<p>Studying is only becoming familiar with the format.</p>
<p>You can learn all of the TYPES of questions, but there is no fact memorization.</p>
<p>Yeah that is true, theres no memorization. But if you run through enough practice tests, you can get an excellent score on the SAT. I don’t think becoming familiar with the format, has to do much with intelligence. I bet the many students, if they contained the drive to sit down and study, could score great on the SAT 2000+</p>
<p>And that is why the only reason SAT tutors are “successful” are because they force you to take practice tests :P</p>
<p>Yeah, but most people don’t. Some people score 1500 with no practice, others score 2350 with no practice (my friend).</p>
<p>Yeah so your paying for something that can be done for alot cheaper on your own. I feel I could have gotten around a 1900 on my PSAT if I had learned half of the math. Im taking Algebra II this year (Junior). Im not accelerated,and my school does not allow math advancement once you hit the 9th grade. So if I had learned the math I could have done alot better</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For people of certain intelligence, getting 2400 (no matter the extent of preparation) has such low odds that a population size much greater than that of the Earth would be required.</p>
<p>The SAT was born out of IQ tests, so I think there has to be a high correlation between SAT score and IQ score.</p>
<p>To Silverturtle: Quote (“The SAT does not measure intelligence”)</p>
<p>To say the SAT does not measure intelligence, sounds absurd. One would think that SAT meausres more of that than the ACT would. I hate both but i would rather take the ACT anyday. It makes up for its lower qualities by adding harsh time restraints</p>
<p>Is it lame that we’re debating the SAT/ACT? Yes. :)</p>
<p>But for what it’s worth, the SAT does not measure intelligence. All you have to do is take a class, or practice, and anyone can do reasonably well. It’d be worth a lot more if everyone had to go in and take the test without any studying. But the SAT is supposed to measure potential success in college, and studying is part of that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This false impression is perhaps due to the narrow sampling group to which you are exposed. I assure you: not everyone can do “reasonably well” after having taken a class.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The data tend strongly against this conclusion.</p>
<p>hmm silvert</p>
<p>if you dont mind, would you care to divulge your IQ test scores if you’ve ever taken one?</p>
<p>also, my stance on the SAT is this:</p>
<p>it is a reasoning test, yes, but the very fact that preparation improves scores is a testament to the knowledge-lean that it has</p>
<p>i remember the guy who wrote the CR guide said he took 25 practice tests before achieving his 2400; why, thats an awfully large number of practice tests, wouldnt you agree?</p>
<p>if someone waltzed in, took the test, and waltzed out with a 2400, then I would say that person is ‘intelligent’ in the truest sense of the word</p>
<p>for example, i said this before and I dont see how anyone can disagree: if a SC gives you 5 words with meanings that are unknown to you, you’d have to guess</p>
<p>if a reading passage gives you 5 adjectives to describe a character, and you dont know any of them, you’d have to guess</p>
<p>in each of the 2 scenarios, not knowing the 5 words does not make the taker less intelligent than someone who knows all 5 words; he or she was just less exposed to these words</p>
<p>math is pure quantitative reasoning, i suppose</p>
<p>writing, you’d have to be armed with prior exposure to some of the rules that it tests</p>
<p>also, to arthua:
i would say that your high tolerance level of studying does not make you more likely to succeed than your peers, who are apparently more “intelligent” in that they can score better on a standardized test with less preparation</p>
<p>unwillingness to study, well, that can be overcomed by a change of habits; eventually, studying will be a skill seamlessly inveterated in the student doing the studying</p>
<p>intelligence, or rather, a lack thereof, is not as easily overcame</p>
<p>Never forget, you can study for any test, the CB even provides books to study from. Do not get so lost in the term “reasoning test”!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>i agree with this to an extent; while participation in a SAT class does not ensure success on the SATs, it certainly helps</p>
<p>if nothing else, only because participation entails exposure to the SATs. However, if someone who couldnt afford a SAT class borrowed a book from the library and studied it as much as a class-taker sat in class, he or she would not be at a disadvantage</p>
<p>Silverturtle, i’m sure you didnt earn your 2400 cold turkey–you must’ve put forth tremendous efforts in preparation</p>
<p>I wish I had done the same, instead of operating under the false presumption that I could blaze in and get a 2400</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It sure is.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I thought I knew the result of the only IQ test that I have taken (it was in middle school). I have since discovered, however, that the result must be invalid because it is incongruous with the scale of the test. Therefore, I do not know what my IQ is. I do not want to, anyhow.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, but we are not aliens placed on a foreign planet whose linguistic patterns and lexicons are completely indiscernable. Assuming the student has grown up in an English-speaking culture (which is not true for all, obviously), his or her amassment of vocabulary is probably correlated to his or her intelligence. Cramming vocabulary lists (especially effective ones such as Direct Hits) does skew this, however.</p>
<p>well what was the result anyway?
and if you dont know, would you give an estimate, or is approximation impossible for IQ tests?</p>
<p>also, I am probably an outlier as defined by you because prior to this November, my vocabulary was about as robust as a 9th grader just entering high school</p>
<p>for the purpose of the SATs, I crammed all of the words on some website’s list of 5000 words–amass an Ivy League vocabulary</p>
<p>of course, many of them were obscure and due to the lack of situations where I would need to apply those words, I have since forgotten a good 25-30%</p>
<p>while I do not have a 800 in Cr to show for it(so envious :D), i have a spotless SC record through the 2 SATs i have taken since November, if that amounts to any kind of significant achievement</p>
<p>as do you, im sure, as your 800 in CR would attest to; however, your methods may have been(and probably were) drastically different</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The test had a ceiling of 150, but my reported score was higher than that; so I know it to be incorrect.</p>
<p>oooo, silverturtle is too smart for test caps</p>
<p>then, would you discuss how you prepared for the SATs?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I did not do anything unique: just the standard regimen of a few Blue Book tests and Direct Hits. Oh, and lots of CC posting (best way to score high :)).</p>
<p>blehhh, naturally intelligent and willing to practice/study!</p>
<p>what a combination</p>
<p>if i had either…
I may have to pay a hefty price for my severe insouciance in my SAT approach; ohs wells, I’ll have to take it again next year for transfers</p>
<p>better get on it, right?
how far back did you start this regimen of yours, and what is a “few?”</p>
<p>25?</p>
<p>Shut the **** Up, Pussies, Im a ■■■■■ btw so ignore me.</p>