<p>As of late, I have been contemplating the obvious farce the SAT seems to be, in my opinion. Having searched through many threads and reading far too many responses to questions such as, "How long does it take to raise my SAT score x points" and others of the like, a thought in my mind points to the pure and simple fact that perhaps the SAT is not really a test that is capable of measuring what you really know. On the contrary, perhaps the SAT is but a test of endurance, measuring your capacity to seriously sit down and master topics? What is your opinion on the system of the SAT?</p>
<p>In my opinion, the SAT is not a good measure of aptitude. But I do think its a decent measure of how successful a student will be in college, and even throughout their lives.
The SAT is something that an average kid can practically master with enough practice and test taking strategy, and because of that there a good amount of hard working students who aren't necessarily brilliant that are scoring brilliantly on the SAT because of their work ethic anddetermination. These are the types of students who will be successful in college, not because of their fantastic learning aptitude, but because of their willingness to work hard.
Then, there are those students who are scoring in the 2000's without much practice at all, simply because they thoroughly understand the material. These students will also most likely be successful in college because they have such a strong foundation of some of the basic skills required to be successful in college.
Of course there will be exceptions, such as the genius student who has absolutely no work ethic and fails his college courses which should be a breeze, or the student who simply isn't a fast enough learner to succeed in college, but has been practicing the SAT since the age of 6.</p>
<p>Actually I'd say the CR is the only real measure of aptitude. I think people who are avid readers can really distance themselves from non-readers in this section, as the consensus is that it is the hardest section to improve on through studying, and that's how I think the SAT should be. I scored 2300+ and the only real studying I did was memorize vocab and learn grammar rules. The math and writing sections are both pretty easy to master...The math is so simple it's not even funny, and the writing is easily conquered throough learning grammar rules and doing practice problems. The essay grading is also formulaic and if you're even a decent essay writer you should be able to pull a 10-12.</p>
<p>Overall though I think the SAT still does a pretty good job of predicting college success and separating student abilities, since obviously not everyone can study like crazy and get a 2400.</p>
<p>The SAT is just the SAT, which is what colleges, who control your future, want, and for me thats good enough for me to study my butt off no matter how stupid/moronic the test is >_<</p>
<p>It mostly tests you with third grade level math problems, except the people who create the math problems are in third grade, and don't have good enough grammer to correctly trick you into getting the problem wrong.</p>
<p>SO it is mostly, can you follow the instructions of an illiterate 3rd grader, to solve one of his/her stupid problems.</p>
<p>If yes, then the test is for you. Some of us arent so good at deciphering third grade work, and the true meaning of it all, so we have to resort to the ACT.</p>
<p>haha, i know. my last post is probably my favorite piece of all time. It really shows how much i hate the SAT over the ACT. Its is easier math, and for some reason i do way worse on it. 34 on the ACT math is much better than 700 sat...xcept i got that my first time on ACT, and my second time on SAT (640 first time)</p>