<p>Good Grief, I had a feeling you would rely on that nitpick. Okay, 750 or above. The whole point was that I compared the exact same statistic from a 1973 report to the same statistics from 2008. That was my whole point in making the post, not to argue the ridiculous proposition that one question on this test is the difference between Norbert Wiener and Homer Simpson.
We don’t have the 10 point split from 1973.</p>
<p>This is what competition does for you. Mark Spitz’s time in 1972 would not get him into some high school state finals today.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not relying on anything, and the distinction is significant – it results in an approximately 33% increase in the number. While you’re right that it doesn’t affect your point that one number is bigger than the other, it’s still probably appropriate to communicate statistics correctly when one’s argument hinges on those statistics.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Indeed. And the Flynn effect’s significance cannot be disregarded, as another poster alluded to. From 1960 to 1996, the average national intelligence test score has risen from 89 to 100 (by 1996 standards). 89 is approximately the 23rd percentile. And these numbers are relevant to the SAT: according to the only SAT/IQ correlational study that I know of that was performed in somewhat recent times, there was a +.82 correlation between SAT scores and IQ scores (performed in 2004).</p>
<p>@arwenevenstar, I was on the same math track as you, and I have to agree that the difference between a 770 and an 800 doesn’t mean anything (just a simple mistake or two).</p>
<p>@silverturtle, I wasn’t sure exactly what it covered because I took the SAT Math and the Math Level 2 after taking Calc 3, LA, and DE, so it was hard to keep straight Math I learned 4+ years ago.</p>
<p>“I have never heard of a test that does not measure someone’s ability to avoid stupid mistakes – that’s what retakes are for. Moreover, I have never encountered an oddly phrased question. For the vast majority of students, it’s not stupid mistakes that are keeping a student from scoring 800.”</p>
<p>I’ve only taken it once, but what I meant was that was the main thing it measured. The material is so rudimentary that the only way to make mistakes are stupid ones, imo.</p>
<p>I suppose I didn’t really mean oddly phrased questions, but I just felt that in 1 or 2 problems I would start integrating to find that area under a curve as opposed to finding the y intercept or something like that.</p>
<p>You’re also absolutely right, including Calculus on an exam wouldn’t make it more difficult (it’d be easier for me, to avoid overthinking problems), but a test that is more like the AMC would be much more effective measurement of problem solving ability (maybe toned down a little bit so that you still have time to answer 60-80 or so problems).</p>
<p>I’ve often wondered what would happen if today’s students took the older SATs. The changes in the SAT1s are huge and systemic. For the non-math sections, the style of questions has changed completely as well. Or what would happen if you took the kids from the 70s and had them do more (aka any) prep? I know that my sense is that the SATs have gotten easier but I have no really good way to test this.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You, too, are erroneously assuming that someone who misses a question surely knew how to solve it. Some errors are “silly” or “simple”; most are not. Moreover, some people are better at not making simple errors, and that, though not indicative of mathematical aptitude, is a valuable skill. There are people who consistently score 800.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For a very small group of gifted individuals? Sure. For over 99 percent of the population? No way. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, I agree. Your thinking seems to align closely with that demonstrated by neomom in a recent debate that I had with her. I think it would be great if the College Board were to send letters to everyone who scores 750+ on the Math section inviting them to take the AMC. I wouldn’t have heard of the test if it weren’t for CC.</p>
<p>Re: posting 64
The Flynn affect is much disputed. I won’t summarize here - just google around to reasonable sites if you are interested.</p>
<p>I don’t believe a 770 and an 800 in SAT I math makes any real difference, though all I have are personal anecdotes to back it up.</p>
<p>I’m an extremely meticulous test-taker, and didn’t make any errors though I’m hardly exceptional at math. I know a USAMOer who was accelerated through math and ended up taking calculus in eighth grade and got a 770 because he made a stupid mistake. Another friend who was much better at me at math and took it two times, getting 770s twice. The second time it was because he misread a number. Though not making silly mistakes is an important skill, it’s not what the math section is meant to test.</p>
<p>Also, correct me if I’m wrong but from my experience the SAT hardly tests anything above Algebra I.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Can you pinpoint anything that is contributing to this? Are there any SATs from the 70s available online? I would be happy to take them to compare my score. But the test couldn’t have gotten too easy, as less than .01 percent of the most recent graduating classes achieved perfect scores even in this culture of competitive college admissions and occasionally obsessive test preparation.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then you ought to amend your assertion that there is no “real difference” to “There is no difference with respect to the intention of the metric.” The latter does not seem to have general relevance, however.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There is certainly Geometry material on the test, but, indeed, most does not require Algebra II skills. I think that’s certainly preferable to the ACT’s approach, in which almost no problem solving is necessary – if you know your Algebra II and Pre-Calculus content, it’s easy-sailing application of formulae for every question.</p>
<p>I’ve never seen any old ,complete tests online, and can’t really imagine anyone bothering to put them up.
The comment that "the test couldn’t have gotten too easy, as less than .01 percent of the most recent graduating classes achieved perfect scores " is not valid. We can deduce nothing about the floor or midsection of the test from this one piece of information.</p>
<p>I suppose that I don’t really have a grasp on how the average student does on the math. Almost everyone I know got an 800, and everyone I knew got at least a 750. The people who didn’t really like math still got 700+.</p>
<p>I took the AMC all four years, but the first two I had no idea what it was. The math teachers said to take this test, only 1 person has scored over 100 in the past few years (same person more than once), but try your best. We all went to the test having no idea what it was about, and only learning about how it was scored as we sat down (So we all only answered exactly 14 questions). The last two years were more serious and I went to the AIME, which was definitely fun.</p>
<p>I agree that there should be invites to the AMC if you get a 750+.</p>
<p>Once again, most of the points I have made are based on comparisons with me and my class (30 or 40 students taking AP Calc sophomore year than IB higher level, with 5-6 taking Calc Freshman year), which isn’t the national average (Not sure if it is calc junior or senior year). So, I guess I’m a little biased when it comes to standardized math testing. </p>
<p>The only other issue that I have is that the SAT 1 is 2/3 English, as opposed to Math, and Science. I know there is the SAT 2s, but it seems that the main test should at least contain more math/science topics as the score out of 2400 seems to be the most important.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Most students don’t take Calculus ever during the high school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, the test is 1/3 English, unless you mean that in the sense of “in English,” in which case the the test is 3/3 English.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The SAT is an aptitude test. There is not an effective way to test science without testing achievement too much.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, my language (i.e., “too easy”) was too vague to be deemed “not valid.” But I think we can determine something about difficulty from the top end: if a test were very easy, almost everyone would miss nothing.</p>
<p>When it comes to the math scores, I’d point out that many more high schools offer an accelerated math track than was the case a few decades ago. When I was in high school, only a very select group was allowed to take algebra in 8th grade, and we didn’t have any such thing as AP calc. The idea of a student taking calculus as a sophomore would have been ludicrous. </p>
<p>Now in many areas a student who didn’t complete at least algebra I before entering 9th grade would be considered to be on a slow math track. So by the time junior year rolls around, you are dealing with kids who are probably on average at least a year, and maybe 2, ahead of their counterparts in a previous generation. </p>
<p>(I don’t think the same is true as to language – if anything, I think reading and language skills have gone down over time – but I also think they dumbed down the SAT I considerably by eliminating the analogies, which simultaneously tested both vocabulary and logical reasoning skills. Now it has become a much more prosaic test overall).</p>
<p>It is difficult to determine how the difficulty of the SAT 1 has changed since the population taking it has changed (generally broadening over time), and the degree of preparation has increased (in highly varying degrees which further muddies the waters).<br>
This table converts pre-1995 to post-1995 scores, but appears to specifically deal only with 1990 and 1995.
[SAT</a> I Individual Score Equivalents](<a href=“http://professionals.collegeboard.com/data-reports-research/sat/equivalence-tables/sat-score]SAT”>Higher Education Professionals | College Board)</p>
<p>RE: posting 77
Silverturtle - I don’t think anyone here is arguing that the test is ‘very easy’. I merely speculate that the SAT 1 may be easier than it once was as it has been renormed to a broader population.</p>