June 2019 Earth Science Regents Answers

Getting Through the June 2019 Earth Science Regents

The June 2019 Earth Science Regents was one of those exams that separated people who actually read the reference tables from people who just guessed their way through Part B-2. I spent a lot of time going over these answers with students, and the pattern is pretty consistent across the board. Let me walk you through what you need to know. Part A had 35 multiple choice questions covering the standard curriculum: solar system formation, Earth's atmosphere, weather patterns, plate tectonics, geologic history, and a fair amount of graph and map interpretation. The questions that tripped people up were mostly in the astronomy section, particularly around the relationship between a star's luminosity and its surface temperature. You had to actually understand the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram, not just memorize where things sat on it. Part B-1 had another 15 multiple choice questions. Part B-2 was where the constructed response questions lived — about 10 to 12 of them requiring short answers with specific formatting requirements. Part C wrapped it up with another 15 constructed response questions, mostly centered around interpreting cross-sections, weather maps, and stream table data.

I remember one student who lost three points in Part B-2 because she wrote "the Coriolis effect causes wind deflection" when the question specifically asked about the direction of deflection in the Northern Hemisphere. The answer they wanted was "deflected to the right." It's not being difficult — the grading rubric is very literal. If the rubric says a specific word or phrase, that's what they're looking for. Generic correct-sounding answers don't always land the points. The actual scoring scale for that exam put the passing mark somewhere in the low-to-mid 60s range, which is standard for NYS Regents exams. You didn't need to get everything right, but the gap between a passing grade and a failing grade was surprisingly narrow in some score ranges. Missing five questions in the astronomy section could be the difference between a 65 and a 72 depending on how the curve fell that administration.

How the Reference Tables Actually Work

The Physical Setting / Earth Science reference tables are provided during the exam, and a lot of students treat them like a backup plan instead of a primary tool. That's backwards. The reference tables contain most of the data you need to answer questions without memorizing everything. The flow velocity chart, the density table, the radioactive decay data, the mineral properties — these are all there. The trick is knowing where to look quickly. One counter-intuitive thing about this exam: the questions are often designed so that if you use the reference tables properly, you can answer them without having memorized the underlying formulas. The density calculation questions, for example, give you enough information on the question itself and in the tables that you shouldn't need to pull a formula out of memory. The students who got bogged down were the ones trying to recall equations instead of using what was right in front of them. Another thing people miss: the star and planet data in the reference tables isn't just decoration. Several questions on the 2019 exam directly referenced values from those tables. If you ignored the tables and tried to answer from memory, you'd waste time and potentially get the answer wrong.

What Went Wrong on This Exam

The weather map interpretation questions were the biggest source of point losses. Students kept confusing isobar spacing with wind speed relationships. Tighter isobars mean stronger winds — that's fundamental, but a surprising number of students skipped that part or got it backwards. The cross-section questions around groundwater and permeability also saw a lot of wrong answers. People conflated porosity with permeability, which are related but distinct concepts. A material can be porous without being permeable if the pores aren't connected. The geologic timeline questions were relatively straightforward if you knew the relative order of events. The ones that caused trouble involved matching fossil evidence to rock layers. You had to use the index fossil concept correctly — short-lived, widespread organisms that mark specific time periods. Students who just matched rock layers by color or texture without considering the fossil content lost easy points there. There's also a structural issue with how some of the Part B-2 questions are worded. They'll ask you to "explain" something but the rubric only requires a two-word factual answer. Overwriting those responses doesn't help and can sometimes hurt if you include an incorrect detail. The grading is holistic but precise — extra wrong information can cost you points on otherwise correct answers. Keep it tight and directly responsive to what the question asks.

Where to Find the Official Answers

The New York State Education Department posts the official answer keys and scoring rubrics for every Regents exam administration on their website. For June 2019 Earth Science, you can find the scoring key at the NYS Ed website under the test materials archive. The PDF will have the complete answer key for Part A, the scoring rubric for every constructed response question, and teacher annotations explaining any contentious items. Use the official rubric when checking your work, not third-party answer sites. Those often have errors, especially on the constructed response portions where the exact wording matters. One more thing: if you're reviewing this exam for retake preparation, don't just look at which questions you missed. Look at the ones you got right but only by guessing. The reference tables can cover for a lot of gaps in memorization, but if you can't use the tables efficiently under timed conditions, you're going to struggle. Time management on this exam is genuinely tight for most students. Plan your approach before you start — Part A first for the quick points, then Part B-2, then Part C, and leave the astronomy questions for last if you're weak on them.