<p>You're wrong. Its wrong to make that connection. People can memorize well and perform well in school yes. However, the SAT measures strategy not logic. Imagination is actually wat hurts your SAT score. Being analytical and smart hurts your score because you pick the BEST answer. But the BEST is not the ETS BEST answer. They do it on purpose. Its all getting to know the test.</p>
<p>I thought they changed it to Scholastic Achievement Test?</p>
<p>To quote Grad'06: "shows you got a good score on sat"</p>
<p>B2C,
I think your argument is incoherent enough not to deserve a response. Point is the prior poster to me said that the SAT measures nothing, I was saying is that is illogical considering colleges use it to gauge their applicants, are you saying colleges do not do this? Are you saying anything? Saying they use it to see above, below average etc. is saying that the SAT is a relative tool. Congratulations B2C you have finally realized one of the fundamental aspects of life EVERYTHING is relative. For example what would an A mean if their were no B's, C's, D's or F's? You remind me of the typical "i have a low sat score so sats mean nothing."</p>
<p>Thanks. Im glad i remind you of that, even though thats not me. Well you remind me of the typical "i have a high sat score, but darn it, not high enough, i only got a 2310, oh my god, hell hath taken over. The SAT definitely measures how smart I am, see, cus i got a high score :) So im special."</p>
<p>uva, To quote Grad'06: "shows you got a good score on sat"</p>
<p>A person who is interested in learning for the sake of learning and is naturally talented will do well on the SATs no matter what. Everyone has to study and do a couple of practice exams, but if you were reading all your life and writing prose, you WILL earn a higher mark!</p>
<p>I've mentioned this before, but I took the SSAT (entrance exam for private schools) 3 times: here are my scores on the verbal section
39% in grade 7,
56% in grade 9,
90% in grade 10
They only measured scores in percentiles(only compared to kids from my grade).
And for the math section I recieved 90%+ each time...probably because I have an affinity to since kindergarten </p>
<p>My verbal score gradually increased because I became more familiar with the english language (I used practice books in grade7 and 9 too)</p>
<p>To quote Grad'06: "shows you got a good score on sat"</p>
<p>Actually B2C, i didn't score that high, i mean it is a respectable score but not a 2300(btw i didn't take the new test). I am not really worried about my SAT score, considering my college is already decided(UVA!!). The SAT may or may not measure certain aptitudes of an individual, but to make the silly claim that is measures nothing is simply...silly!</p>
<p>Your SAT score is a great measurement of how good you are at taking the SAT.</p>
<p>I said it measures HOW WELL YOU TAKE THE SAT. IT DOESNT MEASURE HOW MUCH YOU KNOW, HOW SMART YOU ARE, OR YOUR INTELLECTUAL CAPABILITIES. Its been scientifically proven through professional research. Correlations with income are obvious. That doesnt mean rich ppl are smarter. Quite the contrary. Example our great (actually piece of feces) president W. He's rich, and look at him. The cockroach crawling in the basement is smarter than he is. :) That was a little bit of my political ferver, lol, sorry, couldnt help myself. Anyway, yes, its cus they study more through more prep brought about by more courses taken and/or more private tutor hirings. Its obvious. SAT is training, training, training. No question about it.</p>
<p>I disagree, i think you can be trained but only to a certain extent. IMO doing well on the SAT is 75% innate ability and 25% experience.</p>
<p>The SAT is not all training training training. The first time I took it, I had prepped for it for like, a year, and I had trained my butt off, and I got a 2050.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, here's a buddy of mine "Jon" who sleeps in class all day, doesn't give a crap about school/test scores, he walks into the test and he scores a 2100.</p>
<p>agreed with above</p>
<p>bklyn did you even read my post?</p>
<p>some people happen to get things wrong? my goodness.. we don't want to sound too conceited(sp?) here do we? the sat is the sat. its a test. some people do good, some people don't. there are many factors involved you can't just say someone isn't smart because they didn't do well on the SAT .. O__o</p>
<p>I just can't believe people who say that the SAT means nothing at all and is NO judge of how smart you know. I know that alot of it is training, but I think the math is a pretty good judge of logical mathematical skills and that the critical reading and vocab sections do a good job of measuring your handle on the english language. If you have natural ability for math you will do well without studying and if you read alot, you will do totally fine. I just can't be convinced it has nothing to do with how smart you are when I have never seen someone dumb do terrifically well or someone smart do terribly poorly. Most of the people I know well do exactly as I would expect without studying according to my perception of their overall learning aptitude. </p>
<p>While I'm making people mad anyway, I might as well say that "not being a good test taker" is such a weak excuse.</p>
<p>kramer-- To quote Grad'06: "shows you got a good score on sat"</p>
<p>of course it is a judge. now.. but it is not like.. oh, you got a 1600, and she got a 1300, you must be smarter than her (regardless!)<br>
that puts way too much into one test.
Some people ARE not very good test takers, it makes them nervous. I don't think it's a weak excuse.</p>
<p>yeh couple people here got like <1400 new SAT...make you think......HOW?</p>