem.
My mistake: In this problem, I forgot about the fact that corners are non-differentiable. I
plugged in two and they were both equal, and from that I believed that it had to be
differentiable at that point, when in fact that was wrong. From this problem, I’ve learned that
corners are non-differentiable.
My mistake: upon seeing that I was plugging into both a corner and a point that did not exist, I
automatically assumed that the limit there could not exist, when in fact I mixed that up with
thinking the derivative at that point did not exist. Don’t mix up limits and derivatives!
My mistake: same as last time – I mixed up derivatives and limits. I saw I was plugging into a
cusp and a point that wasn’t there, so I assumed that the limit did not exist, when actually it’s
the derivative that does not exist at 2. Don’t mix up limits and derivatives!
My mistake: This time, I think I both mixed up derivatives and limits, and also just didn’t know
how to do the problem. When you went over it in class I remembered seeing a problem like this
a while ago, and I was able to help a friend correct this problem on their test corrections.
My mistake: This one I honestly just did not know how to do, but after having a friend explain it
to me I can figure it out. Using VLT, we know that the graph needs to cross the point ½ twice.
Therefore, the interval [1, k] and [k, 2] need to both include ½ . My choice of k=1/2 would not
quite work because the interval would be something like [1, ½) and (1/2, 2], which does not
include ½. The only value of k that would work for this is 0.
My mistake: I am honestly not sure how I got to 1/2 (not sure which numbers I plugged in
where, probably made some mistake in the computation too), but I do know that when solving
this problem I did not even think about the quotient rule. What I’ve learned from this problem
(which is solved correctly below) is that, when getting derivatives, always look for any rules
(product, quotient, chain, etc.) that can be used.
My mistake: Same as last time, but this time I know what I plugged in – I just put in the
derivatives for u and v and ended up with 5.5. Like last time, I didn’t look for the product rule
when I plugged in, and so I’ve learned to look for these rules whenever I can. The problem is
solved correctly below.