<p>The SAT Math and English sections are much easier than the ACT ones in my opinion, but the SAT vocabulary is my big turnoff. If they’d stuck with analogies, it would be the easier of the two.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I really, really don’t think it matters. That said I have a much higher ACT score (35 vs. 2200) so maybe I’m biased. I asked my school’s college and career center counselor (who is actually very knowledgeable) about it and she said it would be silly to retake the SAT. I also think that at elite schools, you are SO much more than a test score that the difference is negligible.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Calculators don’t really help much on either test: There are usually back-door shortcuts to solving these problems and time pressure usually causes students to immediately begin with brute-force calculator attempts rather than take time to reflect for 15-30 seconds to find the shortcut. My son went to his PSAT and second ACT sittings without a calculator and got perfect scores on both. Admittedly, he already had his first 36 in hand with college apps finished, so he wasn’t feeling any pressure.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Out of 1.5 million test-takers, around 800 get a 2380 or better; about 580 get a 36 ACT, which includes all 35.5 averages and above; about 300 get a 2400; and probably less than 150 get a 36.0. But out of 1.5 million tests, that’s really splitting hairs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know exactly how many students and what ability levels you have experience with, but if you are basing this statement on one student (your offspring) who pretty much scores perfectly on every exam with ease, I’d suggest this is a bit of an overgeneralization. THe extent to which a given student can grasp and use a “back door” approach, and alternatively the extent to which a student might benefit from the use of a calculator can vary wildly from student to student.</p>
<p>During a two year period of disability I tutored probably a couple hundred students in the SAT through a well known tutoring organization (mentioned in “The Gatekeepers.”) I had students ranging from recruited athletes trying to get a minimal score for admission, (we’re tallking somewhere in the high 400s on math) to high-scoring students that really had no business receiving tutoring from me. I taught them all the well known “back door” methodolgoies, but for many simply trying out the answers or “brute forcing” it was the best way to improve their scores. For such students efficient calculator use could get them 50 to 100 points on the exam. We showed everyone the “tricks” so to speak, which were basically just clues about the ways the problems were designed. But for many students (primarily those at the very low end or very high end) this just wasn’t that much af a help. Those on the low end had difficulty applying the methodolgy, those on the high end already had their own methods for success, or were well aware of the problem design (eg ratios, systems of equations, percentage changes, etc) the first time they looked at it.</p>
<p>In fact, the organization provided diagnostic testing which often showed that some students would benefit merely by not even trying some of the more difficult problems at the end of the test, which they were statistically likely to answer incorrectly. </p>
<p>I will say that since they eliminated quantitatvie comparisons from the SAT, calculators probably make less of an impact overall.</p>
<p>I will add my own experience on this issue. When I started looking into this ten years ago, there were a few programs for the TI-83 and 89. There were also many discussions about using it for the SAT-II. My conclusion is that the use of a calculator can help, but only help the people who might, in fact, not need it. There are students who can make a TI sing and find the Math Subject test trivial because of the allowed graphic calculator. </p>
<p>My take is that allowing a calculator on the SAT is a poisoned gift for most, as it contributes to wasting time with circular approaches. In the early days of my participation here, I challenged others to SHOW how a calculator helped solving a problem FASTER than one armed with a pencil and a quick mind. I do not remember more than a few problems that were toss-ups. In most cases, the calculator was a waste. Now, this assumes a regular understanding of using a graphical calculator. Again, some kids are bona fide power users and can use that knowledge to solve problems with a very advanced approach. Those are the guys who ace the Math subject tests and other problems in national competition.</p>
<p>My conclusion was that the calculator should be a weapon of last resort. It is still true today or most parts.</p>
<p>From what I’m understanding in some of the posts is that several states are using the ACT as a state-wide standardized testing program sort of like the Regents exams in New York or the SOL tests in Virginia.</p>
<p>If that is the case, then the “ACT more popular in 2012 than SAT” is a misleading statement.</p>
<p>It’s like comparing flip-flops to leather beach sandals and saying flip-flops are the more popular beach footwear. It may be. But lots of people also wear flip-flops when they’re not at the beach.</p>
<p>What would be a truer comparison would be to find the numbers of SATs and ACTs that are specifically submitted as college entrance exams. That will give you an accurate comparison.</p>
<p>^^^Yup. The state of Tennessee requires every Junior to take the ACT in a school administered setting on a single day in March. It’s a graduation requirement. If you’ve already taken the ACT, that’s too bad, you have to take that administration too. The ACT administered does not include the writing portion, which our state flagship requires so students would need to take it a 2nd time (or the SAT with writing) if they’re planning on applying to UT-Knoxville or any other number of schools.</p>
<p>
Xiggi, I admit to being correctable on this, but it is my impression that it is the ACT that has been largely unchanged in the last 4 decades and it is the SAT which has mutated quite a bit. The ACT still has the same four sections in had in the 1970’s and, from what I can tell, still asks the same kinds of questions. The SAT, on the other hand (and just off the top of my head), has done away with quantitative comparisons and analogies and has added math content, fill-in-the-blank math problems, and an entire new section–writing–which largely seems to imitate the ACT English section. They have also changed their score reporting policies and followed the ACT in “re-centering” their scale scores by a few years (1995 vs. 1989). On that evidence it seems to me that the cynic ought to be applying your analysis to the SAT.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Therein lies the problem with your analysis. Not every student can be armed with a quick mind - or at least a quick “SAT” mind. Not sure where your experience comes from, and what range of scores we are talking about, but I suspect any experience based primarily on a sample from this website will be skewed towards the top students -at least the top 50%.</p>
<p>I think the average for the SAT Math is somewhere around 500 - maybe a little less. Not sure where the median is, but assuming it is somewhere around there that means there are a lot of students scoring under 500. And I tutored a lot of them, and saw their scores. And the calculator was a godsend for them. Particularly back when I tutored, and they had quantitative comparison sections.</p>
<p>As an example - look at today’s SAT Question of the day, looking at a histogram and determining the average height of some trees. Sure, bright students can figure out a trick to do this or do the calcs on paper as quickly or more quickly. But I guarantee you there is a significant population of students who would do significantly better on this problem using a calculator. That may not be a good thing but in my experience it’s a fact.</p>
<p>I took my actual SATs and PSATs in the 1970s. We didn’t have calculators. As I recall, when I took the GRE and GMAT we couldn’t use calculators either. At least I didn’t use one. For me, I don’t think it was a problem. However, I can see how a calculator might help me. Speed is not a problem for me, stupid mistakes are a problem. I can see how finishing a section early and having a chance on some problems to carefully plug in my answers and check them out might help. But I don’t have any real experience with that.</p>
<p>Don’t forget that SAT penalizes for incorrect answers while the ACT does not.</p>
<p>Bovertine, my experience ranges from helping a group of students who needed 920 to earn an athletic scholarship to helping others grab the last 30 points for a perfect score. </p>
<p>For the record, you have to balance the increased correct answers with the time wasting using a calculator in a circular way. There are good strategies to help one score at the 500 or 600 level by focusing on answering only easy and medium questions. Such questions are rarely requiring a calculator. </p>
<p>I always considered the best SAT help was to force one to forget bad teaching in school and bad habits. Grabbing a crutch such as a calculator in a whimsical manner is probably one of the worst.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m well aware of those methods. They were the basis of the strategy of the organization I worked for, which administered detailed tests to determine which questions a particular student should not answer (as I wrote earlier). </p>
<p>I merely disagree with you. I know there were many students for whom the calculator was a tremendous help. And I am talking about hundreds of face to face teaching assignments with quantifiable results. If your experience was different, so be it. I can’t dispute your experience.</p>
<p>BTW - have you looked at today’s Question of the Day? You are telling me you never encountered a single student who could use the calculator to his or her advantage on a problem like this? Frankly, that’s bizarre. You may find the arithmetic simpler to do by hand or in your head. So do I. Not all students would.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have looked at the QOTD. This is one of those rare examples of a very simple problem that is made difficult by the sheer numbers of calculations needed. In this case, it is obvious that a calculator is helpful because it is DESIGNED to take advantage of one. The overwhelming number of questions are NOT designed in that manner. In addition this question uses numbers that make a quick reasoning solution more difficult because of how close the two obvious solutions are (74 and 78.) Although the correct solution can be identified through logic, I gladly admit that under the pressure of a real test, it would be easier to rely on the calculator to define higher than 72 and lower than 78. </p>
<p>I did not say that there were no questions that could or should be solved with a calculator. I mentioned that some questions were a toss-up. But, fwiw, I did not have a question such as today’s QOTD in mind. </p>
<p>Please also note that I tend to judge questions that have appeared on official tests as opposed to the questions that are in obvious need of a review. </p>
<p>Fwiw, read the question statement with attention. Is the leftmost bar really composed of trees that are at least 60 feet but NOT LESS than 65 feet tall?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, that is OK. There many paths to the top of a mountain. Again, I was talking about an excessive reliance of a calculator. I am quite certain that, in your many face to face tutoring sessions, you experienced a student grabbing his or her calculator after being totally surprised by a question. Grabbing the fancy calculator with the hope that plugging the proposed numbers will magically yield the correct answer. </p>
<p>In the end, it is a matter of using time judiciously. The test makers DO HOPE that students will rely on faulty methods (read what is taught in school) and WASTE time, especially by plugging and checking all possible answers.</p>
<p>Fwiw, this represents a debate without possible reconciliation because we both rely on hypothetical situations today and past experiences with different individuals. My point is that the test could be improved by prohibiting the use of calculators, but that is not the case today. Since calculators are allowed, one should have it at his or disposal, but also be taught to use when appropriate. In my book, that is, as I said, as a weapon of last resort, and when a question is designed for the use of a calculator. </p>
<p>HTH</p>
<p>I’ll add something regarding the design of a better test. Testing the ability of students to enter numbers in a calculator does not add much to the value of a test. </p>
<p>On the other hand, testing the knowledge of mathematical principles and the ability to apply logic to a mathematical problem is important. </p>
<p>For instance, let’s look at a QC question that appears on the GRE (no longer on the SAT) </p>
<p>Col A 100,210 x 90,021
Col B 100,021 x 90,210</p>
<p>Is A < B, or A > B, or A = B, or is it undefined?</p>
<p>With a calculator, this is a trivial and silly question.
Without a calculator, this is hard to solve in 60 seconds or less. </p>
<p>However, with a bit of logic AND the knowledge of the mathematical properties of … geometry, this can solved in a few seconds by just LOOKING at the answers. </p>
<p>This is the direction ETS/TCB should follow in making the SAT a better tool. Unfortunately, as we know, the main problem of the test writers is not to make a better test (they can do that sleepwalkingly) but to maintain the historical comparisons and maintain a quasi 500 average as our high schools sink in total mediocrity.</p>
<p>
A < B</p>
<p>It took me a while to understand that you’re comparing 2 numbers</p>
<p>A=100210<em>90021 and
B=100021</em>90210</p>
<p>Yep, but how can you define B>A without calculating the results?</p>
<p>Here is a hint </p>
<p>Col A 3 x 8
Col B 4 x 7</p>
<p>or</p>
<p>Col A 4 x 6
Col B 5 x 5 >>>> It’s a square!</p>
<p>^^
Yes, with a given perimeter the quadrilateral with the largest area is a square. By extension, two numbers with equal sums will have the greatest product the closer they are together. That’s probably the best way to do this. Assuming you remember that and remember or see to apply it. I’ve seen this problem before so I probably would. Probably. I’m not sure I would the first time I saw it.</p>
<p>But if you don’t remember this trick you can estimate in other ways. You could also split it up into 100K+21, 90K+210, 100K+210, and 90K+21 and do the mults. It still requries some calculation but to me it is pretty quick and can work on a larger variety of number sets.</p>
<p>But if you COULD use a calculator, that’s still pretty fast. 
I’m not saying I agree with the design of the test, and I have little or no experience with the current test (my tutoring was a long time ago), other than answering that QOTD for the heck of it.</p>
<p>All true, Bovertine, and this goes to the heart of the issue. </p>
<p>A typical recommened solution on the GRE boards is to deconstruct the problem as you suggested. It obviously works, but no matter how agile one is, it does take MORE time, and assumes one knows how to do it correctly, and does not make a silly error. </p>
<p>On the other hand, recognizing that the problem can be solved by applying the “square/perimeter” rule is very helpful in a test that is driven by time constraints. </p>
<p>Bringing back this to the SAT, a person armed with a calculator WILL solve that problem (short of entering wrong numbers) but it will still take more time than … recognizing the pattern of the question. </p>
<p>I admit that you will many times more people who can plug the numbers in a machine than people who know how to think through the SAT. But again, that is why it might pay to teach more people to do the latter than lining up the crutches! Something I see on a daily basis when the cashier has to look at the register to give me my 38 cents of change on the purchase of my favorite beverage!</p>
<p>I remembered that I thought that I did much better on the SAT than the ACT, because the time limit on the ACT was ridiculous IMO (1 minute for 1 question is a GREAT benchmark). I mean, 35 minutes for 40 questions? On Science? Really. </p>
<p>Funny thing is, my highest score was in Science. </p>
<p>The ACT was generally much easier, but the time limit is what led to “lower” scores for me in Reading and Math (screwed up and forgot a question as time ran out). </p>
<p>Of course, either score for me is nice. Very nice :).</p>