<p>I took the SAT in October, got a 1620 (M: 430 CR: 530 W: 660). Took it again in December, no studying, got a 1710 (M: 520 CR: 540 W: 650).</p>
<p>The low math score the first time, it turns out, was a result of guessing when I shouldn't have. The second time I took it, for the questions I wasn't sure how to answer, I just left them blank. My math score increased 90 points.
As for reading, I had a horrible approach. I was so nervous and strung out that I could barely focus on a thing I was reading. I was focused too much on rushing and timing that I had to keep re-reading the passage and I just couldn't think straight at all. For the life of me I just couldn't finish on time. </p>
<p>So I've taken a lot of timed practice tests lately (real SAT tests from the BB) and all of a sudden, everything just "clicked."
I have a new approach to CR: I don't let anxiety get the best of me; instead I just skim the passage, answer the questions.
I finish with about 5 min left on each section, and get almost every single question right. </p>
<p>Based on the timed practice tests I've taken, my score has increased dramatically (2000+). All due to my new approach.</p>
<p>So what, did I magically just become smarter? Or was it in me all along, it was just anxiety that prevented me from getting a score that reflects my true ability? </p>
<p>It is commonly noted in psychology that anxiety leads to worse results, so that can definitely be a part of it. You will do much better when you are confident rather than nervous and anxious. I wouldn’t say that you just became smarter.</p>
<p>From what I know, the current SAT, rather than skill testing, tries to test based off of skills that will show how well you might perform in college. It can also show to a college if you are a competitive applicant for their school. It would be more of a thinking test rather than a skill-testing test. That being said, it is probably a good idea to study.</p>
<p>Yes that’s true. When my nervous system is kicked into high gear like it was the first two times I took the SAT, I just can’t do anything right. For the math, I’ll make stupid mistakes. For the reading, I won’t be able to focus on what I’m reading at all. At that point the reading test just becomes a guessing game. </p>
<p>But I guess I was just doing it wrong, I don’t see any other explanation for it. I didn’t really study that much for the CR; one day I just decided to take a practice test and I forced myself to calm the hell down and just take my time. Since I’ve been doing that, there’s been a huge discrepancy in my scores. </p>
<p>Does the amount of sleep you get the night before seriously make a big difference in performance? </p>
<p>Do fully timed practice tests. Sit there for 4 hrs on a saturday morning. Do about 5 of them.
The more confidence you have, the less anxiety you will have.
yes, sleep matters. Ease off the coffee, etc in the morning.
Lots of different approaches to math, reading, write. You need to find out what works best for you.</p>
<p>Yeah, and you know, I think I finally have.
But when people say that the SAT measures intelligence…isn’t it more of a correlation? Like if, for example, you have an IQ of 90, no matter how hard you study you’re probably not going to get a score in the 2200+ range. But conversely, if you have a higher IQ, but are sleep deprived and anxious to the point where you can’t focus, can’t your scores be considerably hindered? (for the lack of a better term; it’s 12:13 am.) </p>
<p>I’m taking the SAT again in June. If I get say, a 1950-2030, (which is the expected range based on the timed practice tests I’ve been taking), then was I just capable of it all along or what?</p>
<p>Just took a fully timed section of CR. Got a 20/24 points. Had I been as nervous as I was when I took the SAT the first couple of times, I would’ve gotten more like 13/24. My new approach to CR has really, really made a difference. And it’s just based on calmness. </p>
<p>No one worth listening to thinks the SAT measures intelligence. Admissions officers don’t think this, and neither does the College Board itself. Even as a predictor of success in college, it’s only sort of accurate.</p>
<p>Yeah, I saw on the back of my Blue Book that the SAT doesn’t test IQ or logic abilities. Why is everyone saying that it does though? </p>
<p>Yeah enough with the BS. The SAT was derived from an army IQ test, and still is an IQ test to an certain extent. The new SATs are correlate less with IQ, but they still do considerably. </p>
<p>Anyways, statistics show that the old SAT (pre 2006) correlate with IQ tests AS MUCH AS IQ TESTS CORRELATE WITH EACH OTHER. Basically this means that SAT is nothing less than an IQ test. That is why most high IQ societies accept SAT scores. </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/frey.pdf”>http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/frey.pdf</a></p>
<p>Anyways to all those people who deny it, what evidence is there contradicting this?</p>
<p>I personally think the main reason why people say it’s not an IQ test is because they do not want others or themselves to feel bad because they have a low(er) SAT score. They want to think that high scorers are simply better prepared or studied, rather than intellectually superior. Furthermore, people like to assume that all races are equally intelligent on average. The fact that vast racial gaps exist on the SAT and IQ tests seems to be a conundrum to them.</p>
<p>I read somewhere that the SAT is more of a Cousin to the IQ test. They are coorelated and I believe so. Both of my kids had their IQ tested when they went into see if they had ADHD. My oldest son’s IQ was average…but the high end of average. His processing speed was above average IQ. He went in to take the SAT without studying or prep (bull headed and aggravating) and scored a 1100 CR and Math. Not astounding, but not horrible. It would be more interesting to see what everyone’s SAT score was if they went in cold…that’s where you can tell the difference. Anyway, 2nd DS IQ is not near where his brother’s is, but he is more motivated and studies harder for almost same grades. Had months of SAT prep, and only scored 910 CR and Math. Yes…I think the SAT and IQ is correlated. </p>
<p>But…I’d like to add that I don’t think that is indicative of success or failure in life. DS2 is motivated and knows how to work hard…DS1 does not. I think DS2 will be more successful in life, and will find his way and do well. Qualities of getting along with people and your general attitude are characteristics that aren’t measured like the SAT, but just as important.</p>
<p>“Anyways, statistics show that the old SAT (pre 2006) correlate with IQ tests AS MUCH AS IQ TESTS CORRELATE WITH EACH OTHER. Basically this means that SAT is nothing less than an IQ test. That is why most high IQ societies accept SAT scores.”</p>
<p>Mensa doesn’t accept SAT scores as IQ equivalents. </p>
<p>They accept the old SATs, but not the new ones. This leads me to believe that the new SATs correlate less with IQ. Either that or people are uncertain about the changes and don’t trust it yet. I don’t think that there are any peer-reviewed research on it yet, so there’s no way to tell for sure. </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.us.mensa.org/AML/?LinkServID=005EB3F7-B83A-44BA-B4FFD5114A1AC31D”>http://www.us.mensa.org/AML/?LinkServID=005EB3F7-B83A-44BA-B4FFD5114A1AC31D</a></p>
<p>I think the professional opinions are a little mixed regarding this topic. In general, I find that most agree that the old SAT coorelates with IQ, but that the current one doesn’t. <a href=“The Sat And The Prep Business - What Does The Sat Really Measure? | Secrets Of The Sat | FRONTLINE | PBS”>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sats/test/what.html</a></p>
<p>In recent years it has become a political-correctness taboo to acknowledge it, but the SAT does to some extent measure intelligence. Small differences in test score fall in the realm of statistical noise. But big differences in test scores have significant implications. </p>
<p>Critics of the SAT and other standardized testing are disregarding the data
<a href=“What do SAT and IQ tests measure? General intelligence predicts school and life success.”>http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/04/what_do_sat_and_iq_tests_measure_general_intelligence_predicts_school_and.html</a>
</p>
<p>If SATs measured intelligence, then there wouldn’t be people with >2000 scores majoring in womyn studies and other forms of underwater basketweaving concentrations.</p>
<p>Innate intelligence and good judgement are two different things</p>
<p>The SAT may correlate with intelligence, but I don’t believe it is designed to TEST intelligence. The letters SAT (used to) stand for “Scholastic Aptitude Test” because it is supposed to measure your scholastic aptitude - your ability to do well in school.
And just throwing this out there, some people dispute whether the SAT is even a reliable test of scholastic aptitude because you can get so much variation in scores. The test of a test’s reliability is whether your score remains consistent - those kids who get 200+ point increases fly in the face of the SAT’s claim as a reliable, legitimate test. </p>
<p>In my opinion, the SAT does not measure intelligence (not that much, at least)</p>
<p>The SAT measures dedication. You see, the SAT was designed to be a test that is almost impossible to get a perfect score on, unless one studies a ton; unless one is extremely dedicated to the SAT, they will not do well on the SAT.</p>
<p>Colleges use the SAT and ACT for the precise reason that they DON’T measure intelligence. Colleges are not looking for the smartest of the smart. Top colleges want the students that can prove dedication, so the SAT and ACT are more good markers of dedication, especially good as they are numerical values, to complement the GPA and the EC’s on a resume.</p>
<p>However, this, again, is all a theory, an opinion.</p>