<p>Sorry bro you’re wrong again. June SAT test breakdown: CR: 740 Math: 800 Writing: 800 78 MC 12 E. You being wrong again makes anything you say futile from now onward as no one who claims to be “perfect” can make so many errors. Nice try. Oh and forgot to mention: it’s not CC’s fault that your parents turned out to be such a pain in the ass (boohoo they won’t let you major in psychology).</p>
<p>Why would you post this?</p>
<p>isk82live…tell your friend to get a 2400 on common sense and screw this thread!!!</p>
<p>This thread deserves to be deleted. Or at least closed, to demonstrate the moronic nature of the OP.</p>
<p><a href=“boohoo%20they%20won’t%20let%20you%20major%20in%20psychology”>quote</a>.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I believe he wishes to major in philosophy, not psychology. Huge difference, learn2read.</p>
<p>“He got a tutor” “Took 3 practice tests” BRO looks like you/him [whoever] did try harder than I ever have. YOU MAD BRO?</p>
<p>I love this thread</p>
<p>I think the ■■■■■ has left…</p>
<p>800 chem? If I were him I would double major in Philosophy and Environmental Engineering.</p>
<p>I actually thought this thread would be of use to me. Guess not. Flamers be flamin’ ;)</p>
<p>The trick to getting a 2400 and 3 800s is realizing that not everyone can do it, and you might waste a lot of time in pursuit of such transient accolades.</p>
<p>Nah ■■■■■■ don’t leave, they just take breaks</p>
<p>But yea, I agree, you certainly cant expect it, so don’t try to. Just cram those practice tests
Subject tests I think tho are somewhat contingent on the quality of teacher/class/how much info you covered or cover in your studying</p>
<p>no but seriously, can people who have never studied before actually get 2400s? </p>
<p>I don’t think so. It would require an insane amount of luck or lots and lots of preparation. Even if you were an intelligent individual you would still need a certain amount of knowledge to do “perfect”</p>
<p>The test tests you on English grammar. Which includes countless idioms that 2400ers need to be familiar with. </p>
<p>The C.R section requires you to be familiar with almost all of the vocabulary words in order to answer the question correctly. </p>
<p>Also from personal experience, I have noticed that almost everyone who gets a 2200+ has been reading avidly throughout their life. Reading books that aren’t required by school but instead are just books that these kids read for leisure. </p>
<p>All of those hours of reading sure do count towards ‘studying’ for the SAT. </p>
<p>So it may appear that the OP’s friend didn’t study “that much” for the SAT. But to know how much a person has truly studied for the SAT is impossible to tell. His studying includes any and all life experiences that enabled him to answer every one of those questions correctly (or enough questions to get a 2400). </p>
<p>What is unfortunate is that we all have different levels of intelligence. Some of us are able to read faster than others, or consume knowledge faster than others which is totally unfair. Some of us have amazing recall and can remember little details like SAT words from past conversations and be able to properly apply that on tests. </p>
<p>Our brains are wired differently and its as depressing as Lindsey Lohan to think that there are individuals out there that can process information faster and remember better than we can. </p>
<p>Is there anybody out there with a more positive view on this situation? Can someone please argue that intelligence is changeable and that any person with motivation and dedication can reach the required amount of intelligence to secure a score of 2400 on the SATs? That would be nice and comforting.</p>
<p>A little anecdotal evidence:I took the SAT got a score. Afterwards I took 10 practice tests reviewed all answers spent at least 10 hrs per practice test. I did all the CC stuff about preparing. I read the guids etc and then i took the test again. Same score. </p>
<p>If that isn’t depressing I don’t know what is. I guess that’s a sign that my intelligence has prevented me from increasing my score. It wasn’t knowledge that I lacked but just ability. And practice apparently doesn’t increase ability. Or it does but only to a certain point. That point being different for every person.</p>
<p>
■■■■■!
The next SAT essay prompt haha.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not really. Lots and lots of preparation certainly wouldn’t describe what I did. Nor would INSANE amount of luck.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ehh…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m writing an article about my view on the SAT; I’ll probably publish it as a thread on CC soon. But you’re sort of right. It’s not so much that there’s a required amount of INTELLIGENCE as it is a combination of foundation, skill, and thinking on the fly.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Like I said its difficult to truly assess the amount of preparation that you have actually done. You might have unknowingly prepared yourself by reading lots and lots of books at a young age and continuing with that habit. You might’ve been exposed to knowledgeable people who constantly spit out English idioms or sat vocab words, thus giving you an adequate amount of knowledge to do well on the SATs. The bill boards you have read, the music that you have listened to, the tv shows that you have watched, the list can go on and on. </p>
<p>I’m not saying that unintelligent people can get 2400s by preparing. I’m saying people with a certain amount of intelligence can get a 2400 given they reach a certain threshold of knowledge. </p>
<p>I think you might have that intelligence and you might have casually acquired that knowledge throughout your life. So casual that you barely realize how much you have actually prepared.</p>
<p>and " skill, and thinking on the fly" is included in my definition of intelligence. Foundation is more of the knowledge that I speak of. And I know that skill and thinking on the fly can be improved through practice (well maybe not thinking on the fly) but only to a certain degree. Only to a potential. A potential that you can eventually reach. But if your potential falls short of the required potential to get a 2400 on the SAT then you are screwed. Like I was.</p>
<p>Johny1 - Since you seem sincere, I’m not going to ■■■■■ you, which is a pretty significant concession.</p>
<p>To say that it’s unfair that people have different levels of intelligence is kind of odd, because obviously ppl are different and have different skills and preferences. That’s like saying it’s unfair that pro athletes are so naturally physically adept, or that a singer is born with a great voice. Not everyone can get a 2400, not everyone can be an Olympian, etc., but why is that a problem? There are many other things out there.</p>
<p>Where hard work and motivation come in is in utilizing and honing those inherent talents. Yes inate ability is very advantageous, and only certain people can achieve at very high levels. But just as a pro athlete needs to work to reach his full potential, an intelligent kid also needs to work one way or another to do so well academically, whether by doing practice tests, learning the relevant material already, “unknowingly preparing,” etc. A 2400 isn’t quite as hard, but the general idea applies to most I’d say. Even geniuses have to work hard to be successful. Think Einstein or da Vinci.</p>
<p>I’m not going to argue that anyone who is willing to put in the work can get a 2400. I think that would defeat the purpose. But that’s not where everyone’s forte lies. I think the trick rather is the find the thing(s) that you personally have a penchant for, what you were “born to do,” and to ideally build that up.
Just my thoughts</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well it is unfair that pro athletes are so naturally physically adept. They are lucky to even have the potential to be pro athletes. Fine, you can say they deserve their skill because they worked hard to get where they are. But what about all those kids who are just as willing to work hard but don’t have that potential?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Its a problem because our society picks and chooses which skills or potentials are good and bad. Having the potential to get a 2400 on the SAT is by our society a good thing. It has the ability to lead to success. Having the potential to juggle five bowling pins isn’t as rewarding. It wouldn’t be a problem if the person who has a penchant for whatever skill he has was happy with that skill. But I would be quite disappointed if I was told that I didn’t have the potential to get a 2400. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah that sums it up. But unfortunately some of us can’t find what it is that we truly are born to do in time to truly realize our potentials. And some of us just don’t like what we are born to do. Like sucks and that is all I can conclude. I can only pray that someone comes along and tells me that I am completely wrong in my assumptions. That any one man has the same potential as another. Or that a potion exists that would allow me to get those potentials.</p>
<p>This is getting deep. And dismal.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I believe there was this thread on CC where this kid started off with an SAT score around 1500 and eventually scored a perfect score. Although, he did take around 50 practice tests, and who knows what other forms of studying he did.</p>