<p>20 minutes being given to answer 25 very difficult questions is absurd!</p>
<p>If more time was given on each part of the SAT test, scores would be substantially higher. Students are "rushed" through the test because of the short time limit. Sometimes students will just fill in answers without thinking about them because they are almost out of time.</p>
<p>Also, students taking the SAT/ACT would be far less stressed-out and better able to focus if much more time was given on each section.</p>
<p>Is there any way to be allowed to have more time on the test? If so, how much more time?</p>
<p>What about people with learning disabilities? I have a very pronounced LD in mathematical comprehension. But all of my other academic skills are at, or above grade level. I graduated high school with a 3.6 GPA and high/average test scores except in the math department.</p>
<p>In HS, I excelled in every other subject except math. I am TERRIBLE at math! So much so that college actually might not be a good option for me. I may end up at a vocational or trade school instead. I may have something called "dyscalculia".</p>
<p>For some reason, I never had to take the SAT/ACT after I graduated high school. And I don't know why. Do community colleges require the SAT/ACT?</p>
<p>Off-topic, but I've got a few questions about the SAT/ACT</p>
<p>*How many questions are there in total?
*How much time is given for each section?
*Is it true that you get 200 points for each section if you write and spell your name correctly?
*Are you penalized for wrong answers?
*What is the average SAT/ACT score?
*Can you retake the SAT and ACT?</p>
<p>While this might be true, if it were changed, it would make the SAT and ACT a lot less useful to the most selective colleges and universities. If everyone can score 2250 and above, how is Harvard supposed to distinguish the top 2% from the rest of the top quartile?</p>
<p>And it’s nonsensical on its face to say that the tests are too long for the time allotted. Some students are turning in perfect tests every time these tests are offered. They’re too long for most applicants to complete them and be sure they’ve answered every question correctly, yes, but that is the point.</p>
<p>People with LDs are given extra time on the SAT, don’t know about the ACT. The time limit is part of the test, it is partially what makes it more difficult. I don’t want more people walking around with higher scores, it would make my score less “special”. </p>
<p>To answer your questions:
*67 CR, 54 M, 49 W = 170 total + Essay
*25 min for 2 math, 2 CR, and 1 writing section. 20 min for 1 math and CR section. 10 min for 1 Writing section.
*Yea you can’t get lower than 600, but if you don’t answer any questions at all you are likely to get a 650-700 depending on the curve.
*Yes a wrong question is -0.25, so 4 wrong would cost you 1 correct answer, although they round so anything >=0.5 is worth 1 correct answer.
*1500 SAT, and I believe 22 ACT (not very familiar with the ACT)
*Yes</p>
<p>Extremely few people get accepted into Harvard. Unless you’re a road scholar with perfect or near-perfect grades and test scores throughout your entire K1-K12 career, don’t even bother applying.</p>
<p>Is it really true that you get 200 points on each section for writing and spelling your name correctly?</p>
<p>How long do people prepare for the SAT/ACT?</p>
<p>I have slow processing speed, meaning that the time limit on the SAT/ACT would probably demolish my chances of getting a decent score.</p>
<p>Yes. But why are you so fascinated by this fact? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It varies. I think it’s reasonable to say that most people prepare for a couple months. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think it’s more accurate to say that each wrong response to a multiple-choice question costs you a total of 1.25 points. </p>
<p>I don’t see how 4 wrong responses to multiple-choice questions will cost you 1 correct answer. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t forget the experimental section, which means either extra CR, M, or W questions. The extra section will not be another essay for you to write, fortunately. </p>
Because if you leave a question blank it isn’t -1, it just doesn’t add onto your score. Although the way you do it is also accurate, I am just stating the way college board describes it.</p>
<p>And yea completely forgot about experimental.</p>
<p>Elitism, you may not be targeting Harvard and its kind, but tens of thousands of students do so each year. The really elite colleges and universities want a way to distinguish between the able and the extraordinary. Standardized tests help them make that distinction. In order to be useful, though, these tests have to be sensitive to differences at the top of the range.</p>
<p>Plenty of students who will never be Rhodes Scholars take these standardized tests every year. They just don’t score > 2300. They score in the middle of the pack, and lots of them still get a college education.</p>
<p>You don’t have to panic about the ACT or SAT. Nobody expects you to get 'em all right, and you don’t need to get 'em all right–not even if you’re applying to Harvard.</p>
<p>Rhode Scholarship is offered for Senior UNDERGRADUATE students. And there have been no more than a few thousand rhode scholars since the program was implemented. And the majority of those scholars aren’t from Harvard. I think it’s nigh impossible to say whether a freshman will be a rhode scholar- it’s inexplicably competitive.</p>
<p>Even my son, with a 2300 SAT and a 34 ACT, commented on the time problem the first time he took these exams. Those scores are from the second testing.</p>
<p>So while you are right, since everyone is subject to the same rules, you are not really unduly hurt. </p>
<p>Taking the exam a second time should help you.</p>
<p>Of course there are. They’re mostly not famous, but there are lots of them.</p>
<p>There is also a growing list of colleges and universities that allow students to apply without submitting SAT or ACT scores: [SAT/ACT</a> Optional 4-Year Universities | FairTest](<a href=“http://fairtest.org/university/optional]SAT/ACT”>ACT/SAT Optional List - Fairtest). Many of them are obscure or specialized, but some of them are actually quite well known and well regarded.</p>
<p>Yes, but employers are looking for university graduates. And depending on where you’re applying for work, your employment options sometimes depend on what kind of school you went to.</p>
<p>Good luck getting a job on wall-street without an MBA from HBS or Wharton.</p>
<p>Some are, and some aren’t. It depends entirely on the kind of work you aim to do. If you are trying to work as an x-ray technician, training in that field at a community college would be a lot more helpful than a B.A. in history from Dartmouth.</p>
<p>It’s true that a lot of top jobs in the financial sector go to graduates of prestigious institutions, just as jobs in top law firms go to graduates of top law schools. But it’s not as if those are the only jobs around. </p>
<p>What point are you trying to make? That most people can’t put together the kind of credentials that get you into highly selective colleges and universities? No doubt. That’s what makes them selective. That the most prestigious, lucrative jobs tend to go to graduates of those highly selective institutions? Often, but not always true. </p>
<p>Do you blame employers for looking for the best employees they can get, or colleges for enrolling the best students they can get? Educational history is one factor that many employers judge in determining which job applicants will perform “best” for them, and standardized test scores are one factor that colleges judge in determining which students will perform “best” for them. But I don’t know of any employer that hires any and all Ivy League graduates who apply, and nobody else, nor do I know of any college or university (in the U.S.) that admits students based only on their standardized test scores.</p>