<p>Cousin went from 900s to 1400s within two years. She's an extremely hard worker and did a practice test a week for those two years and paid for two separate SAT classes. She just got in ED to JHU. Friend went from a ~1060 to ~1480 over one summer by doing three hours of SAT practice every day over that summer. It takes dedication- not intelligence.</p>
<p>As long as SATs are weighed as heavily as they are in the college application process, there will be SAT books and SAT tutors and failsafe SAT strategies for the collegebound student, and it cannot be a true measure of intelligence. The average SAT score from my high school was somewhere in the 900s; for the high school in a neighboring mid-upper class town (just up the street) it was in the 1200s. Are the kids a few blocks away really THAT much more intelligent than our kids? Doubt it. Could their parents afford SAT classes and tutors and books much more easily and readily? Yeah, definitely.</p>
<p>I mean it's been said but really, past a certain number of hours spent studying for the test, the SAT no longer measures intelligence but how much you CARE about the test results. The more intelligent you are the fewer hours you have to spend studying to achieve the same results, so sure, there's a correlation. Now, if students weren't ALLOWED to study for it or take the test more than once, perhaps we'd actually see scores determined by natural abilities.</p>
<p>The whole thing is ridiculous but it is the sad and awful truth. Does it make sense that I made a 620V on the SAT but a 35English and 33Reading on the ACT? Probably not.</p>
<p>My SAT score percentile was within .3% of the percentile ranks of both of the IQ tests that have been administered to me (one in second grade, one in 9th.) I guess it wasn't too off, at least in my case.</p>
<p>The SAT measures the intelligence one has at taking the SAT. Something it does not measure is intelligence that is achieved by simply living/experiencing life. Data and facts only tell part of the story...an entirely unmeasurable, unteachable, untestable element exists within the realm of intelligence. That's my opinion.</p>
<p>I bet most people who lean towards Yes, it does measure intelligence, at least a little, have higher scores than those who say it measures nothing at all.</p>
<p>Well, I agree with brassmonkey also. It measures how good you are at the skills you'll need in college. It doesn't measure other types of intelligences that say an IQ test do. Hardworking or not, if you score high, you score high. If you score low, it doesn't mean you're dumb, just that you don't test well.</p>
<p>Well, FlipstaG, I am sure some feel that way, but no matter what my score I wouldn't feel any differently. I got a 1320 M and V, which is good, but below average for CC. This doesn't really matter to me, to be honest because I don't presume one 4 hour test can encompass my knowledge and intelligence. I know there are smarter people on this board, but I deal more effectively in person than on a bubble sheet.</p>
<p>I definitely agree with Griff. I don't think as long as humans exist we will ever be able to quantify intelligence or even properly grasp the concept of it.
This is why it is my personal opinion that most if not all so-called 'intelligence tests' are, in practice, useless, and even detrimental to society as a whole.</p>
<p>I can understand people who did well on the test saying that intelligence had somehow to do with it, but didn't you people actually take the test? Remember back to the questions. What was there in the test that would ever make you think that it measures intelligence? The Math section is just a number of tricks and the ability to apply them quickly. The Verbal section is basically just a vocabulary test. Intelligence is a term meaning a person's ability to reason. A six year old is not less intelligent than the same person when they are 30 years old. Your "intelligence" stays the same for your entire life. When a person goes from a 1250 to a 1450, it is not because the person became more intelligent. It is because the person gained knowledge, in this case probably just the knowledge of how to take SAT tests. </p>
<p>If you want to define intelligence to mean how well you did on the SAT, then yes, the SAT does measure intelligence. However, that isn't the standard definition of the word.</p>
<p>NO educator, psychologist, statistician, or CB employee says that the SAT measures intelligence.</p>
<p>The SAT does not measure one's intelligence. When I was taking it, I was wondering how a test like that should be required by colleges because it tells nothing about you or your intelligence.
In my country-- and in most western europe countries, there no test like that. After your thirteen years of schooling, you take the Baccalaureate exam. That's a better test because no answer choice is given to you, and you produce your own answers on a blank sheet. You can have another answer that is true, but the SAT does not give you the opportunity to have a differing view. With the BAC, you can have a different answer, as long as you have a logic explanation for it. Furthermore, the BAC lasts four DAYS and tests many subjects (math, science, humanities, etc.) while the SAT is a four hours test that test nothing more than how organized you are.
Though the BAC exam is wayyyyy harder than the SAT, it's not considered an INTELLIGENCE test. Its only importance: without that degree, you are not getting in any university. And I repeat my stand; the SAT does not measure Intelligence.</p>
<p>Definitely not. The SAT only tests ability to do school work in the subjects limited to math, reading, and writing. Some people score really high because they've taken SAT prep classes.</p>
<p>I definetely don't think the stuff tested on SAT is based on high school curriculum at all...it has its own curriculum. Obviously a high school senior would test better than a 5th grader, but its less because of the curriculum and more because of maturity, understanding, and reasoning ability. All you have to know in terms of curriculum is some basic algebra and geometry rules, and after that it's all reasoning. </p>
<p>Also, i feel the verbal score is based less on IQ and more on EQ - EMOTIONAL intelligence. Then again, the roots of intelligence have not been discovered...it can even possibly be increased by tightening specific neuron connections in the brain. </p>
<p>Cavalier was referring to 90%+ questions correct, not the overal percentile as you assumed ASAP.</p>
<p>no. the verbal score is based on your way of doing it. my score went up from 590 to 700 in three weeks. did i become smarter? i didn't even learn any new vocab.</p>
<p>A complete idiot is not going to do well regardless. On the other hand, an average student can prepare and work very hard and do very well. And the smart people usually do well regardless. I think it's more a test of preparation though.</p>