<p>I've noticed a small subset of kids who get very, very sad about their SAT score. most people (who get lower scores) can brush it off as not meaning anything about them, not measuring anything important (even though it does - this thing many of us value called intelligence).</p>
<p>But there are a handful of kids with usually SAT scores in the range of 1700-1900, which realize for the first time via the SAT that they simply don't have the intelligence to due what they had wanted to do in life, and what they had come to value. </p>
<p>How do we help these people best..?</p>
<p>I think you sound extremely pretentious here. The SAT does correlate to “intelligence” but one test attempt does not automatically mean that someone is not as smart as you. There are many other variables that will make someone score lower, especially on their first time. Of course there are still many people who do think they are smarter than they really are.</p>
<p>If the person has proven themselves in other academice endeavors such as high grades in hard courses encourage them to prepare better for the SAT. Some people need a bit of help applying their skills in a test environment.</p>
<p>I agree with student 2407 that this is a very pretentious post.</p>
<p>You can be a success in life without high SAT scores.</p>
<p>However, that being said, I do think that the SAT has great value.</p>
<p>I say this because many high schools hand out “A” grades like candy in this country.</p>
<p>My wife was a Calculus teacher, and she was under tremendous pressure from the principal to give out good grades, because the kids taking Calculus with her were the best students in that school, and that school naturally wanted their kids to go to to colleges. If a kid got a B or a C in her class, the parents would immediately call to complain about her. (rather than ask how their kid could do better)</p>
<p>Standardized tests expose such fraudulent activity. For example, if a kid gets an A in his AP class, but then gets a 1 or a 2 on his AP exam, this would tend to show that he did not deserve an A in the class.</p>
<p>I deplore those schools who have gone SAT optional. Basically, such schools don’t like the results of the test, so they declare the test to be unimportant. </p>
<p>I am always amazed when I see some kid on CC saying that they are valecdictorian, but that they only have a 1900 SAT score. Many kids explain away their low (relatively low) SAT scores by saying that they are not “good test takers”, but I am not sure what that means. How do you go through four years of college and be the valecdictorian without being a good test taker? The sad truth is that a kid in the middle of his class at a fancy private high school in Boston would probably be the valecdictorian at many public high schools.</p>
<p>I have found in life that those people who got high SAT scores are indeed more intelligent than the rest of us. However, I know of many people with high SAT scores who were not successes in the real world, and visa versa.</p>
<p>Interesting answers.
I have a dd who does very well in school, is in a college prep HS taking rigorous courses without grade inflation and does very well on standardized tests since she was in 1-8 grade. She will be entering a good LAC in the fall.</p>
<p>On the otherhand, I have a ds who will be entering hs in the fall. He goes to the same small gammer schools as his sister did, really no grade inflation and very few home projects to boost scores (which I see from his friends schools, since I’m friends with the moms). Anyway, he just doesn’t do well on the standardized tests and although I am his mom, he is intelligent. His math and science scores are good and his tests and class work seem difficult enough for 8th grade but he does not test extremely well on the ITBS and now the TACHS for HS placement.</p>
<p>I have already started to worry about when it is time for him to take the SAT. I work in a small LAC where he can go for free (my dd is not going there but did get the tuition exchange scolarship for her school) and probably will go and it is SAT optional. I am not sure what that means since it wasn’t an option for my good test taker dd but I do have to explore what exactly a school needs to see when it is optional. I have always told my ds that he would be a wonderful teacher and again worry about that too if he ever decided to go into the field (which would be tuition free) since he would have to pass his teaching standardized test (whatever it is called).</p>
<p>Different strokes I guess and I do agree that the SAT does make it a level playing field and it worked very well for my dd but having a son that I see hasn’t tested great on standardized tests, just average, doesn’t give me much promise for the next 4 years.</p>
<p>I think that there is something to not being a “good test taker” for the SAT. For example, I’ve always placed in the 95+ percentile in CA state testing for the past 11 years and in the 99th percentile on the ACT, but I only made the 90th percentile on my (first) SAT.</p>
<p>I do believe that grade inflation does exist but I doubt that it only exists in public schools. Public school students are disadvantaged in their quality of education and that is why many will score lower than private students. </p>
<p>My (public) school has a policy where your AP class grades are adjusted after AP testing meaning that you have to pass to get an A (or else they nock your grade down), and if you do far better on the test than in class then your grade is made higher. They also apply this to CA state testing where if you do unsatisfactory you are put in remedial classes but if you get in the top range your grade goes up a tad.</p>
<p>Anyway, we had two valedictorians last year and one had a 2380 and went to Stanford while the other had a 2250 and went to UCLA. This is even though our school has a low-ish CA API score in the low 800s.</p>
<p>Don’t be saddened with SAT I, go for ACT instead. ACT is, according to many, is more straightforward, similar to SAT Subjects. From the international student’s perspective, it’s hard to achieve high scores without much practice and I believe top private school in US all train their students for the purpose. Besides, SAT I measures primarily guessing ability in the Critical Reading section, incredibly easy Math and and ability to write under time pressure, all of which improvement can only be attained through long, not self, practice, save some really good students. SAT II, on the other hand, puts students to test on their sufficient knowledge of the subjects normally taught in schools. Low SAT Subjects may be less academically defensible, however. My S did just over 2100 for SAT I after the third attempt, which was humiliating to him, but got 34 in just one sitting and could probably achieve higher if decided to do for one more time. And this was done with very limited preparation. However, one caution is he was educated under the British System which is more advanced (in Form 7) in regard to science subjects. Therefore, US students need to self study for SAT subjects which is possible (unlike SAT I) to help achieve higher scores.
Hope this helps.</p>