<p>This is a close paraphrase of what our local principal recently told some parents in reference to SAT tests:</p>
<p>"Most students who succeed at a high level are taking prep classes."</p>
<p>I wonder if that is true. In a quick Google search I was unable to find any information on this, and Im curious if anyone is aware of data that backs this up.</p>
<p>Im making the assumption that by high level he meant the top 10th percentile, or whatever score would be competitive for admission to a top 50 school, but Im not sure.</p>
<p>This comment caught my attention because I believe fewer students would need to take SAT prep courses if more K-12 schools offered:
- a coherent, sequential math curriculum that requires mastery at every level
- a writing curriculum that starts with a strong foundation in grammar and includes progressively complex expository writing instead of so many PowerPoint presentations, video essays, and personal reflection topics
- reading assignments that are progressively challenging and weighted more towards non-fiction
- an overall more rigorous curriculum with less grade inflation</p>
<p>I think this is probably true. I’m at Smith and nearly everyone I know took SAT/ACT prep.
I’m probably the only person I know who didn’t take the prep. Also, I live in an area where it really wasn’t offered very much and parents weren’t as involved or, in some cases, “obsessed” in their child going to the “right” college. </p>
<p>But, you don’t need the prep(at least in my mind). I went to your standard public school, nothing special, perhaps even a little low level, and I got a 34 on my ACTs first and only sitting. It can be done</p>
<p>It should come as no surprise to find that those who practice improve their performance on all tests much as those who practice improve in their athletic and artistic endeavors. SATs are no different than other tests in school, if you do your homework, you will do better on the exam.</p>
<p>It doesn’t sound right, but I don’t know where to find data. </p>
<p>My kids didn’t prep and neither did their friends. Any kids we know who prepped (and again, this is an unscientific survey based on anecdotes) did so to go from slightly above average to slightly more above average.</p>
<p>If you are an avid reader (instead of TV watcher and game player) and have paid attention in school, taking the most rigorous courses, and assuming you don’t have a phobia or other problem with standardized tests–no need to prep to get a high score.</p>
<p>One data point for you, my S, who is a freshman at Northwestern University, in the honors Integrated Science Program. Based on your definition of high level, my S received (two sittings) an SAT score better than that and took no SAT prep courses. </p>
<p>He did do some self tests from one of the many available test books (I cannot remember which one now), which is the same approach he had for the SAT subject tests (three taken, one time each.) He graduated from a public high school on the “Westside” of Los Angeles County.</p>
<p>I’m not sure if I would say most. I didn’t, and I’m in the 99th percentile. My girlfriend, also in the 99th percentile, did take an SAT prep course, but it had no positive effect. Rather, working through the Official SAT Study Guide most definitely did have a positive effect.</p>
<p>Regardless of what the principal asserted, it is a good idea to take a practice test to find out your weak spots. If you are determined to get a higher score, you can work on your weak areas or even…get professional help.</p>
<p>Maybe he was warning against being too complacent or “que sera sera”?</p>
<p>Kids who do really well have a good grasp of the material before the test is even an issue, I believe. Knowing the material is probably 80% of the battle and knowing the content/format/strategies is the other 20%. I would bet that most top scorers do some preparation–meaning that they look at the materials from the College Board, and probably get a prep book, and familiarize themselves with the content and format of the test.</p>
<p>However, I think a full-fledged prep course would be overkill.</p>
<p>One thing that I’ve heard is that the prep is more useful if the assistance is needed for the math portion of the test. Since that was where my S’s talents are, he didn’t need that. He would probably have had a better CR score if he did more casual reading, but he’s happy at NU and was probably always going to be a STEM major anyway, so it’s all good.</p>
<p>High test scores correlate with high income. Higher income parents are more likely to be willing to “pull out all the stops” to enhance their kid’s chances of admission to top colleges. They are more likely to be willing to pay for prep classes. Therefore, it may be true that high scores correlate with high rates of test prep.</p>
<p>At my school most people who took SAT prep classes were trying to “get by”. I can’t really think of any high scorers who took prep classes (I know one person who got a little over an 1800, but that’s it), but maybe I don’t know enough people to make any conclusions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I see a lot of posts here saying prep classes are a waste of time (of course, this is partly because CC is home to students who can get 2000+ scores with minimal studying). At my school prep classes are encouraged by guidance counselors. The disconnect between the two worlds here is pretty clear in this case.</p>
<p>My 99th % D1 didn’t take a prep class (I did buy her some prep books that are awaiting with their spines uncracked for D2.) The only pre-test prep that she did was to take a practice math section test. Not much SAT prep in this area as it’s not the test of choice; I know the school offers ACT prep sessions after school, but I’ve heard it’s usually the low to mid level testing kids who take advantage of that; lot of pressure here to get a 21 or above on the ACT to qualify for the Hope scholarship. </p>
<p>I firmly believe that it is difficult to prep and improve your CR score; kids I know who do well on that section are usually voracious readers. And if you’re child has been reading for pleasure since they were young then they will have had thousands of hours of SAT prep time just by curling up with a book. </p>
<p>I do think that prep can be used to improve math scores (especially if a student hasn’t done the SAT type math in a while) as well as improve test taking technique (i.e know the tricks of the test in terms of incomplete vs. wrong answers, etc.) But of course for that they could just come on CC and look up the Ziggi method ;)</p>
<p>Pleaded with my d to look over materials to take both the SAT and ACT–but did no prep! Scored a 31 on ACT and 1950 on SAT. She will be graduating top 9%. Solid academics throughout school prepared her.</p>
<p>S1 was a 2350+ one-and-done, no prep courses. Did parts of a couple Blue Book tests, mainly to make sure he was good on grammar rules. The only prep he did for the GRE was the subject test in Math, which is much tougher than the GRE Quant, and looked at the analogies section in Verbal.</p>
<p>First time S2 took the SAT, he scored in the 98%tile, but didn’t like the CR/W score distribution. No prep courses, did three Blue Book tests and some additional math sections. Second time, with zero additional prep (AP & IB exams intervened) his score went up 90 points. </p>
<p>He had a 370 point jump from freshman year PSAT to junior year PSAT, which we attributed to the intensity of his full IB program. He took freshman and soph PSATs stone cold (zero prep), so we were able to gauge how much he had picked up in the course of his regular schoolwork. He did the practice test and additional math practice before the junior year PSAT. Final SAT score was 480 points higher than first PSAT.</p>
<p>The folks we know who did prep courses were looking to increase a 1800-1900 to 2000-2200. Kids with higher scores (~2100+) had a sufficiently good foundation to use the Blue Book or other test guides and do self-directed practice (if so inclined).</p>
<p>Our kids were at public schools.</p>
<p>Best prep for good scores: read, read, read. Know your grammar. Take Alg II, pre-calc and trig by the beginning of junior year.</p>
<p>I’d modify the principal’s statement to “many top scorers prepped for the test using online, store-bought, or classroom preparation materials beyond that provided by Collegeboard”. I doubt if “most” is even close to an accurate statement, especially about “taking prep classes”. </p>
<p>
I’ll also comment that a 90%-tile CR/M (1330 for males, 1280 for females) may not cut it at a number of the “Top 50” schools. We are really talking about a higher percentile than that IMO. </p>
<p>In my experience helping some local kids, it’s easier with test prep to get a reasonably smart kid from 1000 to 1300 than it is to get a smart kid from 1300 to 1450. But that is just my experience from the kids I know.</p>
<p>My S got a 2180 without a prep course. He did practice at home, working on the areas he needed to improve, 15 -20 minutes a day for several months before he took the test.</p>
<p>^^^Average SAT at our flagship these days is over 2000. We know several hard-working kids with decent grades, 1800-1900 SATs and 25-27 ACT scores who did NOT get in but who did get into schools like Penn State Engineering, Ohio State, FSU and Clemson.</p>