Not enough time

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
1

Anyone here agree that you are not given enough time to complete the SAT?

Before I state my opinion, I’d like to mention something to avoid haters commenting on this with invalid arguments- time does NOT equal a measure of intelligence in any way or form - and this is something that is backed up by any conceivable official body of qualified study in this field.

My take on this is that the SAT/ACT are just a way to milk money. They found a good marketing strategy with just one flaw - it’s illegal. Oh, but I am forgetting the world we live in. Money has the power, thus whoever has more of it, has the power to decide, regardless of the fairness of the outcome. So how do they do it? SAT basically lures you in with relatively easy-medium level difficulty, but an unfair amount of time. The reason many students choose SAT is because they are attracted to the low difficulty compared to other tests. This brings them confidence and psychological comfort. If they made the subject tests too hard, no one would be drawn to them. Students would feel discouraged from the start and not even attempt to take it. But by flaunting easy subjects, they give hope; they make people think they have a chance to score really high very easily, which couldn’t be further from the truth. After all, no one is drawn to a test because of the time. The thing that stands out is the content. It also makes sense to have SAT organized several times a year during consecutive months with those specific dates - if you get a low score (which you definitely will), you can take it again! So convenient, isn’t it? Also, they get more money the more attempts you take. But of course, that’s so not their purpose.
Now about those dates - think about it. You get tested at the start of each month and you only get the results after a month and A HALF. Not enough time to check your results and decide if you want to go for another. You’re forced to just go ahead and register for another SAT before knowing your score in case you are doubting your results too much. Not to mention you don’t even have much time to decide since the testing day is usually around the registration deadline for the next month’s test. Yet again, quite convenient, isn’t it?

Any qualified teacher/psychologist/researcher/scientist in the field would tell you that the time allotted is not proportional to the difficulty/complexity of the subjects. And as I said above, I think very few people believe speed of perception or problem solving is what makes a person intelligent. And if colleges/universities are looking for this specific trait in students, it shouldn’t be administered by a test that is meant to reflect intelligence and general performance, since these two don’t go hand in hand. Problem-solving speed and intelligence are not mutually exclusive but they’re not dependent on one another either. So if universities want to find people with performance speed, they should require a specific test. If they want students with overall solid performance and intelligence, they should go for a general test - which is what SAT is supposed to be. And if they want both, they should require another specialized test. It makes absolutely no sense to blend all requirements into one test just for the sake of “top universities wanting to distinguish students who can solve things fast” as I’ve read on some threads on this forum as an argument to the time limit. It’s like saying you are altering a test in order to cater to the needs of a niche part of the world. Top universities represent a very very low percentage. Making a test that is basically specialized for their needs only and tagging it as a general test is not only illegal, but nonsensical.
It also has no logical basis to say that “no one expects you to score high” and “universities other than harvard will accept lower scores” because it is in fact wrong. I personally applied to a university in UK that required quite a high score and it wasn’t a top uni, but no way near bottom either. It was among the best ones in UK but not Harvard or Oxford level. According to comments like the ones mentioned above, you would deduce that all other great universities that just aren’t niche will accept low scores. This is definitely not true. In order to verify this, I compared the entry requirements of top, great and average UK and US universities, for US, UK and other international qualifications, to see if they correlate. And it resulted in a clear discrepancy when it came to the US qualifications, which proves people consider the SAT a general test, not a specialized performance speed test, and thus they demand scores based on that criteria, which cannot be determined from the SAT.
Here are some of my findings for Physics course for example:
Oxford - top
UK requirements: A*AA
European Baccalaureate: 85%
US requirements: 2100 (1400 new SAT)

Harvard - top
US: 2260 (1510)

King’s College - great
UK: AAA - A*AB
European: 80%
US: 1900 - 1950 (1270 - 1300 new sat)

Sheffield - average
UK: AAB
European: 80%
US: 1800 (1200 new sat)

If SAT was in fact a general performance test, then the above requirements would be fair and accurate, but given the fact SAT is created in such a way that it does not test you like other exams, in terms of general performance, but instead based on speed, then it makes no sense to judge its scores like you would others. This shows international universities and perhaps even US ones, do not judge accurately as they are unaware of these details. Thus this unfairness affects the future of students and it shouldn’t be taken lightly thinking “average or lower than top unis will accept low scores” since it is clearly not the case. They are blatantly unaware of the true meaning of SAT and they just determine the requirements based on a standard set of testing methodology.

My rant is done. While I wish there was something I could do about it, I know suing or other legal methods, despite having a logical and legal basis, even with other people’s backup (as improbable as that is) would result in nothing since SAT has existed for ages now and there have been attempts at correcting it before but they didn’t budge. It means those in power are corrupted to the core and nothing can take them down. It’s a sad world.

2

Wow. How melodramatic.

Welcome to college, where both my criminology and chemical engineering professors attempt to stuff exams into 50 minutes. It works for crim. Not so much for material balances. This crap doesn’t go away and it’s not corruption that does it.

3

From my experience and my friends’ experience at university, it seems no other tests are as poorly balanced as the SAT. There may be even worse ones but I haven’t heard of them/compared them. Of course not all poorly designed tests have the same reasons. That’s not an argument to dismiss my point of view. SAT organizations gain from multiple attempts as I explained. A college professor gains nothing. When it’s this well set up by an official body, it makes you wonder.

4

@Skelbo Lots of people score well or perfect on the SAT, so the time constraint is not impossible.

I am fairly sure the GRE General Test comes in strictly worse, since it is fairly similar in content to the (old) SAT, but 4x as expensive.

5

Let’s take 2000+ (or 1330+ new sat) to represent great/borderline good score. I’ll take one table of SAT results at random. Let’s consider the 2014 scores. Of ALL test takers, only about 7% obtained a score of 2000+ and only 0.03% a perfect score. To put things in perspective, that is like saying 7 out of 100 people getting a good score = lots of people or 3 in 10000 people getting a perfect score = many people. I don’t think that is a proper definition of ‘lots’. Let’s even consider the average range. Take 1500-1800 (1000-1200 new sat) to be average. According to the same table, 30% of the test takers got an average score. This results in the majority of the test takers acquiring a below average score.
The fact the time limit is not impossible I’m well aware of. It’s not impossible for a man to set foot on the moon either or for one to survive a dangerous fall, however the percentages dictate the rarity of the event happening and a good general test score being a rarity should ring alarm bells to officials as there is clearly something wrong with it. Or most people are just complete idiots… one of the two. I’m inclined to believe the more probable option, which is the first one. A good score on a general achievement/performance test shouldn’t be nearly impossible to get. This was my main point. If you consider the SAT a specialized processing and problem solving speed test, then the scores and design would match. But as it is defined now, the SAT is not living up to its expectations and claims.

6

I asked S2 about this (he just took the test). He said he finished all the sections early and had time to go back & review his answers. No, he did not do test prep course. All he did was that he familiarized himself with the material by doing the 4 free practice tests from the College Board’s website. He said the real test was no big deal. My S1 (took old SAT years ago) also said the SAT was no big deal. He did absolutely ZERO prepping at all.

No school admits on the basis of SAT alone. For admissions, the test is ALWAYS used in conjunction w GPA. Together, they are a more useful tool than either alone.

In the real world, you deal with time constraints all the time. Get used to it.

7

@Skelbo You may want to switch to the ACT; there are lots of students who do significantly better on one or the other (rather than equal scores on both).

8

Thanks for the advice. My topic here wasn’t really based on a personal problem. I think I scored ok on the test, but I can assess it objectively as well, despite my score. So I just did a little digging and browsing for opinions and comparing test designs and results and it ticked me off a bit to see that such an important test is so flawed imo.

Exactly. In the real world, a speed problem-solving test won’t do you any good unless it’s dedicated to a very specific group of people and field. You won’t be required to handle extreme time limits in college or uni, at least not as a main part of your study. Which makes the SAT irrelevant as a component in getting accepted to an institution that won’t require pretty much anything of what you were tested on. Slow or average processing minds can be extremely successful in life and university. That is not reflected at all in the SAT results. As I said above, intelligence does not equal speed solving. And I think only a minority of unis would be looking for speed over general academic excellence.

9

@Skelbo

Your complaint about the SAT is ostensibly about time constraint. If insufficient time was the issue, then the solution is to simply allow more time on the test. But that’s not your agenda. You want to get rid of the test entirely.

My solution for you:
Lots of US colleges are “test-optional”, if you feel your testing performance is not reflective of your academic abilities, then apply to one of those.

Are you an international student? Few Americans use the word “unis”. If you don’t like the American admissions criteria, then don’t apply to US schools. Easy.

10

@GMTplus7 My idea was exactly that - to allow more time for the test. I never mentioned I think SAT should be removed. I only said I don’t think the time limit matches the difficulty and gave my opinion on the reason. Ideally, they should change the time limit, not remove the test.

I’m not applying to US schools, I’m applying in UK but by using SAT because I went to an American high school due to certain circumstances.

Either way, this topic was mainly, if not entirely dedicated to the matter of SAT timing in order to hear opinions and experiences and share my view, not really to request advice on what to do regarding scores or admissions. I still appreciate any advice and helpful tip, but just saying my purpose was rather theoretical than based on a specific case meant to be solved.

11

I don’t see the “illegal” aspect, nor do I see the dark “good marketing stratgey”. You’re not low-income/ totally clueless since you attend an American int’l school in the UK (an English-speaking country), plus you obviously have internet access since you are participating in this forum. Therefore, you had the opportunity to look at the free sample tests on the College Board’s website to familiarise yourself with the test’s format.

Secondly, since it’s the same scoring metric applied to all test takers, the SAT’s “fairness” is arguably greater than GPA comparisons between students from different American schools w different levels of rigor.

Can you articulate the SPECIFIC “legal basis” you want to sue them for? Simply having hurt feelings doesn’t make for a compelling basis for a lawsuit.

12

@GMTplus7 I simply started the topic to get opinions. I get your point of view. That’s about it. I don’t know why you wanna take this into other grounds.

Like I cleared above, this thread wasn’t started with the purpose of solving a personal problem of mine to do with my future or my sat scores. It was meant to get opinions.

Again, I wasn’t asking in order to receive a solution to a problem of mine.

My feelings aren’t hurt, thank you very much for your concern and condescending attitude thinking I would carelessly use words with a completely wrong meaning. When I say legal basis I do not equate it to “feeling hurt”.

The test’s design is a logical and legal reason as it does not comply with educational regulations (at least none of the regulations I am familiar with from UK, RO, most of the rest of Europe and US - up until now perhaps). Where I’m from, if an institution came up with a flawed test, and for whatever reason it didn’t get picked up when certified by the Ministry of Education, it would get taken down as soon as reports came in mentioning something wrong with it along with proof that would be analysed by a specialized professional in the field.
And I said “I wish I could sue them”, but I cannot, since I am a noone in their eyes and basically any court. One man can’t win against an army. It would require a proper organization to fight another organization in order to gather enough evidence and credibility to be noticed and not instantly dismissed.

I did not compare the fairness of the SAT with the other students taking the same test… but with other tests, obviously.

As for the good marketing strategy - it is there whether or not my financial situation is good. I don’t see the relevance of that matter. But FYI I have a lower than average income and have studied in a non-English speaking country in high school. I did look up all the test samples and I realized they were easy but flawed due to incredibly short amount of time. AGAIN, this thread wasn’t started to solve a personal problem. I was well aware of the test I was stepping into the moment I decided to take it. I knew the time wasn’t fair (imo) and that I will most likely be forced to take it several times to achieve a good score, but I took it because I had no other choice at hand. Regardless of my awareness of the testing limits, it doesn’t mean others pick up on it, and even if they do, for whatever reason they still go through with it, like I did. Which is just sad in my eyes, so it made me think and explore the topic. I know forums are a very dangerous place to post your opinions as there are tons of arrogant people itching for an argument, but I took the chance anyway. At least this time I came mentally prepared to block such comments :stuck_out_tongue: So whatever comes next from you, I won’t bother to respond, as it is a clear waste of time and you’re just instigating, hoping for an argument to blow up. I’ve got better things to do and perhaps nice and wiser people to listen to, if they want to contribute to this topic. Feel free to hit as hard as you wish with your next post or say I’m imagining all this if it makes you feel better.

13

No one makes you or anyone else take that test. It is not required for any school, there is an alternative. And your analysis of what is “illegal” is highly flawed and completely specious. They can put out any test they want. I can create a test and charge for it. No person has to sign up for it, and no college is forced to pay attention to it. It is completely voluntary at every step of the way. If there was anything illegal about it, someone would have brought it to court by now. Oh, and your comparing the subject tests to the general test is ridiculous. Two totally different things, and it shows a certain lack of reasoning skills to say they “lured you in” with easier subject tests. Not only would that be comparing be comparing apples and oranges, but many students take the general test before they take any subject tests. How were they lured in?

Your argument about money/power doesn’t hold water for two reason: 1) many billion+ dollar companies have been successfully sued, including almost every major auto manufacturer and pharmaceutical company at one time or another, and some very recently. These are among the largest companies in the world and dwarf the College Board in resources. Why didn’t their money/power get them out of multi-billion judgements? 2) There is always a hungry lawyer or politically ambitious government prosecutor anxious to make money in the former case and build a career in the latter. Again, plenty of evidence of powerful people and corporations being charged and found guilty. The College Board is small fish compared to many of these.

With regard to your core argument (at least I think it is) that a timed test is not indicative of intelligence, many people disagree. Productivity and intelligence are two very different things. You are correct that people that don’t do well on these tests can be extremely productive in life. But time is a resource that is not infinite to us mere mortals, and so over the centuries we have measured both intelligence and the absorption of knowledge via timed tests. To say that the SAT is somehow more guilty of not recognizing human time constraints is ludicrous in the extreme.

There is a normal bell curve of results from the test, and time is but one factor, and one that is considered relevant as to how natively intelligent you are combined with how much you have learned and retained. After all, how would you propose to differentiate the student who is just a bit slow in working through a problem even though they have learned the material versus the student who is slow because they have not learned it as well? No test is perfect, but your rant is really rather riddled with flaws, IMO.

Now a school can decide for a variety of reasons that in fact these tests are not good indicators of how a student will perform at their school, and as was mentioned a fair number have gone test optional. But if a school requires a standardized test, you can disagree all you want but that is the way it is. It doesn’t make your logic about the test itself any less flawed. It measures what it measures, and schools either think it has proved useful in differentiating the kind of student they want from those they don’t (at least in part) or they don’t.

14

What U.S. regulation regulations are you specifically referring to? If you are going to make provocative statements in a discussion, be prepared to back them up.

15

@fallenchemist

I wasn’t comparing the SAT general test with the SAT subject test. I was comparing the SAT general test with OTHER tests. And I said the SAT lures you in with the easy design of their subjects. aka the English reading and writing and maths subjects. I referred to those designed test subjects, not the special test called “Subject test”

I don’t think that is a reasonable conclusion to draw. Money and power can save you or not. It usually does, but not always. In this case I concluded it was money/power because no other reason seemed plausible enough.

This has been the case with college board. It was just unsuccessful, thus reinforcing my opinion that something fishy is going on here. Fairtest organization is against the SAT. I don’t know why others didn’t take any/much action to change this. One reason could be fear, another disinterest, or perhaps college board is under too much protection to be touched. Who knows. Could be 100 reasons. Maybe it’s going to happen soon.

I don’t see what is extreme in my view. I am comparing the SAT with other FAIR general tests, not with other worse cases. It’s like saying I am accusing murderers for being more guilty than animal abusers or child beaters just because I didn’t mention them in my post. My question here was simple and it was focused on the SAT only. It was neither a personal problem nor an international testing massacre, but a plain and simple question about the time limit on the SAT in order to get opinions but people keep going way off track, perhaps in an attempt to subtly dodge the main point because they agree with it but don’t want to admit and can’t justify a counterargument. Who knows.

Totally agree. It’s standard in this world to be tested on your knowledge through timed tests. My core point and only question of my whole thread was regarding the time LIMIT. It was not an attempt to express I think the sat or all test should remove the time limit entirely. My purpose was to get opinions about the fairness of the limit. In other words, I wanted to hear if others thought the time limit was too short, too long or just perfect. In my opinion, it’s exaggeratedly short. That’s it. No test is perfect, I agree. But imo the SAT is exaggeratedly flawed in regard to the time limit. It would be greatly improved by increasing the time allotted. For example instead of 25 minutes for 20 maths questions, get double. Instead of 65 minutes for 52 English questions, get double or at least 150%. Either that or if their problem is keeping students in a test center for too long in one day, then split the test in two days. Or create more difficult questions and reduce their number, so the time doesn’t have to be increased. Tons of solutions could be applied to improve the SAT in my opinion.
I had been doing lessons in preparation for the SAT with a Maths tutor that has 10+ years of experience and she said she doubts even she, as a teacher, would be able to complete the test in time even though she understands each problem right away and knows how to solve. She said given the calculations you have to do it’s too hard to be given such a limit because you won’t even have the time to literally do the math of the problem, even if you know it.

My core idea was that (from my understanding) the SAT is set to have a certain purpose which it fails to accomplish due to the test design. And I asked if others felt this way too. I think given the fact that SAT is meant to prove general performance in order to be admitted to college/university, its design is not in accordance with this set purpose. The time does not match the length and difficulty of the questions imo. To be clear… when I say design of test I mean the way it is composed. Aka the number of questions given + the time limit + the difficulty. I think those components aren’t blended well for the type of test SAT is supposed to represent.

A student who has not learnt it as well will not be able to complete the question at all, regardless of the time limit. A student who processes more slowly will eventually answer correctly.
If you mean both getting the answer right but after some time, due to those different reasons, then I get it. But I don’t think it’s fair for those with slower processing abilities and no other medical problems, thus unable to get a medical note, to get the short end of the stick.

I started this thread thinking people here would be open to discussion and rational and mature enough to be able to express opinions objectively and politely without getting defensive or emotional about a topic that disagrees with their view. Instead I got side topic comments, low blows and irrelevant points meant to distract from the main point.

16

You wanted calm, rational discussion and you went to the INTERNET?

Anyway, I’d imagine starting with an emotional “rant” and following up with defensive comments didn’t help to accomplish that goal.

17

That is categorically untrue. I was able to solve problems I had forgotten the magic formulae for, but it took a little longer and required some ingenuity.

As far as the rest of your post, it is because you go in with the absolute assumption of guilty until proven innocent when it comes to the College Board organization.

Or that they did nothing wrong and you are just wrong

Or just the one that over these many years people have found the test to be reasonably fair and useful, even if not perfect. If there is a better one, it will presumably do better. Oh wait, more people now take the ACT than the SAT. Imagine that. Doesn’t mean they are crooked and doing other unethical or illegal things.

I still take great issue with your statement. Do you mean luring you in with the practice questions? They are real questions from past tests. They are no easier or harder, on average, than what you get on the actual test. As far as the time limit, since they have practice tests and you can time yourself, how is any of it a surprise?? Your statement about luring people anywhere is absolute and utter nonsense if the person does any preparation at all. If they don’t, then they were not lured by anything because they saw nothing ahead of time. Of course people that don’t prepare for a test, especially when there is so much practice material available, both for free (like checking out books from the library, online questions) and at low cost (books you can buy) get what they deserve if they do badly. But no one has to pay for expensive tutoring services to prepare. It is a test, you study for it.

And IMO that is all so much rubbish, putting a lot more strain on students, not less. Actually some of those things were tried some years ago in some experimental locations and the students hated them. I mean hated it, and they were quickly dropped.

Another way of looking at that is that they could have put 60 questions and only give 20 minutes. Now clearly no one would finish, presumably. The idea would not be to finish, but to further use the test to not only see how many they get right, but how many more as well. For those that cannot even get through 25 questions in that time, this is the same thing. They just chose to cap it at 25.

As far as your teacher, I would suggest you get a better one. My D finished easily (2330 just a few years ago, one sitting), my son finished easily (2110 a couple years earlier), and oh those many years ago I finished easily (1410 out of 1600 possible). And that was even with having to rederive a formula or two on the math, in my case. Anecdotal, for sure but plenty finish every year. Again, not finishing is one of the things that spreads the scores out and differentiates the students into the bell curve. You may not like the conclusions that are drawn out of that, and think it is unfair to some, but I have news for you. Any test that can be conceived by people is flawed against some type of person. And without testing, we are without measurement and without measurement, we are without tools to make decisions. We might as well all live on communes somewhere in that kind of world.

I think that is why you are getting such a harsh reaction. Your “facts” are not facts, your bias is way too strong starting out, it doesn’t ring true and/or reasonable with most people anyway, etc.

18

@Skelbo I find this quite surprising - I scored perfect on the math section both times I took it, and I am nowhere near the fastest reader. As far as the reading and writing sections were concerned, I didn’t score as well, but at least I had enough time to think about every question. As fallenchemist said, perhaps find a better tutor?

The one exception to the old SAT that I thought was somewhat unreasonable was the essay - 25 minutes is too short to write a polished essay. But last thing I heard, the revised essay doubled the allotted time.

Yes, I do agree that the SAT (as well as the ACT, GRE, etc.) has many flaws, but no test is perfect. Even at MIT I have had tests in which there were many complaints including too short of a time limit.

19

@bodangles Following up with defensive comments in reply to the already present passive-aggressive and defensive replies to my thread you mean? :stuck_out_tongue:

20

I’m not sure how “Lots of people score well or perfect on the SAT,” “You may want to switch to the ACT,” and “Here’s another example of this in college, this crap doesn’t go away” count as defensive, unless not agreeing with you is the only criterion for being “defensive.”