<p>
Best post in this entire thread. +1 ;)</p>
<p>"If the test contains skills required for college (vocabulary, reading comprehension, grammar, math, etc.), then improvement in those skills does make you readier for college. Here is the argument in an easy to follow format:</p>
<p>Success in college requires certain skills.
Improvement in those skills results in improvement in college performance.
The SAT requires some of these skills.
Studying for the SAT results in improvement in some of these skills.
Therefore, studying for the SAT results in improvement in college performance.</p>
<p>You can tweak this around a bit but the idea is the same."</p>
<p>No no no. The SAT is suppose to test what you already learned (supposedly). You are improving on a timed test, Not the actually college. Last time I checked, college isn’t necessarily timed (I’m biased because I fail to finished some sections on time but my opinions still stand). You go to high school to learn the skills. You go to college to improve these skills. Studying for the SAT is like studying for any other tests. Chances are you WILL forget them. Can anyone named the first 10 president or all 50 states like we were suppose to do back in grade 3-6? Few can. Fewer will manage if they are given less time. </p>
<p>So no when you study for the SAT you aren’t improving “college readiness” you are improving your test performance and what you learned in high school.</p>
<p>WUDAHELLGUISE!</p>
<p>Stahp!</p>
<p>Learning is learning! Either you do it or you do not. Either you study for school and the SAT, or you do not. Test prep is additional learning. I don’t know what Serenity is doing with that extra time, but I don’t see why anyone would have a problem with the concept of studying.</p>
<p>How can extra learning and review possibly be a bad thing?</p>
<p>Is studying lying to yourself about how ready you are? No, it is becoming readier than you would have been. Not studying is intellectual suicide! </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As of when? When you signed up for the test? When you woke up in the morning? When you feel like it? No. It is suppose to test you on what you knew when you WALKED IN TESTING CENTER. After that, acquiring knowledge becomes cheating.</p>
<p>I concede defeat because you guise are shooting yourselves in the rhetorical foot. :(</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So the director of writing at MIT grades papers wrong? He compared the given score to the one he would give based on the quality. The length of the essay had more higher correlation to the score given than his score. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know about the ACT but the SAT doesn’t do anything for your skills. I saw words I would never use in a million years and I looked at how they tried to trick me with the math. It’s bull**** that you don’t need. Wow, Junior can learn to read a passage in two minutes and answer nonsense questions about it. I can do that but it makes me start having panic attacks. Yes, I start having panic attacks at being asked in a multiple choice timed format what a passage is trying to say. I could read that same paragraph and in one minute give you the gist of it though. Isn’t that more like what I’d need to do anyway? When are you, on a job, required to answer multiple choice questions on a passage? I’m ranting now, but my point is that the skills the SAT tests are practically worthless. Wow, a person knows how to reason? That’s what IQ tests are for. IQ tests logic and reasoning. But, oh yeah, the SAT isn’t an IQ test. And it’s correlated more to INCOME than intelligence. It’s biased to the nth degree. And n is a very high number in this case.</p>
<p>“I saw words I would never use in a million years”
“When are you, on a job, required to answer multiple choice questions on a passage?”</p>
<p>Unless you go to a college focused on training you for a specific career, you probably won’t directly use most of the things you learn in college either. Learning additional English vocab won’t hurt you and might even help you, say if you tried to learn a foreign language.</p>
<p>Oh, and about reading sections: I’ve found that I can justify more than one of the answers.</p>
<p>Anyone else noticed this? They’re incredibly subjective. They say “choose the BEST answer,” but if I can justify more than one strongly…it’s just ridiculous.</p>
<p>
Midterms and finals (which usually account for most of your grade (over 50%, usually about 70-90%)) for the most part are.
I’m sure you haven’t forgotten everything. If you did, then you would be illiterate. Look at the Ebbinghaus curve - it levels off instead of going to zero. Also, this argument has undesirable consequences - if true, why learn anything in school since you’re going to forget it anyway?
There’s nothing in the article that states that he did that. And even if he did, it still wouldn’t be quite as clear cut - what would the definition of “quality” be in this case?
You might not use the words, but you’re quite likely to encounter them when reading academic works.
There are plenty of perfect SAT math scorers every session, which suggests that the question writers are not trying to trick you; rather, you cannot answer all of the questions correctly in the alloted amount of time.
Other people can answer the questions without having panic attacks. If you have a valid medical condition you can request for accommodations.
The SAT directly relates to college, not job performance. Many colleges have multiple choice questions relating to required readings (for example, in biology and social science classes).
For your last point, you are once again “blaming the thermometer for the fever.” See my argument [url=<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/15165192-post80.html]here[/url”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/15165192-post80.html]here[/url</a>], which applies just as well as well to income as ethnicity.
Talk is cheap. Why do you show an example from an actual exam? Anyways, in the rare event that this happens I believe they throw out the question so it doesn’t affect the scores.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I won’t use knowledge of English grammar to write and read? I won’t use knowledge of history to know something about the past of my country, the pasts of other countries, and the world? I won’t use science (I actually likely won’t take science in college) to know how the world works? To know how weather works, why a car moves, and why battery acid is corrosive? I won’t use math in everyday life in addition to my job as a math teacher? I won’t use my education courses as a teacher? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, it does. Because it hurts my speech. It makes it harder for me to speak because my mind is cluttered with too many words. I can’t find the word to explain something simply to someone because large words fill my mind. My five year old nephew doesn’t understand what I mean when I say that I can’t articulate my point. </p>
<p>And English is going to help you learn other languages, how?</p>
<p>“I won’t use knowledge of history to know something…?”</p>
<p>If you consider just <em>knowing</em> something to be a practical use of it, then why aren’t the big words on the SAT useful just because they’re cool and knowledge is valuable in itself and so forth?
I’ve never actually studied vocab for the SAT. If you read a lot, or use freerice.com a lot, you just sort of pick them up after awhile.</p>
<p>People with a lot of knowledge don’t usually sit around thinking about all of it at once. They focus on what they need for a particular task. Truly learning a new concept or word should not affect your ability to use what you had before. Again, your brain can store a lot more information than you think if you organize it correctly.
(And it should be rather obvious that we shouldn’t limit our word use to what a five-year-old can understand unless we’re talking to a five-year-old.)</p>
<p>As far as English helping without other languages, I’ve remembered the following Spanish words because I associate them with English words that presumably have similar origins. You just start to see more connections. </p>
<p>pr</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>1) Nice attempt to insult me. Not working. The test made no sense. Sentence structure and phrasing on the mathematics section was abhorrent. The math was reminiscent of what I was doing in fourth grade. Seriously. Pictograms? Really? I ended up with multiple on my October test. I haven’t used a pictogram in years. I know how to read them, but they’re childish. Who uses them? Who? The test takes advantage of compulsion and instinct to manipulate people into making mistakes. The natural reaction when one sees a graph is to look at the graph and interpret it then look at the questions. The SAT’s time limit can make this difficult. </p>
<p>2) I’m more likely to infer the meaning of a word from context clues than be able to remember the definition. Plus, I read in a far different manner than you do. Knowing random vocabulary wouldn’t be helpful. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are you serious? Money is making things unfair again because you can easily buy a score by being able to buy unethical test prep materials from the company. And you say I’m unjustly blaming the test for people scoring bad on it? I am very justly blaming the test for being biased to those who can study to the test. </p>
<p>Ever heard of “teaching to the test”? Guess what, people are now studying to the test. In other words, they are studying for the SOLE purpose of getting a better SAT score. That is wrong. Education and learning are not about “Oh my gawd, I want to look better to this college so let me waste time making myself look more prepared than I actually am by buying all this stuff to help me get this score on this test I have to pay for and then I’ll just forget everything from the test because it’s not like I wanted to learn it in the first place.”</p>
<p>That is the issue I have with SAT prep. Studying to the test. You don’t care about the material, you care about the end result. That is wrong. That is a disgrace to learning. And a dishonor to you as the studier.</p>
<p>I would not have as big a problem with the test if the College Board did not sell test prep materials. But, it does. That’s unethical and sheds a bad light on the company. Pretty much, if you want to get a super high score, you have to buy the books. Even if you didn’t necessarily have to, they make you feel like you have to. They push them constantly. </p>
<p>A company developing tests like the SAT that are used to decide people’s futures should NEVER sell test prep materials. It makes their testing unfair. As a testing authority, it is the company’s duty to make the same materials and opportunities available to all those taking the test. By selling the materials they do, they are biasing the test towards those with money. Period. End of story. Get over it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re being delusional.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>1) History repeats itself.
2) We must learn from the past to avoid making the same mistakes in the future.</p>
<p>
[quote]
As far as English helping without other languages, I’ve remembered the following Spanish words because I associate them with English words that presumably have similar origins. You just start to see more connections. </p>
<p>pr</p>
<p>
Read what I said carefully. If the test made no sense, then hardly anyone would get a decent score. However, the significant number of perfect scores on the math section demonstrates that the test is not being tricky (because plenty of people are not being tricked by it), rather that you cannot answer everything correctly in the time they give you.
You say that you understand pictograms, therefore you are not tricked by them. I don’t see the problem there.
If a test taker interprets a graph first then reads the question, then surely the blame lies on them.
Fair enough. But what do you do when you encounter a situation when this is not possible? And I’m sure that for most of the words you read (such as the ones in this sentence) you recall the definition instinctively instead of using context clues (it’s just how people who are fluent in a language read).</p>
<p>
- This is actually not the cause. The average score gain from test prep companies is [30</a> points](<a href=“http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124278685697537839.html]30”>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124278685697537839.html).
- You can check out SAT review books for free at the public library. Many high schools also have review material available to their students. There’s lots of free stuff online as well.
- I’m saying the test is not the problem because these minorities and lower income people get lower scores in every other aspect of the college admissions process. If the low SAT scores were in isolation of these other facts then yes I would agree there is bias against these groups but since these groups have difficulty in all other areas such as GPA and participation in extracurricular activities the more reasonable conclusion is that there are factors that lead to these groups performing below par, not that the test singles them out somehow.
Don’t people study for tests in general to get a higher score? Do you think they stop doing that in college? Anyways, this seems to be a criticism of the attitude of the student and/or the culture they were raised in, not whether the test is effective at what it does.
See the part above where I mentioned it doesn’t really make a difference and you can easily study for free.
This doesn’t address any of the points I made.</p>
<p>Also, what about all the other points I made [url=<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/15178117-post107.html]here[/url”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/15178117-post107.html]here[/url</a>] (SAT writing section, panic attacks, multiple choice questions)? Do you concede them?</p>
<p>I recall in 8th grade reading a certain passage for social studies. One student raised his hand and asked, “Why do they do that?”</p>
<p>“Do what?” inquired the teacher.</p>
<p>“Use two words that mean the same thing to describe the same thing. Right here, it says, ‘It was a difficult and arduous fight towards victory.’ (<— something like that, only more eloquent) Why use both ‘difficult’ and arduous?’”</p>
<p>“Oh…! Well. It demonstrates a stronger vocabulary on the part of the writer. It shows that he - or she…! - is exceptional at his craft.”</p>
<p>@aldifo, I didn’t respond to everything because it’s late, this board is not my life, I am trying to grade papers, I am watching chemistry videos for no reason other than I love them, I have a song about phi stuck in my head, and, frankly, you annoy me with your incessant need to try to prove yourself correct. My question is why do you seem so determined to defend the SAT…</p>
<p>lol omg an SAT thread.</p>
<p>the SAT correlates really well with other reputable metrics that try to measure cognitive abilities, like IQ.</p>
<p>and there’s the strange fact that admissions rate increases exponentially for people with SAT scores greater than around 2300 at some prestigious schools. if it’s not the near-perfect SAT scores doing most of the favor (which you would hope it would not be), than being able to consistently almost ace the SAT must be indicative of exceptional performance in the other dimensions of evaluation.
(page 8: <a href=“infogoaround.org - This website is for sale! - infogoaround Resources and Information.”>http://www.infogoaround.org/CollegesChinese/RevealRanking.pdf</a>) </p>
<p>i don’t know, those are two things which influence how i view it.</p>
<p>Some people on the thread need to call the WAAAAAAAmbulance. Seriously. </p>
<p>Who cares if I study for the SAT? Excuse me for wanting to increase my chances of getting into a prestigious institution that could very likely have a large influence on my future career. Your pedantic argument for studying being “immoral” is, for lack of a better word, stupid. Completely and unadulteratedly asinine. I’m sorry for being impolite but after reading 6+ pages of your pseudo-intellectual complaining I can’t really help but indulge. I’m also quite offended you would consider me “immoral” for studying for the SAT. Some people have already pointed out the sheer stupidity of your claim, but not obviously enough because you keep making it.</p>
<p>Why don’t we all join hands and sing Kumbaya and denounce the evils of the College Board together while refusing to study to benefit us? </p>
<p>The SAT is like a riddle. You have to solve it. You have to employ all of your problem-solving and critical-thinking to solve it. But you know what? By studying, you’re honing those skills. How dare you even attempt to say that that is immoral. </p>
<p>Say there exists a terribly poor kid in the inner city in Detroit. Say he gets his hands on the Blue Book. I guess he’s destroying the foundations of learning by studying for the SAT. He’s really a less-dignified human being now. </p>
<p>Honestly, if you’re going to cry and moan about the morality of the College Board and the SAT do it somewhere else. I’ve never seen such a stupid point in my entire life.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, let’s start attacking others’ beliefs. Sounds fun!</p>
<p>I DON’T CARE IF YOU STUDY FOR THE SAT! It’s your life. It’s your loss. It’s your lie. Despite popular belief, it DOES affect my score but I don’t really care because the entire system is corrupt anyway. If I wanted to go to some fancy school that wanted astronomical scores, I might study. But, unlike a lot here, I have never been a fan of ivy. To me, they’re just a bunch of people who succumb to society’s ideas of elitism. </p>
<p>Why do you study for the SAT? To get a better GRADE! You can say it’s to go to college but, ultimately, it’s solely for that score that you think you need for this college to want you. And because so many people believe it, the school does it. It is wrong and unrespectable. </p>
<p>The issues with the SAT are like an undiagnosed cancer on the body of the US post-secondary education system. People don’t realize they’re there and it hurts the system. I just hope it gets fixed before it kills the system with corruption.</p>
<p>You’re characterizing that kid as hopeless beforehand. He has absolutely no chance at getting any sort of “good” score if he doesn’t have that book. </p>
<p>[insert random thought on the world]
It is idiotic that everything is being graded now. Especially on the basis of right versus wrong. I can argue for my answer on any issue. Why am I an environmental skeptic? Because it is not human responsibility to save the planet. Why do I still believe in green technology? Because it benefits humans. I have messed up beliefs and ideologies but NONE of them are wrong. I have the right to believe what I wish. You have the right to call them idiotic, but you do not have any control over what I believe. The thread is about how we feel about the SAT. I expressed my belief about the SAT. It is different. It is controversial. But it is MINE. Get over it.[/end random thought]</p>
<p>Listen to me and ask yourself these questions:</p>
<p>1) Why am I (you) defending the SAT?
2) Why do I (you) feel so strongly about the SAT?
3) Why do I (you) refuse to listen to an argument against the SAT?
4) Why do I (you) go into this argument biased?
5) Why is she (me) actually making this argument?
6) What is the truth about the SAT?
7) Why am I (you) arguing with a person over her (my) beliefs?</p>
<p>Damn Aldfig0 is destroying here. Too bad i cant give him anymore rep points</p>
<p>You don’t appreciate the JuniorMint? :(</p>
<p>It wont let me give them to your either.
It says i need to spread it around before i can.</p>
<p>Socialists.</p>
<p>^haha</p>
<p>Serenity, no one has to concede defeat. You argued well, and aldfig0 is a rhetorical mastermind. The funny thing, at least to me, is that, overall, this thread seems to echo the original theory I proposed on response bias.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[ul]
[<em>]Because I liked/disliked my score.
[</em>]I don’t, actually. I am on break, so…
[<em>]If you noticed, I did contemplate a few tweaks.
[</em>]If I am biased, how wouldn’t I go into the argument biased?
[<em>]You are making this argument because you believe in it.
[</em>]The truth about the SAT? Holy hell! I will have to think about this one! 
[/ul]</p>
<p>I quote Elmo: “You can believe in any opinion you want, unless it is a dumb one.”</p>