<p>Who wants to wake up more saturday mornings then they have too? If you take the SAT 3 times this way you would really be getting up early like 13 different mornings. Ridiculous!</p>
<p>Oh brilliant, let's have even more testing days. Or, here's a better idea: keep the SAT as one!</p>
<p>
[quote]
digit: different from fingers in having only two phalanges
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ooooh, no, they can't do that: it would be culturally biased, as the thumbs ARE fingers in some other languages... :D</p>
<p>Why hasn't anyone thought of this? Split the SAT into three sections just like the subject tests. Take all three in one sitting, or two at a time, or one at a time. Maybe even take one SAT I section and an SAT II section the same morning. Take all three the first time, then come back and retake the one that you want to retake and a subject test. Other than the UCs, this works for everyone as nearly all colleges accept the best scores from multiple sittings. I'm sure College Board can figure out a way for them to use this to make more money.</p>
<p>Why don't they just make the writing portion a SAT2 test again? Problem solved.</p>
<p>ooh, I like that idea exrunner. I would have much prefered to get each section out of the way all at once.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm sure College Board can figure out a way for them to use this to make more money.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yep. As soon as they can figure out they can charge the current testing fee for each separate section and make three times the money, they'll be all for it. Kids can just go ahead and schedule their test dates at the start of junior year: every Saturday morning until the end of high school.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why don't they just make the writing portion a SAT2 test again?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No way. Only a small fraction of SAT takers pay to take the SAT II tests. This way, the College Board has a captive customer base all across the country paying for the Writing test that most colleges don't even look at.</p>
<p>We should get the Mafia to run the college testing. It would be cheaper.</p>
<p>WHAT A STUPID IDEA!
Collegboard wouldn't mind terribly. Would simply mean more revenue for them. How many days in each year are already spent on standardized tests? This would be a huge step in the wrong direction. If they actually did split the test into 3 days, each single day test would naturally start to grow and grow to fill the time allotted. Just think about the unintended consequences.</p>
<p>That is why there must still be an option to take two or three sections at the same time. Here is the ideal situation: </p>
<p>Test Date 1 (SAT I m,cr,wr)
Test Date 2 (SAT I CR, WR)
Test Date 3(SAT I CR, SAT II whatever)</p>
<p>People would still take the test the same ammount of times as they do now, except in this situation they would not have to take the math every time they want another shot at the CR. This adds more flexibility for the students. This works in everyone except the UC's(CB's biggest customer) favor.</p>
<p>edit: if anything, this could possibly reduce days spent on standardized testing, as you could retake your one SAT section along with an SAT II or two. Of course, CB would have to raise fees, but alas...</p>
<p>There is a tremendous problem of fairness with this "solution", however- it promotes retakes and specific prep for specific sections by allowing students to only choose one section of the test at a time. The result will be that the SAT will further favor the wealthy and well-informed students who have the time and the resources to retake the test multiple times.</p>
<p>True, but isn't that already a problem?</p>
<p>Splitting up the test would make the SATs MUCH easier.</p>
<p>Think about it...the way the test in now, you go from writing, to math, to reading, to math...always switching and it throws you off.</p>
<p>If they tests are separate it'll be all math at once, all reading at once, all writing at once. That would definitely make it much easier, which would mean more 800s, which would mean higher scores have even less meaning.</p>
<p>What makes the SAT so difficult is the fact that its mentally draining. Splitting up the sections would take away a huge part of the challenge. </p>
<p>And honestly, the SAT is long, but its not THAT long. Sleep the night before. Eat breakfast. You'll all be fine.</p>
<p>I don't know about you but the New SAT was too long, and I went to sleep the night before. With the writing section first my hand started cramping up, I was starving by the end of the test because if I eat before a test it usually comes back up. I think they should just make the test breaks LONGER. With 5 minutes and only a few bathrooms available I didnt even bother to go to the bathroom because of the huge lines. Splitting this tests over three days (not making it 3 different tests) is a great idea. It won't make the SAT any easier it'll make it something thats measuring more accurate because in no case will anyone have to do something so strenuous without much time for break and without extended time. Some people don't have a problem with the current SAT structure, some people have a huge problem with it. Are people that can take this current test and get a 2400 any better than people that couldn't get a 2400 because of being tired, uncomfortable, or hungry? Does this ability even determine your performance in college? Is it even a factor? Its like measuring how long you can hold your hand out for 4 hours to determine whether or not you can play basketball well. (can't think of a good analogy). Anyway I think this is great, though a bit too late because I'm done with the SAT.</p>
<p>i like the idea because while i did really well on the math and vebal sections, i did really poorly on the writing. i would definitly have retaken the writing section if i had had the oppurtunity to just take take it. but i didnt because i didnt want to sit through four hours of testing.</p>
<p>I really don't see any difficulties here provided that the option of taking the entire exam in one sitting is still offered. 4 hours can be quite draining on the average student, so it would help better center our focuses into different areas. It is quite a waste to have to take the entire exam if you are only trying to improve one section...but then again, I have much more respect for the one with a 2400 in one sitting than another one with an 800 on each of the 3 sections in 3 seperate sittings, so disparities in this aspect definitely need to be considered.</p>
<p>also, when is the EARLIEST possible time this could take effect since CB is taking their sweet time to wait 5 months from now to meet? I hope at least by next october.</p>
<p>I will be livid if they go through with it... I'm class of 06 and UCs only take highest scores in one sitting. Because of this I lost a very high writing score when I retook the SAT and improved math and reading, but got lower in writing.</p>
<p>If we have to go through it, so should every class following 06!!</p>
<p>Chrisr, that isn't the best reasoning for why it there should be no change. "The system is bad, and I had to suffer the system, so it should never be changed."</p>
<p>Anyway, I'd agree that this isn't really addressing the underlying issue - that the test is too long. And also that the Writing test need not be one of the three sections... it gives an unfair weighting to verbal aptitude over mathematical/scientific, and there's really no place for standardized good writing in the world of the SAT I, at least.</p>
<p>I agree with dstark: make the Writing a subject test again. Then there's no problem, the test is a good length, and all the problems that go along with the writing section on the SAT I are solved too...</p>
<p>Plus, having the SAT as one <em>single</em> standardized test for students to take to approximate aptitude for the college educational experience is the goal of the exam... and it should stay that way.</p>
<p>It seems to me that the definition of "one sitting" is the issue here. From what I gather, test takers were made to do the test over a period of 5 hours + including breaks but no lunch. This is far too long for teenagers to go without food. Why should the a portion of the test not be administered AFTER a lunch break? It would resolve the issue of tiredness and hunger on the part of many students.</p>