<p>^Right. Of course, there is an element of chance - did you have a bad day? Have restless sleep? Whatever. But on the test itself, it's not necessarily chance. Some people make silly mistakes, but there are many who just don't. And they know everything so the questions themselves wouldn't affect their scores at all.</p>
<p>How many of you have taken an AP statistics course?</p>
<p>ah....if i were good in english,i guess i would score 2400 by the grace of The ALMIGHTY....but guess what--i am a real **dumbass **in english.it's not my first language.i don't want to learn anymore language :( .....but i do hope to score 2400 in my 3 subject test(math II,physics,chemistry) :p</p>
<p>Not I, token. I understand what you're saying, but perhaps I'm missing something. The SAT is based on limited knowledge, and someone can learn all of it. Take math, because it's the most straight-forward example. The topics and types of questions are very specific, and can be mastered. One can eliminate all sense of randomness in the score based on the specific questions asked simply by knowing all the topics that could possibly be tested. Next, careless errors could reduce a score. But some people are very diligent test-takers and don't make them at all. They can take different SAT practice tests over and over again without ever making a single error, because it is impossible that they would - they know how to approach every single question, and make sure never to make errors.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The SAT is based on limited knowledge, and someone can learn all of it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh, really? Where is the statement of the limits?</p>
<p>The SAT goes up through what, Algebra II/Trig now?</p>
<p>It's clearly limited. I'm not talking about an average student here, I'm talking about students who are taking Calculus in 10th/11th grade and who are qualifying for the AIME/USAMO. What does this mean? There is NOTHING, on the SAT or Math II test, that they wouldn't know - literally NOTHING. All the geometry is incredibly basic and comes up all the time in competitions/classroom math. The algebra is always a given; only basic concepts are on the test. The graph theory is incredibly simplistic, etc. The questions are totally straightforward as well. There is no application, only regurgitation. A knowledge of the formulae and their applications is all that is needed; little thought is required.</p>
<p>That's the point. Once you reach a certain level of preparation, whether specifically for the SAT or not, the variability in performance is essentially zero - they will always get 800 because no matter what the question is, they can answer it without making a careless error. If they took 500 tests, they might get 780 or 790 on a couple. But in small sampling size of 5 or 10, they will get 800 every time. There are not that many questions.</p>
<p>i kinda agree with baelor lol.</p>
<p>Actually, it's not possible to know every single vocabulary word. There is definitely a random factor....what if you get a random passage you can't understand? </p>
<p>What Baelor is trying to describe is a superhuman test taker who knows every vocab word, math and grammar concept, and wont be affected by test taking conditions, passages, vocab, etc etc etc</p>
<p>If it was just a matter of "knowing" that stuff and not making stupid mistakes the number of people getting 2400 would much higher, let me assure you.</p>
<p>Baelor's right. Any scrub that can get >100 on the AMC 12 can get an 800 on the SAT Math. Dumb mistakes are always possible, but the people that avoid them aren't "lucky" - they're just that good, and will get 800 every time. And might I add that there are a LOT of people out there who will get 800 on math every time.</p>
<p>I'm not one of them, though. :(</p>
<p>^what? I got 114 on AMC 10 but got 2 wrong on the PSAT math :(</p>
<p>lolcats, I'm talking about the test. Of course external factors, say a terrible proctor, would affect the score. But look at the quotation of the director or whatever again. He said that there was a random element in the TEST. That's the thing. That's not necessarily true.</p>
<p>"Actually, it's not possible to know every single vocabulary word. There is definitely a random factor....what if you get a random passage you can't understand?"</p>
<p>But you can know all the words the SATs would ever use. I have never been unable to answer a SC question (read: never missed a point on any practice test or real deal in high school on those questions) just through POE. My vocab isn't even that big; I'm sure voracious readers are much stronger than I regarding size of vocabulary. Again, the variability in score can basically be reduced to zero.</p>
<p>"What Baelor is trying to describe is a superhuman test taker who knows every vocab word, math and grammar concept, and wont be affected by test taking conditions, passages, vocab, etc etc etc"</p>
<p>Test-taking conditions are out of the issue right now, I already agreed that those have an effect. But it is (easily possible, through years of consistent reading) to have a vocabulary that is guaranteed to cover every question, a math ability guaranteed to cover every concept, grammar skills that cover everything (a couple years of Latin and a grammar textbook do the job quite nicely), etc. </p>
<p>The grammar section is actually quite interesting, in my opinion. The only questions that do not have very specific rules governing them are the idiomatic ones, but generally we are so familiar with those that it's not an issue. You can assign a rule to every single other question. </p>
<p>The only section where I think there's any debate at all is the passage comprehension. This, I think most would agree, is the one where it varies from test to test. But how is it that some people score well very consistently? They may miss one or two more questions depending on the test, ranging from, say, 770-800, but this hardly seems like a result of the specific passage. Rather, it may be a question or two that trips them up. But they key factor is that there is ALWAYS a right answer, and that right answer ALWAYS has a very specific, detailed justification. There is a state of SAT "nirvana" where one does not only see the answer choices, but why they are wrong. Instead of hazily saying "No, this choice seems wrong," you zoom through them: "Too broad." "Too extreme." etc. Again, there things that are wrong with the answer choices are limited in scope.</p>
<p>P.S.: This is mainly from my own experience and that of my friends, all excellent test-takers.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But you can know all the words the SATs would ever use.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What makes you so sure of that?</p>
<p>"What makes you so sure of that?"</p>
<p>Having taken many, many SAT tests, and never having run across more than one word that I didn't know (or could determine the meaning of) on each test. Having friends who have done the same. If I took 500, I might miss 4-5 questions on vocab. But I have never done so yet on practice/real tests. Not so with passages, but I'm not very good with those.</p>
<p>That's the point. You can exhaust everything on the SAT except the passages (discussed above).</p>
<p>I think anyone who gets a 2350+ has the caliber to get a 2400...</p>