<p>Ok so it seems that many people on this board keep referencing "high test scorers" and whatever in various repeating posts. Often ignoring what MIT says about sats not being that important, people seem to feel that high scores make them strongly academically qualified. </p>
<p>I just want to say that the SAT was never meant to differentiate the top students. The test is too shallow for that task. Even the more specialized SAT II tests don't really test any deep knowledge. </p>
<p>I firmly believe that beyond a certain reasonable mark, the SATs don't really measure anything. I'm not saying this because I'm bitter. I was quite successful on those tests myself, getting close to perfect scores. But seriously, who could say that the SAT1 math measures math skill or that the writing section tests true writing skill? There are better ways to demonstrate one's academic prowess in those areas. </p>
<p>My point is, if you have good test scores, good job but don't think that it entitles you to anything or makes you stand out academically. If you see someone with a 2100 as opposed to your 2380, don't assume that you are superior academically because that is not necessarily the case.</p>
<p>Note, I am only talking about the SATs in this post (don't have any personal experience with the ACT), not other metrics of achievement.</p>
<p>Hmm…well I would go take a look at the results threads on this form. Or, if you want, I’ll save you the time and summarize. </p>
<p>Almost everyone hookless kid admitted to HYPS on this form had a 2300+. Now, there were a FEW exceptions. However, the only real times when kids admitted had poor test scores (for HYPS this is anything below a 2200) were when the kid had either 1. poor/first gen or 2. a minority or 3. built a nuclear reactor. </p>
<p>Finally, mostly because I am lazy and dont feel like typing more, I suggest you find a thread posted in the SAT/ACT prep fourm by mifune. Mifune is a crazy smart kid who posted and discussed a study done that DIRECTLY shows an exponentional increase in admission chances when students rise higher in the 2300+ range. However, if you want more detailed discussion of this study, I would recommend you find the thread for yourself (again sorry…I am lazy).</p>
<p>To Rtgrove: I am aware that there is a correlation between acceptance rate and high sat scores. However we don’t know that correlation implies causation anyways. My point, however, does not relate to that. It’s simply that I feel that people pay too much attention to this limited test when looking at stats on the boards when it doesn’t actually say that much in the first place. </p>
<p>Yes, the SAT1 math section functions better at a lower level. But I just used it as an example because for academically stronger applicants, such as those applying to MIT, it is certainly not a good way to differentiate them.</p>
<p>After a certain point (mid 600s) the SAT math test works by “gotchas” rather than “huh I don’t know how to do that”'s. That’s pretty super if you want to find out who is good at picking out tricks in a limited amount of time. </p>
<p>It is not a good test of the complex problem solving that is expected of scientists and engineers.</p>
<p>The fact that the test is able to be studied for negates a lot of it’s usefulness. When I took my first practice test, I scored around 1900. After two weeks, I ended up with a 2290 on the real thing.</p>
<p>I did not undergo an Algernonian transformation, I just read a book that told me what the tricks in the test are and what the test authors are looking for. At best, it’s a test of whether or not you know how to take standardized tests. That’s a useful skill in life, but it isn’t necessary to be an attractive applicant.</p>
<p>Agreed. I got in - My sat was below 2300, I had no hooks (I’m asian), and not a single sci/tech award - not even science fair. My extracurriculars weren’t that impressive either. However, I did have an incredibly intense course load and expressed my creativity and personality in my essays. If you’ve read the other posts, MITChris clearly iterated the fact that sat scores are useless beyond a certain point.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t call them “gotchas.” I would call it mathematical thinking at a very low level. </p>
<p>For instance, if they ask whether x or x squared is bigger over a certain range of values, there’s no “gotcha” involved. It requires a certain intuition, like knowing numbers between zero and one get smaller when squared instead of bigger, negative numbers become positive, stuff like that. Now, obviously, everyone knows such things, but if you’ve got mathematical intuition such a thing will pop out at you. You can learn to watch out for such tricks as you call them through the infamous test prep, but you really shouldn’t have to do this to get it right. </p>
<p>The only caveat may be that if a student isn’t very advanced, say in the mddle of geometry, when they take the test, it may not be so easy to ace the test.</p>
<p>Nice allusion, though! I don’t see an allusion to “Flowers of Algernon” everyday.</p>
<p>The gotchas are usually in the awkward and unclear wording of problems, not the math. I can’t pick any out off the top of my head (even after skimming one of my study guides), but I think most of us have taken a practice test. And then, while going over the questions, come across something where we were unclear or confused as to the wording of a problem and misinterpreted it. This may only come up on 3-5 questions, but that’s significant enough to drop someone by one hundred points or more.</p>
<p>In a scenario where mathematical aptitude is truly important, you can consult previous work or derivative problems to see if you understand the problem and to find a route to possible solutions.</p>
<p>I really don’t think that the SAT is capable of demonstrating mathematical intuition past some very perfunctory thinking. There’s a difference between “two choose fifteen” and serious math. The only problems I struggled with on the SAT involved convoluted and/or unclear language. I think it’s a bit telling when most study books emphasize the language and vocabulary of the questions rather than the basic mathematical skills necessary to answer them.</p>
<p>I suppose that may be a broader problem in math that reaches beyond the College Board. I tutor a few high school students, and two of them often struggle with the language employed by textbooks (and tests). I see phrasing within their textbooks and the SAT that I do not see in more advanced math (calculus and beyond, barring Stewart’s). It may be something endemic to textbook publishing, and it’s likely that the same people put in a good amount of work on standardized tests.</p>
<p>I’m segueing into a strange topic, but I see a problem in the way basic math skills (pre-calculus, pre-proof writing) are taught and tested. If this discussion stays alive for a while, I’ll copy a few excerpts from one of the textbooks of a student I tutor. I’ll also try to pick a few out of some SAT study guides.</p>
<p>TLDR: I think that the SAT math is not calibrated to (and does not) test math beyond the knowledge of basic algebra. I’m also pretty skeptical of it’s value to judge math aptitude.</p>
<p>I would be willing to grant that there could be issues of wording, especially for those who have not grown up in the US. To give one example, I saw a question on Stanford EPGY math test, which referred to a baseball team that won 2 out of 3 of its games. The total number of games was given, and I think the question was “How many games did they win?”</p>
<p>Once one is familiar with the colloquial use of “2 out of 3,” it’s truly trivial. In fact, QMP encountered this question at age 8–but had trouble with it, not yet knowing what “2 out of 3” normally means. Read literally, it might mean that there was a set of 3 games, in which they won 2. But what about the remaining n - 3? They might have won any number between 2 and n - 1. Or, one might imagine that “2 out of 3” for the season means: Pick any set of 3 games. The team won 2 of them. Clearly nonsensical.</p>
<p>So, I agree that there can be ambiguities lurking in some standard-looking phrasing.</p>
<p>However, I’m very strongly inclined to agree with collegealum314 that a reasonably good student (by MIT standards) really shouldn’t miss more than 2 on the SAT math. I don’t see any of it as “tricks,” including my EPGY example above.</p>
<p>cgarcia, I’d be interested in seeing concrete examples that you find poorly worded, coming from College Board. Other companies’ practice tests may not be screened as carefully.</p>
<p>It’s difficult to find them without going through a set of problems and then going over all the answers. At least that’s the case for me.</p>
<p>I think that a lot of it depends on the key words, “not”, “including”, “excluding”, and “case” used abruptly when the rest of the problems hints to a different answer. I also found fault in the geomotry-centric questions with needlessly cluttered (and deceptive) diagrams. These two cases can be combined with a cluttered parallel line diagram and a problem focusing on complementary angles which eventually asks a question about supplementary angles. This is an abstract example, but I found it to occur pretty often. It sets your brain up to expect a specific question, and then changes in subtle (often more so than a simple term change) way. It asks a mathematically valid question, but it’s tricky… because the language is tricky. The actual math is simple.</p>
<p>From the daily SAT question email:
In a class of 80 seniors, there are 3 boys for every 5 girls. In the junior class, there are 3 boys for every 2 girls. If the two classes combined have an equal number of boys and girls, how many students are in the junior class?</p>
<p>The question is clear. The phrasing (to me) is unnecessarily thick. It’s a systemic problem in the SAT. My guess is that SAT performance correlates to college performance because, GENERALLY, smart people can figure out baroque phrasing if they have to. That’s not always the case. I’d wager that there are a significant number of brilliant and successful people who would not be able to break 2000 on the SAT because they are unable to deal with its ridiculous tone.</p>
<p>I’m not saying it isn’t a useful metric - it is. I just hold exception to the statement that talented people shouldn’t miss more than a few questions on the SAT.</p>
<p>cgarcia, the phrasing of the question that you mentioned seems to me to be “old fashioned.” At one time, there were many questions of that type in algebra texts, and probably phrased about the same way. I wouldn’t be surprised if that question dates from the earliest offerings of the SAT’s. I would be interested, though, if you could suggest a way to rephrase it that is less “thick.” (It doesn’t really seem “baroque” to me, to be honest–but then again, I took algebra a long, long time ago.)</p>
<p>It was sent to me March 16th by the College Board. A lot of questions are posed in the same obtuse, convoluted language. I haven’t seen language like that used in any of my textbooks, and I have a pretty handy collection. To me, it doesn’t seem pertinent to mathematical ability.</p>
<p>The SAT is definitely a useful tool, but it has a lot of limitations.</p>
<p>I got 460 on my SAT math test vs 5 on my AP Calculus test
Also 640 on math II subject test.</p>
<p>All of them are developed by College Board!</p>
<p>I think they have a hard time figuring out my ability level.</p>
<p>Plus I work at my university(Umaine) math lab as student instructor III.
The good news is none of the students I tutor know my SAT math scores
Thank god all they know is my math skills.</p>
<p>@cgarcia, I agree
The SAT is definitely a useful tool, **but it has a lot of limitations. **</p>
<p>^cgarcia, when I said that the question probably dates from the earliest offerings of the SAT, I meant that they have probably been using questions like it practically since they started (without revising them.) I was very surprised when QMP took an achievement test in elementary school, and later talked with me about the questions that at least some of the questions were absolutely identical to ones I had seen 36 years earlier! I would never have guessed that.</p>
<p>That’s actually a well thought-out problem, phrased in a way that would be hard to improve. Except for the culture-specificity of the terms “junior” and “senior”, the difficulty in the problem isn’t linguistic at all. It is that there are several algebraic and conceptual subtleties that one needs to understand and combine in order to reach the answer. The language is chosen so as not to give away those subtleties, making the question an efficient probe of understanding although based on the most elementary material. Good job by ETS on this problem.</p>
<p>In my opinion SAT tests endurance more than aptitude. Here is an example of the question that I find gottcha. A picture of a shape is shown with part of it shaded. The question asks to find the area of the unshaded part.</p>
<p>It’s not even things that are supposed to be “gottcha” though. It’s not that hard to think that 7*3 = 10, or to miss the fact that while two people are walking on the moving walkway, the third person is walking alongside.</p>
