<p>i wonder if xiggi would like to respond to the accusations made by the darknight? lol</p>
<p>darknight isn’t accusing xiggi. </p>
<p>But perhaps the question shouldn’t have been “Is xiggi wrong??!!”
Then this might have been a more worthwhile discussion.</p>
<p>vocab doesn’t help at all</p>
<p>you should be able to eliminate most answers without knowing what every word means and then pick one that sounds correct</p>
<p>^that was just dumb</p>
<p>I got an 800 on CR without studying lists of vocab. Just read books. Most of the time, even if you don’t know a word you can figure it out based on roots (and no, you don’t have to study those to figure them out) and other answer choices.</p>
<p>it doesnt matter. you are naturally good at vocabulary. im jealous, as well as many others.</p>
<p>i just cant comprehend the thought process that one should be able to eliminate all 4 wrong answers without any knowledge of vocabulary.</p>
<p>This is such a pointless argument. It’s just plain wrong to group all students together and make one statement regarding the helpfulness of vocabulary lists for all students. Studying vocabulary lists helps some people, while the same technique can produce no results for others. It’s not always true that vocabulary lists are worth studying, and it’s not always true that there are better areas to spend time studying. We can pull up examples supporting both sides, but the examples can never cover all types of students.</p>
<p>I personally think that for the vast majority of students, there are better ways of gaining points than learning more vocab. More points can be gained learning grammar concepts, math concepts, passage analytical skills, etc.</p>
<p>However, students who have milked grammar concepts / math concepts / etc. to the last drop can gain from studying vocabulary lists.</p>
<p>In the end, it’s sometimes the most points can be gained from study vocabulary lists, and sometimes, there’s better things to focus on.</p>
<p>I completely agree with Mao’s post above. I am not jumping on the no-vocabulary bandwagon as some might have inferred from the first page of this thread. I studied vocab myself and found it to be the foundation behind my success on the CR since I have never had enough time to read challenging literature or any other material of equal merit outside of my personal schedule. But, first and foremost, the SAT is a test of reasoning, not memorization. Actually practicing and familiarizing oneself with the format and skills needed for the test supersedes any other consideration. Hence, on the SC questions, word context is key. If you go through a question and you reason that you need a word synonymous with “bad” in the first blank and “good” in the second, you have made a huge stride in helping yourself answer the question. Of course, now you need some knowledge of the meanings of the words below to answer the question, but truly, how vital is this in comparison to the rest of the test? Many test-takers can intuit the definition of words through “word-charge” or how it sounds in the sentence. So it is not reasonable to generalize the effectiveness of vocabulary study, as Mao implied, since all test-takers obviously have different strengths. </p>
<p>For instance, if a student were to take the SAT in a matter of days and they had two choices of study material: the CB Study Guide and a word list (Direct Hits, or whatever) what choice would be the most effective for maximizing his or her score considering that he or she had no prior knowledge of the SAT? The question is clearly rhetorical. So, obviously vocab study is vital for a respectable CR score, but studying that at the expense of the other skills for the test is clearly not as time-effective or wise for the average test-taker to see immediate improvement in his or her score.</p>
<p>The question of “does studying vocab help?” is completely based upon the individual test taker’s situation. For instance, if he or she already has a strong vocabulary - be it from reading a lot or other forms of learning - then studying vocab will most likely be a waste of time. However, one who does not have a strong vocabulary will benefit greatly from studying books such as Direct Hits. Especially when trying to reach higher scores (700+), a strong vocabulary is a must. Whether one assimilates that vocab from a vocab list or not is relative to each particular test taker.</p>
<p>Nice comment, SwaGGeReR. That is a generalized consensus that we should all be able to agree upon.</p>
<p>No i completely disagree</p>
<p>(im just kidding. i love being a rebel) :)</p>
<p>Wow, I was really surprised to see this thread. I am not sure why Xiggi decided to post a warning about vocabulary lists. With the huge number of threads and posts about vocabulary and what works and doesn’t work, anyone can make an informed decision about what to buy and/or study with minimal effort. </p>
<p>I have found the analysis done by Dark Knight (as well as the responses generated from each thread) to be very helpful in making the best use of our time and resources. </p>
<p>I agree with swans004 that most test prep companies and unfortunately a number of schools give studying vocabulary short shrift and do not feel it is “futile” to look for the best resources available. I was very surprised at the vocabulary my sons knew and even more surprised at the words they didn’t know when they started preparing for the PSAT and then the SAT. We have found that studying vocabulary has not only helped their critical reading score but also their essay score.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I do not consider Dark Knight’s posts to represent a list of “accusations.” He has posted a tremendous amount of information and shared what amounts to be a substantial amount of research on the hit and misses of vocabulary lists. I have a tremendous amount of respect for his efforts, especially since I did the same at a time when the “bread and butter” of the vocabulary lists fans was none other than the Barron’s 3500. I went as far as posting several lists on this site … because peoople liked them so much. Lists that included the 3500 words or other lists that offered a compilation of words that had appeared on the SAT in the past. </p>
<p>During the past five or six years, I have often explained my position on spending an excessive amount of time reviewing extensive lists of selected vocabulary lists. For some, it appeared helpful to review 70 times a list of 50 words. Considering the extremely poor record of appearing on FUTURE tests and the success in memorizing so many words, I thought that investing countless hours was indeed a VERY poor investment in time and efforts. I also explained that the difficulty of the test was, for the MOST part, not directly pegged to the difficulty of the vocabulary. ETS/TCB could write an extremely difficult and not use a single arcane word, but testing the deeper knowledge of secondary meanings of simple words. Examples? Think simple words such as low, rank, air, table … and thousands more. </p>
<p>However, my conclusion about the dedicated study of words did NOT come from the several mathematical analysis I made (as Dark Knight did) but from hundreds of examples of students who did NOT improve despite spending hundreds of hours on the study of word lists. Their problem? Every bit of gain yielded by recognizing 2, 3, 5, or even 15 words was dwarfed by lacking the proper techniques, the proper understanding of the test, and careless mistakes. </p>
<p>My conclusions remain the same --even after the removal of analogies: there are FEW students who will benefit from the study of hodge-podge lists of words. Those students come from the VERY low and the VERY high percentiles. The overwhelming majority of students should devote a VERY limited amount of time to the sterile study of lists, and NOT rely on a magical list of words. One should remember that we are all individuals. Our vocabulary has been built by experiences of close to two decades. Our reading comprehension, and our mastery of the finer elements of English are hardly based on pure vocabulary. Working towards improving positive approaches and developing good techniques SHOULD pay more dividends. </p>
<p>Fwiw, there are plenty of discussions on this subject in the archives on CC. Actually, you’ll find some linked in the sticky threads in this forum. </p>
<p>The decision to follow a certain path remains entirely individual. It is up to YOU to decide what works the best for YOU. Every bit of studying and practicing should help, but not everything will represent a wise investment. Most students I have known over the years do NOT have much time to waste. I maintain that the precious minutes that are available to most students should be reserved to practicing on official tests. </p>
<p>In MY opinion, adding 20-40 hours of dedicated practice should be much more fruitful than memorizing the latest “must read” list of words. </p>
<p>It’s a matter of choice.</p>
<p>PS This is for Dark Knight. What information should we learn from the words listed in your Post 4 and 5? Are those words supposed to have been acquired from one particular list? Are they supposed to represent an example of words that students might NOT know, short of reading a specific list? </p>
<p>For the record, most of those words should be trivial to the well-prepared student.</p>
<p>^Delighted that you have joined the discussion. As always, your insights are valuable and appreciated.</p>
<p>The words on Posts 4 and 5 represent the answers to vocabulary-based questions on the Saturday 09 PSAT. They demonstrate the types if words currently being asked by CB/ETS test writers.</p>
<p>Direct Hits defined, discussed, and illustrated all of these words. A student who studied DH would have reaped a substantial reward of Critical Reading points. In fact, it could easily have pushed some students over the National Merit threshold. </p>
<p>I agree with your general view of most vocabulary lists. As I have repeatedly documented, studying massive vocabulary lists in Barrons and other sources is both arid and a waste of time. However, DH seems to be more than just another “must read” list of words. It helped me and a large number of CCers prepare for the PSAT/SAT. Its record of success is now fully documented. Xiggi, I encourage you to take a look at DH. I will be very interested in your evaluation. Meanwhile, lets hope that the next SAT has blasphemous on it - LOL!!!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>DK, I understand your point of view regarding DH. </p>
<p>Although I did not discuss it in my prior post, your quotation of my earlier statement was a tad out of its original context. As stated in my prior post, I formed my opinion SEVERAL years ago, and well before the Direct Hits became available. I believe that it is still pretty clear today that a listing that includes “TestMasters: 2 Hits; Princeton Review: 2 Hits; Hot Words: 3 Hits; Rocket Review: 2 Hits; and finally Barron’s: 9 Hits” is hardly a positive testimonial for spending time on such lists, especially when analyzing the EXACT words that provided a “hit.” </p>
<p>All in all, as your analysis seems to indicate, it is entirely possible that reading Direct Hits offers a much better return on one’s time and investment than it was possible a few years ago. After all, there is a world of difference between reading words in context and simply trying to memorize 3500 words. </p>
<p>For good measure, I paste the original exchange. HTH! </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>@ ATLMOM Thanks for your post. I’ve had the same shocked response when a student that attends a good quality high school and has taken a test prep course doesn’t know a word like “malleable” - that one came up just a few days ago. Yikes!</p>
<p>As for Xiggi’s very thoughtful post, I appreciate his position and the experience that led him to it. But I just don’t agree with the supposition that only the outliers benefit. My experience actually leads me to the position that most students need SOME vocab prep, and a smaller percentage need a LOT of vocab prep. As with my above example, I am amazed at the limited range of usable vocabulary many students master. While some are reading everything they can get their hands on, many, many more aren’t. While handing someone a list of words and asking them to memorize it isn’t particularly effective or efficient, there are some very, very good vocab resources out there that make learning as easy as possible (not to mention letting parents/students/teachers monitor progress over time…that’s why I’m such an advocate of Word-Nerd.com, it’s efficient and I know exactly what a student’s been up to, or not!). I know I like being able to point to specific weaknesses with vocabulary to help a student best direct their time and efforts.</p>
<p>As for the time commitment, it can be hardly noticeable if a student starts early. We can certainly all agree that no one should put off prep till the week before the test! When I’m approached by a freshman or sophomore wanting to get started on SAT prep, I generally discourage them to wait for a bit with the exception of getting a jump on vocabulary. I don’t think there’s any doubt that gradual development of vocabulary is desirable, and there’s no reason that this process shouldn’t be spaced over months or even years.</p>
<p>And no one has really touched on the fact that a diverse vocabulary is enormously valuable in life. We’re very focused on school and testing here, of course, but vocabulary (unlike geometry, for example) is a skill that we all will use throughout our lives. Unfortunately, as I noted above, schools are often not doing much to help students with vocabulary, especially those to whom reading doesn’t come naturally. </p>
<p>So, count me firmly on the side of studying vocab, but firmly against word lists. It’s all about how you go about it! Thanks for the thoughtful discussion, everyone.</p>
<p>
I question the premise that SAT vocab needs to be learned by memorization from any vocab study guide. The vocabulary terms you posted are not particularly advanced, and I would be extremely concerned if they were the weakest link in a student’s preparation for the PSAT.</p>
<p>If the Saturday PSAT words are so easy why will only 2 percent (or so) of test takers score a 750 or above and only 5 percent (or so) of test takers score a 700 or above?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There is a very simple answer to that. Contrary to the belief of the many who have a rather superficial understanding of what is really tested on the SAT or PSAT, the pure mastery of vocabulary accounts only for a small PART of the entire exercise. </p>
<p>In fact, if raising scores for reading and writing hinged on the extensive study of vocabulary only, students would find it easier to raise their scores. As an example, someone might learn every word on the Barron’s 3500 list and fail to improve his or her scores. </p>
<p>Reading the thousands of CC posts regarding the frustration of students in dealing with the Critical Reading sections should make it quite clear where the true difficulty of the test resides.</p>
<p>Isn’t SC section of CR, ONE THIRD of a CR score? And as I said before, SC questions are not the only part requiring a good vocabulary. Some passage-based questions are based heavily on vocabulary knowledge. </p>
<p>Since more than a third of a CR score depends on vocabulary I don’t think it’s role can be downplayed to be accounting “only for small part of the entire exercise.”</p>