<p>The problem with the SAT is that it is actually not "standardized" in any way. Some people can afford better calculators, better tutors, and better books, so they score higher. The only way that the SAT could really be an accurate measure of one's intelligence is if everyone was forced to take it with NO warning and NO prep.</p>
<p>The person I sat next to when taking the SAT got a 0....but that's because he was cheating.</p>
<p>some girl got a 1430 on the NEW SAT...she didn't know what it meant and actually thought it was good so..i guess thats a good thing?</p>
<p>lol what did he do to get caught cheating?</p>
<p>"lol what did he do to get caught cheating?"</p>
<p>*He was swearing pretty loudly at the makers of the test for making such difficult math questions
*He was looking at other people's tests more than his own
*He was whispering to those around him asking for answers
*He was eating during the test</p>
<p>...and I couple other things I'm sure I'm forgetting. He wouldn't have received a very good score anyways, he isn't exactly the smartest kid in the school. </p>
<p>He received a 0 on the ACT for cheating as well, retook it without cheating, and got an 11 I believe.</p>
<p>The only thing the SAT tests is how well you take the SAT</p>
<p>haha wow it take serious skill to get caught cheating on the SAT. lol</p>
<p>"The only thing the SAT tests is how well you take the SAT"</p>
<p>That's just ridiculous. The human brain certainly does not have an "SAT test taking component." SAT scores are a result of intelligence, logic, verbal reasoning abilities, and other skills. Sure, there are smart people who get poor scores. But there are far fewer stupid people who get good scores.</p>
<p>i believe there is a certain cut off line for SAT prep. the line is basically the middle classed average joe. If the MCAJ has the determination to study for like 1 year, he will ace the SAT's.</p>
<p>of course, if ur below an MCAJ, and still ace theSAT, then ur going to harvard</p>
<p>Apparently nobody listened to me, so I'm gonna quote myself.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The only way that the SAT could really be an accurate measure of one's intelligence is if everyone was forced to take it with NO warning and NO prep.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The way the SAT stands, it really is no scale on which to measure innate intellectual ability.</p>
<p>Somehow, I think this thread is evidence that the SAT doesn't correlate to intelligence. (It's also of note that I've taken real, psychologist administered IQ tets which didn't correlate fabulously well with my SAT score.)</p>
<p>There's mountains of evidence against the SAT being a test of innate intellectual ability. Mensa won't accept it as an IQ test. There are -large- disparities in SAT scores between racial groups and economic classes. To posit a correlation between SAT score and IQ generally is to accept the ridiculous proposition that education and economic background have no correlation with score.</p>
<p>Seriously, what kind of screwed up ivory tower (and I don't mean the academy) have you kids grown up in?</p>
<p>I think the reason SAT scores do not predict success in the real world is that they don't measure creativity, ambition, hard work, and probably the most important thing - personality. You can be smart, but that doesn't mean you can "sell" yourself to an employer, "sell" an idea, whatever. It also doesn't measure creativity at all.</p>
<p>So, my SAT score is worthless and reflective of nothing? I'm not better off with it than some dude who got a 900? Alright, then.</p>
<p>i know someone with an 1130/2400</p>
<p>"The only thing the SAT tests is how well you take the SAT"</p>
<p>That's just ridiculous. The human brain certainly does not have an "SAT test taking component." SAT scores are a result of intelligence, logic, verbal reasoning abilities, and other skills. Sure, there are smart people who get poor scores. But there are far fewer stupid people who get good scores.</p>
<p>AMEN.</p>
<p>cavalier302- That's about the extent of it, yeah.</p>
<p>uvajoe-</p>
<p>Then you're still left explaining the correlation between income levels and race on the SAT.</p>
<p>Let me give you a hint: You've got a couple of options:</p>
<p>You can say that genetic difference between races cause differences in the SAT score. That means that you're in Bell Curve territory. It's not a fun argument to make, but I'd respect you a little more if you tried. But remeber: correlation does not imply causation.</p>
<p>You could, I guess, say that smart people tend to be richer, that smart people tend to have smart kids. But that means that you could reliably map IQ to income. And that's not an easy claim to make.</p>
<p>Or you could just admit that an SAT score is more a function of education, preparation, and social background than it is of intelligence.</p>
<p>Wow, people. The view of whats a good score is so much sadder than what people got.</p>
<p>1) An 1850 is NOT a bad score. A 1600 is NOT a bad score.
2) A 1260 old SAT will NOT keep you out of the running. You may not get in, but adcoms won't laugh in your face for having this score. It's respectable.</p>
<p>Ugh.</p>
<p>I think there is only a slight comparison between SAT scores and class rank and such. Whenever I go on to a college site I look up admission reuirements or what they expect for the potential "<em>(college name)</em>" undergraduate. They usually say that the GPA is just a start at applications and that the SAT scores tell if you are lazy or not. It could be quite true. Think about the SAT as a way to memorize specific question types. I think people who could afford all standardized related tests classes recieve a higher score than people who study from a book themselves, and I would agree. Of course, there are still brilliant natural test-takers or just people who are "smart". In end, there is always something that could prove my theories wrong and I would submit myself to agree with the "other side". So don't take whatever I said to seriously. ^^</p>
<p>How the hell does the SAT determine if you're lazy or not? If anything, you're GPA would determine that.</p>
<p>I think hannie88 meant that if your SAT is high in comparison to your GPA, then you are lazy in school.</p>