<p>Hi. I'm taking the October SAT Subject Tests and need advice on what books guarentee 750+ on Bio, USH, and Math Level 2. </p>
<p>Thannkk you!</p>
<p>Um, no book guarantees 750+ scores. You have to study and work hard to do that . . .They might guarantee that it will up someone's score but will never say that someone will definitely get a certain score, or else loads of upset parents and students would cry lawsuit if they didn't get what a book claims.</p>
<p>^ The kid didn't ask for your lecture. He asked you for your recommendations on prep books. It's obvious that the books themselves won't just magically get him 800's. Jeez... I hate it when people do that.
Anyway, for math iic, I recommend Barron's. It overprepares you for the test, but you'll be guaranteed a good score if you go through the book.
As for the other subjects, I haven't taken them, and I'd like to know what books are good for those myself.</p>
<p>Purcell.</p>
<p>.</p>
<p>PR for biology.</p>
<p>Everyone says so here.</p>
<p>REA for US History</p>
<p>Sparknotes was a good book too.</p>
<p>If you get this book, make sure you review your mistakes, then go back in DEPTH to that same material in a actual textbook. </p>
<p>Cause there were like a lot of same questions,</p>
<p>Kaplan overprepares you, I just read some parts that I though I was weak on</p>
<p>But Sparknotes truly did a good job</p>
<p>Princeton Review for all of them. Got me 800s. I did not do Bio, but did the other two.</p>
<p>Barrons For Bio..Overpreps..always good , the random stuff randomly show up on tests...(got a 790..sighs) ..and i think barrons for math 2 is good too.just started to use it (not really sure thought cause i havent used it that much..)...</p>
<p>Yeah I'm planning on using barron's to study for biology. Basically I'm gonna have to memorize it rofl.</p>
<p>
[quote]
^ The kid didn't ask for your lecture. He asked you for your recommendations on prep books. It's obvious that the books themselves won't just magically get him 800's. Jeez... I hate it when people do that.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It was only two sentences, and he was asking books that "guarantee" 750+ . . . not "most likely".</p>
<p>^1) Your post seemed didactic, and that's why it was called a lecture; not because of its length.</p>
<p>2) Even if the person used language suggesting a guarantee of a score, I think it's pretty obvious that no one would expect that score to magically come.</p>
<p>I think the both of you are overreacting. I'm sorry if I offended anyone, but from what the OP has said, it seems as if simply getting the book and reading it will automatically result in a score over 750. I wasn't trying to speak down to him or anything.</p>
<p>I wasn't really even *re*acting . . . . rather, extrapolating on the original contendor's POV. I'm indifferent to your statement for the most part. :)</p>
<p>I'm sorry, but you used the word "Didactic", Murusaki. I'm not one to add fuel to the flames but c'mon now. I memorized that word too, studying for the SAT...but I don't actually use it. And neither should you. I'm not preaching lower literacy levels, but even you probably got more of a kick that I did of seeing yourself using it.</p>
<p>I don't mean to be impudent, spewing my vitriolic slander everywhere. I understand that some of you may find this comment to be such a flagrant, egregious effrontery that it may cause you to act diffifent or taciturn. I also understand some of you know me because of my depravity and others consider me a despot but I hope that most of you are not fooled by such accusations. In any case those of you who know the truth of my character, I beg of you to exonerate my actions. If any of you would like to get in touch with me, I hope our relationship could be strictly epistolary, as I find pen and paper (parchment paper is great but overly dessicated paper is far too "crinkly for my liking!) much more expedient to getting your point across. I apologize for esoteric nature of the joke, but I am merely attempting to deal with a lifelong despondency I have been inclined to feel since birth...I'm also dealing with a horrible case of ennui. I hope I haven't caused any dissent in writing in such a grandiloquent manner. Farewell.</p>
<p>...ELEGY ENFRANCHISE FETTER HEGEMONY.</p>
<p>K. Done.</p>
<p>lol, if you think using diadatic is bad, you should meet someone named masterus.</p>
<p>I love how everyone assumes I'm making an effort to use vocab that happened to be on the SAT. Unlike most of you, I didn't memorize vocab for the SAT, a lot of the words I use happen to be on it.</p>
<p>FreeFree I'm seriously gonna study some of the SAT vocab from your post. No better way to learn words than by reading context. So I thank you.</p>
<p>so if I have Barron's for MathII, Bio E/M, and Chem...I'm good to go?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. I knew what didactic meant and used it when I was writing, speaking, etc before I began to study for the SAT. It is a word you know, not just an SAT word.</p>