SAT 2 for chem vrs. REGENTS. (NEWYORKERS)

<p>the title says it all?...harder easier?!</p>

<p>well, id just say that they are different. i took them both, and got a 780 on the sat II and a 96 on the regents. for the sat II you have to know MANY more topics (i.e. yields, flame tests, gibbs free energy, etc..) that arent covered on the regents. however, the regents has long answers that the sat II does not, so if that is your weakness, you'll have more trouble with the regents.</p>

<p>i took both as well, and scored a 96 on the regents and a 790 on the subject test.</p>

<p>but only because i took AP the next year, without AP i probably wouldn't have scored nearly as well on the subject test. (like 500s, probably)</p>

<p>the subject test is much harder than the regents. there are topics in every subtopic of chemistry that isn't taught in regents chem that appears on the subject test. (gibbs, reaction quotients, etc.)</p>

<p>lol the regents chem is a JOKE compared to SAT II chem
i got an 86 on the chem regents and would not even consider the II</p>

<p>The regents is a joke compared to the chemistry SAT; likewise the Physics regents is a joke compared to the Physics SAT II.</p>

<p>I think I actually did better on the SAT II than on the Regents (760 versus 92), but I actually studied for the SAT II and did practice tests. You can do well on the SAT II if you're in a Regents level class if you do some self-study.</p>

<p>I havent taken the sat 2 chem test yet, but i was going to last year because i was taking honors chem, but when i looked at some practice tests i cocluded i wouldnt do that well. Btw i got a 96 on the regents. This year though im taking ap chem and im definately taking the sat 2 chem test because i looked at it a few weeks ago and its a cake walk compared to ap. So if i were you, i would take it if your taking the ap exam, not just preparing for the regents</p>

<p>omg so many of us got 96's on the regents!</p>

<p>Its because of the dumb curve. 2 raw points off translates to a scaled 96.</p>