<p>Srsly.
We apologize for you getting an 800.</p>
<p>If it's that big a deal to you, derive an elementary proof of Fermat's last theorem in the test margin. Make sure to highlight it so that they don't overlook it. That should make a favorable impression... I can see it now. The scorers scrawl "with elementary proof of Fermat's last theorem" on the bottom of your score report. Excellent.</p>
<p>lol, how do u kno if you didn't make a couple careless mistakes? everybody does. and yes , i agree, if you want to prove that you're great at math or something, do like an olympiad such as USAMO. that's a better use of your time than aiming for a perfect score on the SATIIs</p>
<p>If your facts are correct, technically unfair. </p>
<p>However, not be trite, but nothing about the admissions process is fair. Part of life is just a crap shoot.</p>
<p>Well I guess I'm just too brilliant for Math II since I'm finishing complex calculus now and all the things I'm tested are what I've learnt 2 years ago</p>
<p>really can't be bothered to revise all the stuff</p>
<p>CONSIDER THAT A DISADVANTAGE PAL.........</p>
<p>@ the OP: How do you know you got a full 50/50? For all you know, you're one of the "measly" 43/50ers...</p>
<p>OP:
Some people (at CB) sat down and decided how many questions you had to get right to get a score of 800 in the Math II test. "Perfect score" was not what they were thinking about. You fall in the group of people that they consider know enough math to score 800 (not a "perfect score" and not all the math). I don't think it's fair or unfair. It's the way it is because of the nature of the test. Be happy.</p>
<p>Did you do above level testing in 7th grade (a la Duke TIP, CTY, or similar)? Much more discriminating.</p>
<p>I agree with the person that said go do the USAMO, lol.</p>
<p>I totally disagree with the OP! I wish colleges would require just SATII. SATII actually test knowledge, unlike the SATI. I mean with the SATI, scores can be easily affected by a bad test day. But with SATII, there is no such thing. You know it or you dont.</p>
<p>The reason for the generous curve is that it tests a wide range of math, and the actual subject matter varies a little from test to test.</p>
<p>Their scale is not arbitrary. Who do you think has done more research on it, them or you? If only people with 50/50 got an 800, the score would be a lot more arbitrary, because it would depend on the particular test you get (which is completely random) as much as what you actually know. </p>
<p>There is no useful difference between 49/50 and 50/50, so they should be scored the same. That is not the case with the SAT I. It tests basic math, so a person could be reasonably expected to know everything it tests.</p>
<p>well if someone doesn't recognize a problem, that's his fault for not studying enough.</p>
<p>Everyone knows that the curve for math level 2 is ridiculous.</p>
<p>It should be 50 raw score equals 800, 49 equals 790, etc.</p>
<p>That's more fair and accurate.</p>
<p>I think the reason the scale is so lenient is because all the sons and daughters of the college board officers keep getting 44 and 43 raw scores, so the officers want to keep making the scale enormous to keep their offspring in the 800 range.</p>
<p>ya i am horrible at math 2 but decent at Sat math 1, so I'm just saying.</p>
<p>^ exactly. Did you know that for Chinese 800 can be 100% and can be 56%? That's ridiculous. Not even to mention that 700 = 11%... Imagine student (not native speaker) working his but off and getting 97%, and another one who got 56%... How can their scores be same??</p>
<p>The Math 2 test is so hard that if the curve were really 50 = 800, 49 = 790, etc., almost nobody would get an 800.</p>
<p>Oh man that's awful. Those poor brilliant students who got 800s.</p>
<p>I think they should re-center the results and make -1 a 790 or 780 so the super brilliant students can seem smarter than all the other 800s.</p>
<p>Who cares they're some stupid tests.</p>
<p>
[quote]
well if someone doesn't recognize a problem, that's his fault for not studying enough.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No. The test covers such a wide range that not everything is on every test. Right now if one person knows everything but Topic A, and another person knows everything but Topic B, both will get 800, regardless of the test they get. That is a fair and accurate way of deciding their score. If 1 wrong = 790, then their grades depend on the luck of what is on the test. If Topic A is on the test, but Topic B isn't, one of them is screwed just because they got the wrong test. That would be unfair and arbitrary.</p>
<p>
[quote]
^ exactly. Did you know that for Chinese 800 can be 100% and can be 56%? That's ridiculous. Not even to mention that 700 = 11%... Imagine student (not native speaker) working his but off and getting 97%, and another one who got 56%... How can their scores be same??
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Those are percentiles, not curves.</p>
<p>^ Percentiles of results of the test by scores? Or...?</p>
<p>Percentile -> Amount of people who scored at or below that given score.</p>
<p>"No. The test covers such a wide range that not everything is on every test. Right now if one person knows everything but Topic A, and another person knows everything but Topic B, both will get 800, regardless of the test they get. That is a fair and accurate way of deciding their score. If 1 wrong = 790, then their grades depend on the luck of what is on the test. If Topic A is on the test, but Topic B isn't, one of them is screwed just because they got the wrong test. That would be unfair and arbitrary."</p>
<p>That's why colleges don't really distinguish between a 750 and 760 on math level 2, 710 on the sat 1 math and a 730, or a 660 on the critical reading or a 640 or 630. There's really not much difference between those scores, as you said.</p>
<p>But the scale on the math level 2 exam is way too big. There actually IS a pretty big difference between a raw score of 50 and a raw score of 43. I mean, if a college put a lot of emphasis on the math sat 2 for admissions, it would be helpful to know where the student got a 43 or a 50. Of course the college wouldn't really differentiate between a 44 or a 43, but a 43 and a 50 is a big difference.</p>
<p>If you think about it, the curve on the Math II subject test is so generous that a college should see scores of 700+ more often than not, which pretty much means they'll put less weight on it when deciding. Yes, you can get an 800, but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll think you're a genius. It's like any other standardized test--they can only tell so much about you. This is why kids with 2400s on the SAT I do not automatically get full rides at Harvard or Princeton.</p>
<p>Percentiles are based on your raw score. Colleges see the raw score as well as the 200-800 score. And honestly, even though there is a high curve, a lot of students cant get the 800 anyway. There is a reason for the curve.</p>