Do You REALLY Believe in Expensive Test-Prep Courses?

<p>I'm confused on how you can think SAT tutoring is considered cheating...Nonetheless I think that if you can find the right program and the right tutor, you can definitely improve yourself. Also those classes are aimed mostly at the people with low test scores already and have lots of room for improvement. </p>

<p>Personally I take SAT tutoring because my parents make me. I had motivation for it in the beginning but I lost interest very quickly. My teacher sucked because he was basically reading the answer explanations to me. So yeah I've had a pretty bad experience with a tutor. On the other hand, I did improve my score (most likely because I studied at home a lot too).</p>

<p>It depends on the kid and it depends on the prep organization. Everything in here is anecdotal; my common sense tells me that motivated kids can probably achieve the same thing without test prep as unmotivated kids with test prep, but I don't know that for sure.</p>

<p>Here's my story anyway.
I got a 2400 with a tutor. I didn't appreciate the class and I don't want to believe that him teaching me helped my score, chiefly because I didn't even USE his stupid methods on the SAT (they were straight out of the Princeton book, btw, so now I have a Princeton and a Barron's book sitting unused in my house) but hey, we got results. Parents happy, kid goes back to normal life.</p>

<p>OK, test prep is bad. It compromises the effectiveness of the test.
However, not prepping is bad. It compromises my ability to get into ____.</p>

<p>That's why I'm doing (moderately expensive) one-on-one test prep. The guy knows how to do it! Thanks to him & his great way of teaching I genuinely understand how to think outside the box when it comes to math. It's an acquired skill. ...aaaaand I'll be a NMSF... that doesn't suck either.</p>

<p>I'm a quick study, and in some roundabout way SAT prep produces scores for me that reflect that, even if they don't reflect some inherent "reasoning" ability.</p>

<p>I totally would recommend one-on-one tutoring, but not really the class sessions.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I don't think it will make anyone hate math/reading/writing for the rest of his or her life.

[/quote]
okay maybe it was a bit exxagerated.</p>

<p>and i agree, reading is a wonderful (and long term) way of remembering and learning new words. if you want to seriously improve your SAT vocab, i suggest reading the classics--shakespeare, jane austen, charles dickens--if you can understand easily (or even enjoy???) them, you will have more than enough vocab skills and reading skills to last you for the SAT!</p>

<p>latin is the short-term and QUICK/EFFECTIVE! way to learn it all. don't go out of your way to learn it, cuz it can get quite annoying, but if you ever want to take like a CTY class and don't know what you want to do, taking latin there mite be a good suggestion.</p>

<p>No external test prep here at our house. Kids signed up for CB's online SAT Q of the Day (free) in sophomore year. Took PSATs in 9th and 10th grade absolutely cold -- this gave us a baseline, and the PSAT score reports these days offer some valuable info for analyzing one's strengths and areas for improvement.</p>

<p>DS1 did some practice for the PSAT at the beginning of junior year -- a total of two tests, done in sections, over a month. He also took the full-length CB PSAT that was part of the registration package the weekend before the PSAT. PSAT went up 190 points from soph to junior year, and the SAT was 40 points higher than that. SAT practice involved a few practice essays (to make sure he could complete one in 25 minutes) and focused on sections in CR and W where he missed Qs. We bought the Blue Book -- never got past Test #3.</p>

<p>DS2 went up 220 points on the PSAT from 9th to 10th grade. He'll need more intense work in math, but W & CR are in good shape. Expect we'll take a similar preparation philosophy with him. </p>

<p>We just never saw the need to spend the $$$. DH and I were willing to work with them as needed. That's probably a significant differentiating factor right there. I do understand that some parents and kids are like oil and water when it comes to this stuff, and that some parents are unable (whether because of economics or language) to offer more help. This is where the test books come in so handy. The CB Blue Book costs under $20, and there are online resources, too. Our schools' career centers have a ton of test prep books and computers for kids to use if they can't get these things at home. </p>

<p>Nevertheless, all of this requires some initiative and commitment on the student's part, and not just in the month before the test. Read, read, read. No vocab flash cards. Know the types of math Qs. Learn what they are asking. Study hard, pay attention in class, and it's possible to do well on these tests without intense preparation. Those are good skills for life, too.</p>

<p>I have taken many SAT prep courses in my high school career. I am the son of very worried Asian parents, so I have been ferried from Princeton Review, Kaplan, and even a Korean SAT program (CCB), with self-study in between. I have had several years to judge these various prep courses, and I want to try to help people in the future who are concerned about this test. </p>

<p>For the record, I received a 2240 (710 CR 730 M 800 W 12 E) on the actual SAT exam, taken in November 2006 (my junior year). I had taken the test only once before-in June 2005, the end of my freshman year (when the new test first came out). I took the test then cold, to see what the test was like. I received a 1960 (670 CR 600 M 670 W 9 E). I decided not to take the test again after I took the ACT and scored a 34--enough was enough at that point. PSAT sophomore = 203; PSAT junior = 227.</p>

<p>No matter what, I feel that self-studying is CRUCIAL to getting a good score on the SAT without natural talent/luck. If you do not self-study, these courses mean nothing. </p>

<p>Here is my judgment for the courses I have taken.</p>

<p>Kaplan and the Princeton Review:
General: Before CCB, my parents were concerned that I hadn't spent enough time (and apparently they not enough money?) on the SAT, so I was brought to each of these courses in the spring of my sophomore year (about 4 months total, on Saturdays 12-3 or so). In my opinion, these are pretty much the same exact thing. Teachers teach from the book, are trained to think using the book's methods, and do not stray from the book at all costs. I recommend that this course be used only for those who currently score below 2000 on practice tests...
<em>controversial tangent</em>
...tests (plural) that you yourself have taken at home or elsewhere. I believe the diagnostic tests that these two programs give are made deliberately harder or different in order to convince customers that they really need help. Both the Kaplan and Princeton Review diagnostic tests gave me 2100s. I consistently received 700 on the writing section despite a near perfect MC score--why? The testers gave my essays low scores, which effectively dropped my section score about 50-100 points every single time. I sat through each class, learned nothing from these two programs, and I got a 12 on the real essay; Kaplan/TPR gave me 6-9, which would have been OK if the essay graders had ever told me why they gave me that score, or criticized me, or told me anything at all. The other sections fluctuated wildly--I got a 650 on one math section, only to get a 780 on the next with no change in testing strategy. </p>

<p>Atmosphere: Very bland, to be honest. You go in, sit down, and listen to the teacher talk. He reads the book and you do a few drills. There is a break every once in a while. Then, a change in section or a vocabulary game. Then, you leave. I found myself unable to pay close attention to my teacher's explanation of the course methods. To get an understanding of the people who can work for these test prep courses, my PR teacher was a Rutgers undergraduate (senior) who came in late one weekend because he had gotten drunk the previous night and broken his leg dancing on a table. He was an adequate teacher overall, but the things that you are taught in Kaplan/TPR seem to be for people who honestly do not know or have the time to learn the actual material. You do not learn how to actually do the math problems in the math section--you learn tricks to get around knowing the material, tricks that are often just as difficult to remember as knowing how to solve the problem itself. For instance, one of the lessons is actually something along the lines of 'Doing the math without algebra'. If you know your algebra, this is utterly useless for you-practicing the algebra would be infinitely more practical and versatile. Overall, I do not believe that this for people who know the stuff but need practice. This is for people who need a way to perform well on the SAT with limited skills or a very short period of time to do so. I sat down, did the assigned work, and left. I wish my parents had not spent money on this course.</p>

<p>One of TPR's promotions was that if they couldn't raise my score by something like 200 points, they'd automatically offer me another course in anything, SAT I or II, for free. I ended up declining the offer.</p>

<p>CCB: A Korean SAT day camp, basically. I took this in August of junior year. This is the hardcore of the hardcore. About 30 of us were placed in 3 rooms and had 3 different teachers, each one teaching a different section of the test. The course has 8 hour sessions for 4 days a week, and a test on Fridays. We had a grammar nazi for a writing teacher, an ethereal, philosophical 30-something year old man for a CR teacher, and a..well, an old-school middle-aged Asian man for a math teacher. This actually worked, mainly because it's structured like actual classes. I won't talk much about this class because probably none of you know or want to sign up for this course. It is not for the weak-willed, but it will get you results. My initial scores here were about a 2150 (with harder writing MC but perfect essay score), and improved to 2200-2250 by the end of three weeks (with perfect writing score). I highly recommend it.</p>

<p>Self-Study: I did a lot of this before, in between, and after all of these courses. I took every book that I could find, every test, every diagnostic. Do this regardless of whether you take a prep course or not-it is the most important part, regardless.</p>

<p>I suggest this method in order to not burn out and want to stab yourself after a few weeks/days/hours/minutes. I still never wanted to do another SAT ever again after the test, but I got through OK.
1) Do a single large test, and then find out your lowest/least confident section.
2) For the next week or two, very slowly do only that section, dedicating time you might normally be taking for the other sections on that section alone.
3) Meticulously analyze every wrong answer, every error--and analyze the question; what it means, how it's worded, what the intent is.
4) Understand your problems:
a) Vocabulary requires practice and usage and is generally hit or miss. You do not need to memorize the dictionary. Breaking down an unfamiliar word usually works wonders, and words that sound like other words tend to be similar in definition as well.
b) Critical reading passages require that you understand the mindset of the reading (which to me is also unfortunately hit or miss). I read fast, so I always read the passage first and answered the questions afterwards by rereading the parts mentioned. Some people also just go straight to the questions and read only the necessary areas, but I feel that this prevents the tester from understanding the passage well. The general rule for answering questions with quoted phrases is to read the 4 lines before and the 4 lines after the quote. You will almost *always *be asked to find the tone of the passage in some way or another, so just do so while you read. Oftentimes, knowing the tone of the passage will answer several other questions indirectly.
c) Math errors usually are the result of tricky wording or deficient/incorrect application of principles (combined with good ol' human error), and are usually pretty straightforward. You get em or ya messed up somehow.
d) Multiple choice on the writing is exclusively grammar, and is simple to study for--learn all of the stodgy old grammar rules by heart. Imagine a proper Englishman speaking the sentence in front of you, and imagine to yourself: Are his cricket buddies going to laugh at him for using the plural form of a verb in conjunction with the subject noun 'Everyone'? Why/Why not?
e) The essay requires organization of structure and content. The secret? The rubric DOES NOT CARE ABOUT TRUTH. Don't know any real examples explaining why power should remain in the hands of the people? Make something up about Greece! My old fallback was always the 'ancient African fable' which involved a hog doing something and getting his just reward/punishment, conveniently providing a lesson about the question at hand. You can say the most absurd things in your essay-as long as it is organized and related to the topic, then it can only help you.
5) RELAX for a little bit (no more than a day)
6) Take another single large test and repeat. </p>

<p>This basically has you concentrate wholly on one section--to GET that one part and expect the questions, format, etc. beforehand. You aren't doing 5 hour test blocks, you're doing maybe an hour or two at a time of just one section. You should get comfortable with it and start performing better. Eventually, that section will become a strength, and you can start improving on another section.</p>

<p>I hope this long, long, long post helps parents/students in the whole SAT business. I don't trust most prep courses past their books. Taking the test yourself is the best way to really practice, along with content drills for math and rule memorization for writing, etc.
I know that I don't have a perfect score, so I don't pretend that I can tell people what to do on the SAT. But I am sane today because of the methods I used. Practicing for these tests is like mentally running for 5 hours, and a tired brain is an inefficient one. Focus on one section, and just pound that section into submission before moving onto the next one. That's all I can say without asking for money (it's a very lucrative business, after all...)</p>

<p>
[quote]
No matter what, self-studying is CRUCIAL to getting a good score on the SAT without natural talent/luck.

[/quote]
i seriously doubt a "natural talent/luck/intelligence" will get you far in the field of SATs. perhaps math competitions, but SATs are just so...uncreative...that nobody has an advantage. of course a lot of ppl study less and get better scores, but that's just cuz they're all-round more prepared. like you can say "i got a 2300 w/o studying!" and some other guy got , like, a 1900 with studying. it's not that you're smarter than that guy, but you've done a lot of math and reading outside that don't exactly count as studying but is nevertheless preparation for the SATs</p>

<p>Test prep is controversial, but YES, I believe in them. but wait! hear me about before you jump to conclusions; I'll try to keep this as short as possible as well...</p>

<p>Although it's undeniable that lower-income students generally have lower scores, this cannot be attributed to test prep alone. many libraries offer free classes and prep companies offer free testings. It doesn't mean that a lower-income student is forever bound by the "not SAT whiz" label. </p>

<p>Secondly, prep courses provide a structure, but without internal motivation there's no way you can improve, whether it's a $2000 class or a $50 one. Think of it like public school: certain students do better, but just because they're at the top of their class, it doesn't necessarily mean that all of them have a wealthy, upper-class background. </p>

<p>Third, eliminating prep classes altogether is unfair, as either way, people from upper-class backgrounds have an advantage, anyway. Prep actually serves to give those who aren't absolutely rich a competitive edge. $2000 might be a lot for some families, but there are many who could afford it (look at all those SUV's and Iphones and computers and plasmas and ...).</p>

<p>lol rich, unmotivated kids can have advantage over poor, unmotivated kids .</p>

<p>Frankly, I'm not convinced that excessive study does much. As it is designed to do, the SAT relegates one to his or her score bracket. I think familiarity definitely helps, but the whole regression to the mean phenomenon basically ensures that a student who scores around 600 in math will stay around there, and makes it virtually impossible to will a 700. Clearly some manage to do this, but statistically it is very hard. While a 3k Chyten class probably offers some benefit, the innate design of the test offsets the potential gain with such a price tag.</p>

<p>i took a prep class (for CR only) and it increased my score by 10 points. i took a break in the summer (and played nothing but halo) and bumped up my scores to 2340 (780s across the board). For me, I think improving my sat scores was a matter of maturity. I went from a 2090 early junior year to a 2250 at the end of junior year to a 2340 as a senior. so yea, i'm one who vehmently opposes test prep courses (wasted my parents' money). Yes, you can argue that the courses help people who dont possess the attention span/self control necessary to practice at home (i didnt), but yea, all i really used was the last 2-3 pages of an SAT prep book. Ultimately, I also felt that confidence plays a role; for the record, I never anticipated getting a 2090 on my first try, but it gave me a reality check and prodded me to take the SAT more seriously the other 2 times.</p>

<p>I took three (yes, three) individual SAT prep courses and did average. I took absolutely no prep (not even individually book prep) for the ACT and did stellar. Goes to show that they are not neccesarily needed to do well on standardized tests, although the ACT may have just been easier for me.</p>

<p>I've always wondered how ETS has the nerve to call the SAT an "aptitude" test if so much studying is required, and when test prep materials and tutoring services are so abundant and profitable. </p>

<p>I basically agree with Narcissus that teaching students those tricks is somehow unethical. It puts the emphasis on improving your guessing or on learning to outwit the test writer, rather than on actually LEARNING the material so you can answer the question outright without the need for any tricks or strategies. Sometimes learning those tricks can actually make a kid score worse because then he starts overthinking questions or wasting time telling himself stupid stuff unrelated to academics, like that the right answer is more likely to be B or C than A because the tendency is to hide the correct answer in the middle.</p>

<p>Also, having written SAT-like test questions for a test prep company, I assure you we writers are not as stupid as the Princeton Review book tells you we are. If there are patterns in how questions are structured, it's to help ETS make multiple versions of the test and keep them comparable to each other in terms of difficulty, question type, and topic distribution. It's not because we're dumb as dirt and can't come up with anything orginal. So there are definitely question types and formats for statistical reasons, and yes, that can result in some patterns which it might help you to recognize. All the same, you can definitely get yourself in real trouble if you suspend your brain function and rely on advice like "The words "always" and "never" usually signal that those answers are not correct." I can tell you that I, for one, would be the type to intentionally write questions where the answer with an exclusive word in it WAS the correct choice.</p>

<p>Lastly, I think prepping for math is probably more productive than prepping for the verbal sections. First of all, top students often take algebra and geometry way back in middle school and might find themselves a bit rusty.<br>
Secondly, you could learn 300 new vocabulary words and find that not one of them shows up on your test. It's much better to just cultivate a habit of reading. For example, my son commented that reading Time magazine familiarized him with a lot of words he later saw on the SAT.</p>

<p>Did it all by myself for the SAT, ACT and SAT II. I mean, I didn't get perfect scores but I got my target scores. It's definitely not worth the money. Save your money for PAYING for college, it's expensive enough as it is! </p>

<p>I don't get why people who take expensive courses complain about paying for college..</p>

<p>Self-prep was definitely the way to go for me. I timed my practice exams and then went through to see what KIND of problems I was missing. The writing section was the one I struggled with the most, because I would often miss errors in the improving sentences sections. I made a list of rules to check for on problems where the error wasn't obvious. I only practiced for 4 or 5 hours, but I improved my writing score by 110 points.</p>

<p>If i had had to sit through an explanation of why everyone else in class missed the problems they did, I would have zoned out. Self studying saved me time, money, and ultimately made me internalize my mistakes to a much greater extent than a class would have. I might recommend some sort of tutor if your score was 1700-1800 and you were shooting for tier one schools, but if you are in the 2000+ area, you can probably do the fine tuning on your own.</p>

<p>i think my expensive SAT prep was definetly worth the money. my score improved over 300 points (just m+v) and over 400 if you include writing. i would call myself moderately dedicated but there is NO way i wouldve done the prep bymyself if i wasnt at that class 10 hours a week for 6 months.</p>

<p>sometimes you need people to help you understand those rediculous math questions (i always hated them.. got an A in AP calc but i couldnt break 700 on math sat, stupid). my brothers went to princeton review and improved their scores but thought it was a waste of time. i went to a local test prep specialty place and we sat in tiny group settings and worked with great teachers who make this stuff their lives. i didnt know ANY grammar before i went there but they actually taught me the background so i only got 2 questions wrong in the writing section. SATII i just prepared for myself, they were much easier than the SATs</p>

<p>so pretty much.. if your parents have the money and your not very VERY motivated and dedicated to your studies, i say pay for the expensive class.</p>

<p>Well, except for math. I mean, I had a sixteen something on the PSAT in 11th grade. I was shamed. My parents hired a math tutor and it...did nothing I think. But, I brought my score up around 340 points from PSAT --> SATs (including retake where I studied for just one section).</p>

<p>Self-learning is always a good option if you can't afford to take expensive prep courses. However, I firmly believe that self-learning can only go so far. It is always easier and more comfortable to learn when it is with a knowledgeable tutor and what not.</p>

<p>SAT prep courses are basically useless. I even found most of the prep books useless, except maybe for the grammar. The only book I found useful was the Blue book. When I used the tricks from the PR book, my scores fell by about 50-100 points in the practice test.</p>

<p>i had a tutor; didn't help dramatically. when i actually sat down and read the essay strategies section of my McGraw Hill book, my score went up two points. i believe it is discipline and time. if a person has the time and discipline to study for these tests, they will do well. though, with certain questions that are especially confusing, it is helpful to have someone to explain them. i believe most of the best test scorers have been very disciplined in their studies throughout their education, naturally.</p>