<p>Name calling is essential in arguments I do agree (for once). and gshack13, although I concede I am arrogant at times, I specifically did state that I agree with what Idiosyncra3y was saying and conceded that my first post was unnecessarily radical but emphasized that percentiles can’t be ignored no matter how much argument you bring up against them. He was confident that self selection of scores makes percentile ranking moot yet if that was truly the case college board wouldn’t both reporting them. I completely agree with the fact that the 200-800 number allows scores to be in decent relation to one another and also conceded the fact that my first post was quite extreme in regards to my views but never posted back in this thread after knowing that Idiosyncra3y was not going to even consider any different viewpoint.</p>
<p>I am not hopelessly stubborn - you just didn’t give me any facts. I am also perhaps a bit mocking/sarcastic (though I do not usually name call) in an argument…</p>
<p>Ok, I generally don’t support arguments on these boards, but this one is unusually fun. And arguments shouldn’t entail name-calling. But if they don’t have sarcasm, then it’s just not fun anymore.
Anyway, here’s how I see it:
Before, I used to think that percentiles were insanely important. I see idiosyncra3y’s point of view, and it’s perfectly valid. The score is the indication of how accomplished you are. However, I’m still not convinced that colleges don’t put any emphasis on percentiles - especially Ivies. They’d want the best in the field, wouldn’t they?
If there’s a refutation for the above question having something to do with self-selection, I’d be glad to hear it. In fact, I’m hoping I’m wrong, because I got a 710 on my physics SAT II and a 770 on the Math Lv. 2, so I’m not that happy with my percentiles.</p>
<p>Self selection comes in that for a subject such as Physics, the majority of takers WILL be amongst the best in their fields - so if only the top 10% of Physics students take the Physics SAT then the 50th percentile is actually the 95th percentile nationally.</p>
<p>Consider maths 1 and 2 - because only the top maths students take maths 2 (can’t find numbers, but assume that 90% of people take 1 and the top 10% take 2). Then the 90th percentile in 2 is the 99th nationally (for maths) and the 99% percentile for maths 1 is only the 89th nationally (Of course practically this is not true because there is overlap - some of the top 10% of maths students take maths 1)</p>
<p>This is what wikipedia has to say:</p>
<p>The differences in what scores mean with regard to percentiles are because of the content of the exam and the caliber of students choosing to take each exam. Subject Tests are subject to intensive study (often in the form of an AP, which is relatively more difficult), and only those who know they will perform well tend to take these tests, creating a skewed distribution of scores.</p>
<p>Certain test are more skewed</p>
<p>Awesome. Hope colleges view it that way.</p>
<p>Idio - Actually the Math II is taken by almost twice as many students as the Math I. OTH, your analysis fails to take into consideration that relatively few colleges require SAT II test scores and therefore the population taking them is even more self selected.</p>
<p><a href=“http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/2010-sat-subject-test-percentile-ranks.pdf[/url]”>http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/2010-sat-subject-test-percentile-ranks.pdf</a></p>
<p>Ahh, interesting - the maths numbers. I really didn’t expect that…</p>
<p>However, the degree to which the original n of subject test takers is selected not important; it doesn’t detract much from the relative self selection of tests. Modern Hebrew will still be more selected for than Eng lit.</p>