College Confidential members contradict themselves

Test Preparation
1

<p>They claim bush is stupid because of his 1200, yet they make 5 posts a day about how SAT doesn't reflect anything in intelligence. One person who I won't name made 7 comments in one day backing his claim that Bush is an incapable leader because he did poorly on his SAT, on a different forum he claims SATs are flawed and shouldn't be used in college admissions because they don't reflect anything. People, stick to your points please, you don't look smart supporting two sides of an issue like John Kerry does.</p>

2

<p>This isn't about the SATs. It's about using what info you have to make an argument against someone you detest. And the posts I have seen claim he has been an incapable leader.... The posters discuss his SATs because they are relatively low considering he went to Yale, is president, etc., not because his score is the reason for these atrocious years. I don't think it's worth anyones time discussing the results of a test taken decades ago, but if you are going to point out flaws in someone's argument, make sure you're pointing out flaws that are really there and not exaggerating.</p>

3

<p>amen lindsay =D</p>

4

<p>Also note that the SAT has been "dumbed down" over the years, and that Bush's 12-whatever would be relatively higher on today's score range in comparison to what it would have been "back then". </p>

<p>Furthermore, John Kerry made his SATs in the 1200's range also. </p>

<p>For that matter, so did "Algore".</p>

<p>ALSO note that anyone who talks down Bush for his "SAT scores" is substituting a personal Ad Hominem attack for a subtantitive political attack and instead should be talking about the conservative principles Bush translates into political action rather than stuff that simply doesn't matter.</p>

5

<p>Bush was 1206 and Gore was 1355</p>

<p>source: <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A37397-2000Mar18%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A37397-2000Mar18&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

6

<p>Actually, John Kerry scored an 1190 on his SAT I. Al Gore scored a 1355 and Dubya scored a 1206. That was before the scale was recentered (in 1994), so it was much harder to obtain a very high score. For example, my 1350 would translate into a 1290 recentered. (see: <a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/sat/cbsenior/equiv/rt027027.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.collegeboard.com/sat/cbsenior/equiv/rt027027.html&lt;/a&gt;)
Since the SAT I was administered in 1926, around 20 different scales were used to convert raw scores to scales scores.</p>

<p>Sorry to be a nitpicker...:p</p>

7

<p>Dubya...phh.. I hate it when people say that, it's so retarded, but that's just me.</p>

<p>Anyways, so that means (according to the collegeboard table above)
Approximately
Bush: 1280
Gore: 1420
Kerry: 1260</p>

8

<p>Besides the fact that the test has been recentered, "back in the day" most SAT takers did not prep for the test. There were no online resources and very few "big books". We just showed up and took the test.</p>

9

<p>And if I am not mistaken, George W. Bush made a higher score than John Kerry. They both went to Ivies. If you are going to criticize, criticize in an egalitarian manner.</p>

10

<p>The thing about intelligence is, most people can recognize it when they see it. As the intelligence level of the looker lowers, however - more and more of the lookees appear to be intelligent.</p>