SAT: Critical Reading Scores?

Parents Forum
21

<p>As a college English professor I have been asked for advice on CR SAT's many times. I certainly would not disagree with posters who recommend reading. I think this is the answer to any question, as in your scalp itches? Go read a book! LOL But you get my drift. However, something else operates on CR SAT -- the student's mind has to work the way the tester's did. Many questions are wrtitten by people whose feeling for language is not as subtle as the kids taking the test. No slur on kids with really high scores (I got a 790 the only time I took it, darn! thye ten points that got away!). Besides being good readers those kids knew what the tester was trying to ask. I was able to boost my son's score from 670 to 740 (he scored in 670 range on repeated tests and practices) in one hour by analyzing the flaw in his thinking. He was reading too much into answers and often found flaws in the intended answer, and therefore wouldn't select it. Believe me, he was no more intelligent, nor was he a better reader on the day he scored 740 than he was on the day he scored 670. He was, however, a more astute reader of the mind set of the testers, which one might argue is also a skill. (BTW some questions are contributed by kids who haven't finished high school yet.)</p>

<p>I am not as savvy about math and couldn't get him past 690. (Same score two sittings + PSAT.) (He was very successful in AP calc.) He scored 34 on ACT, but schools had SAT scores for SAT II's. 690 hurt him only at Dartmouth, which I hear is very numbers driven. Did not bother Brown, Williams, Amherst or UChicago. </p>

<p>My daughter went from 600 to 790 on WR portion with just one hour of coaching. We'll drilled grammar and talked about how pedestrian essay expectations are.</p>

<p>Sorry for this rambling post. My point is that verbal sections of SAT are not objective. Calmom's daughter's score, for example, may reflect a finer sense of language than the test questions. They do not necessarily correlate to how good a reader someone is. They do correlate to how good a MINDreader someone is.</p>

22

<p>
[quote]
I think this is the answer to any question, as in your scalp itches? Go read a book!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>LOL. Works for me! I concur with Mathmom and Burn This, S is an avid reader and had similar outcomes. He reads a lot of fiction and historical nonfiction, as well as the NYT & WSJ and other periodicals. I guess I don't know what else to attribute his success to.</p>

23

<p>I was disqppointed with my SAT reading score, given that I got 36 twice on the ACT reading section, and I found the SAT easier.</p>

24

<p>
[quote]
Go read a book !

[/quote]
</p>

<p>D doesn't just read one, how about 1 a day without anybody asking. Reading or English is her passion, I think she is always been gifted in subjects reading/writing/vocabulary area. She does not have problem with multiple choice questions either but the reading subject was dry as toast to her(Astronaut). If she were lucky and had a better CR subject she would have scored 2400 first time.
I'm just trying to say luck has to be with you sometimes. But I'm not complaining about her SAT scores, I think they are fine.</p>

25

<p>770 CR. I read magazine articles regularly. I enjoy reading. I'm not a great writer, but I recognize good writing. I look at what the author is saying, and how she is saying it. I don't use tricks. I read. I answer. If needed, I read again. If futile, I skip. CR is tricky, because it's easy not to skip. Students think they have an idea, and they guess.</p>

26

<p>Sorry calmom, but the 720 CR score is a good rule of thumb--as is the +1450 SAT. The top schools (Ivy +) reserve those lower score brackets for athletes, billionaire legacies and Diversity. Tech schools obviously have different criteria but WAshDad can attest to the fact that they too are very numbers driven.</p>

<p>There are exceptions--but precious few for elite suburban high school students--and the proof is in their scattergrams.</p>

<p>My son read technical manuals for fun <em>cringe</em>--and memorized the vocab. Both sons have always been big readers.</p>

27

<p>Thank you all for your input. I was particularly interested to hear my son describe one of the sections he sat for in June was about YAWNING! Maybe if the subject matter was a little more interesting, the test would not be such a bore. You are all correct in that free reading plays a role I'm sure; our whole family are avid readers, so makes it doubly puzzling. BTW, his ACT (at 35) was Math 36, all others 35, so I think that will help.</p>

28

<p>
[quote]
As a college English professor I have been asked for advice on CR SAT's many times. I certainly would not disagree with posters who recommend reading. I think this is the answer to any question, as in your scalp itches? Go read a book! LOL But you get my drift. However, something else operates on CR SAT -- the student's mind has to work the way the tester's did. Many questions are wrtitten by people whose feeling for language is not as subtle as the kids taking the test. No slur on kids with really high scores (I got a 790 the only time I took it, darn! thye ten points that got away!). Besides being good readers those kids knew what the tester was trying to ask. I was able to boost my son's score from 670 to 740 (he scored in 670 range on repeated tests and practices) in one hour by analyzing the flaw in his thinking. He was reading too much into answers and often found flaws in the intended answer, and therefore wouldn't select it. Believe me, he was no more intelligent, nor was he a better reader on the day he scored 740 than he was on the day he scored 670. He was, however, a more astute reader of the mind set of the testers, which one might argue is also a skill. (BTW some questions are contributed by kids who haven't finished high school yet.)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>*"It is true that many questions are written by people whose feeling for language is not as subtle as the kids taking the test." *</p>

<p>Of course, testing subtility is NOT the purpose of the exercise. Test writers deliberately render the text denser than it should be but this not by accident, as they typically ensure that the FOUR wrong answers become detectable. </p>

<p>*"Besides being good readers those kids knew what the tester was trying to ask." *</p>

<p>Again, this simple statement is EXACTLY what the SAT is all about. Knowing that 99% of the questions on the SAT can --and should-- be answered in 30 seonds or less is paramount. Obviously, this DOES not mean that everyone is able or capable of finding the answer in such a limited time because not everyone possesses the same type of background or the same experience with the type of problems that show up on standardized tests. </p>

<p>For the record, there are many students who find the CR to be extremely straightforward. More than often, such students ARE avid readers. The differentiating factor is, however, that they also possess a superior capabiliies in concentration and are used to read CRITICALLY. Just as students SEE the answers to math problems with amazing clarity, others simply SEE the correct answer or, often have no problems in identifying the four wrong answers. </p>

<p>One of the greatest difficulties to "teach" CR is that most people who have the superior abilities cannot really explain WHY they happen to read critically without much effort. The reality is that there are NOT a whole of strategies --or tricks as pundits like to call them-- for the CR. Fwiw, when it comes to official tests produced by ETS, the correct --and sole-- answer is ALWAYS between the four corners of the document and no "external" knowledge is necessary. This is, unfortunately, not true for the tests produced by PR, Kaplan, and other similar companies. Simply stated, for well written tests, there will always be reasons to eliminate four answers, and it does not require as much mind reading as a good understanding of the methodology of the test. </p>

<p>And this brings me to the last point. Are some questions really contributed by kids who haven't finished high school yet? I don't know but would consider this to be feasible. However, what is beyond debate is that no such contribution would EVER be part of an official test without the complete battery of integrity controls used by ETS. Could it happen at the wannabe Midwestern cousin aka ACT? Maybe!</p>

29

<p>I don't want to spend thread being defensive; it would be silly of me. However, I will say that flaws in questions that give extremely literal readers pause are true flaws even if others can overlook them. My info. about test comes from CB exec. who, because of her 1570 (old) SAT score was recruited in high school and employed for many years until she retired to raise children. She eventually obtained a Masters in educational testing for GW and was qualified to critique the practices of the construction of the SAT.</p>

<p>BTW: I am not unhappy about my scores or my children's scores. However, I have seen many excellent thinkers and readers whose minds just went along slightly different tracks than test makers'.</p>

30

<p>I've been reading over on the SAT forum and most of the kids there are reporting big gains on the Jun 2 SAT's. My S's CR went up 30 points to a 740 on Jun 2. He is homeschooled and has done one online AP English course (didn't take the test because I didn't get him registered in time...aaargh!). He reads a lot on his own and some of that reading is from older books. I think that has helped to build his vocabulary quite a bit which likely helped him on CR.</p>

31

<p>June's curve was much tough than Jan on CR. My s's CR score was 10 points lower even though he got one more question right.</p>

32

<p>D's friend scored 800 CR on March test date which D also signed up but canceled after she got her Jan results. So March would have been a better test date. But D is not obsessed with testing multiple times.</p>