<p>Of course there are, but they’re the ones who use “gay” as an insult =P</p>
<p>One thing Tom…you sure know how to sling dat BS!! :)</p>
<p>My 8th grade D’s SSAT overall was 99th percentile. Math:800(50/50), Reading:800, Writing:735
As an 8th grader, she scored 750 in math and 1900 overall.</p>
<p>She got waitlisted in three out four HADES schools that she applied to. She was rejected at the other. We needed ~70% FA. </p>
<p>I don’t know if this information contributes the topic of discussion on this thread, but I wanted to put it out there.</p>
<p>there seem to be some fairly deep misunderstandings about these tests. For any given test percentiles are measured over the population taking the test. In other words, if you are in the 95th percentile (btw it’s not just PA with high ssat scores, check our st p for example) that means that you scored higher than 95 % of those who took this test. It doesn’t make the slightest bit of difference whether this or that person had a bad day etc etc.<br>
Now the organization that runs SSAT is different from the organization who own the SAT test. But obviously the SSAT testers are trying to align their results with the
SAT which is why they recently moved their scoring system to be based on 800 per subject which is the same as the SAT.
The point is that the schools use the ssat scores (amongst other things) as an indication of scholastic ability. It is a check and balance for them (as is the sat for colleges) because the schools the kids are coming from have such different standards. In this sense then it is a measure, no matter how crude, and an important measure of where the kids are in terms of raw intellect and exposure to key ideas. And this is exactly the same as the sat.
All these tests are normed at 500. ie the average student scores 500. But this score is clearly way way different from anything in the 90th percentile.
Furthermore, there seems to be some misunderstanding about the role of preparation. Nobody is suggesting the the prep schools should have the kids do test prep for years. That is obviously absurd. But if you take a smart kid and give them a great education that IS test prep. If you look at the sat test the math and the english are not some bizarre weird tests that you need special training to do well at. If you are smart and have done a decent amount of math and you have read a fair bit you will do very well.
The mystery remains. If you filter out kids as being very smart and give them the kind of great education that does expose them to the math and reading that effectively is a great prep for the sat how come they don’t score higher? 700 is not that great for a smart kid. It’s decent and it’s certainly way better than 500 but it’s not killer. I would expect highly motivated very smart and academically well trained kids to score in the 750s. And this is pretty much what you would expect from the ssat percentile results.
I don’t actually have a real ax to grind here. I fully accept that smart (even if not super smart) kids who are well trained and motivated will do great at any college. I am just curious because something doesn’t add up. I suspect that there is something ‘wrong’ with the ssat test but that’s just my 2c. I also suspect that the schools know this which is why they don’t over rely on the ssat results.</p>
<p>good, peteya, you landed on the right note in the end. I am in a having fun mood today. Let me say something off topic. I have found 3 “taboo” words on CC, which means they always draw opposition whenever wherever you mention them: ranking, prestige and high SSAT/SAT score. :)</p>
<p>Peteya, your understanding of the SSAT and SAT is a little skewed. Not only is it ridiculous to expect 750s in each section of the SAT, even from smart people, but the SSAT is very often representative of what percentile the SSAT-taker would score on the SAT. As I’ve told you, 700 is 97th percentile. That’s good.</p>
<p>Peteya, you shouldn’t have to be told that that’s a very good score. There’s nothing wrong with the SSAT because it does just what it is supposed to - show a child’s aptitude in comparison with his or her peers’ aptitudes. To expect 750s on each section is just, well, unrealistic. 750, in every section, is in the 99th percentile.</p>
<p>So, I don’t really see a mystery here, to be honest.</p>
<p>While plenty of kids from private schools receive 750 and above scores for each section, none do so without specific tutoring programs. Its not true that having an excellent education prepares you for the SAT. Look at scores and medians for top colleges as recently as 20 years ago and you will see much lower scores. Precisely because SAT prep was not prevalent at the time. If you take a genius child who has never seen/heard of the SAT (to the point of not taking ssat, etc)and have them take the test you will be surprised by the low score, compared to the kids not as smart who had prep. That is why colleges discount scores from top prep schools/high achieving public schools. They know most, if not all, kids there have been tutored. In terms of the SSAT – the population taking the test is extremely small. However if 30-50% of those taking the test come from an underrepresented population, naturally the curve will have a great amount of students on the high end, and a great amount on the lower, with not so many in the middle. Also, the cc type kids that will be taking the test from public schools will be extremely smart, raising the score. Then take into account countless kids who take the ISSEEs instead of the SSATs, and you will understand why BS kids come out with the scores that you are describing. Ultimately the SAT score unless exceptionally low does not matter so much for kids coming from private schools. Its mostly about the grades.</p>
<p>tomthecat
it seems to me you can’t have it both ways. The misunderstanding seems to stem from the fact that the ssat and the sat are different populations. everyone has to take the sat whereas the people taking the ssat are well known to be a more select motivated group. This means that for good reason we expect the same kid to score in a higher percentile in the sat than in the ssat. the only question is how much higher. I continue to find it surprising that if you have kids that on average are around the 95th percentile of an elite group they are only around the 97th percentile of the general population after a great education. Of course 700 is ‘a very good score’ in an absolute sense and of course it is great to be in the 97th percentile. That isn’t the question. Maybe you are right that 750 on every section is too much but 720 or 730 isn’t, surely?</p>
<p>mhmm
I can absolutely tell you that as a matter of fact there are plenty kids who get 750 and above without tutoring programs. An excellent education absolutely prepares you for the SAT. Most of the english sections is vocabulary and comprehension which plenty of reading and writing is absolutely the BEST preparation. The math is not hard and plenty of kids do extremly well (say >720) with no preparation just by having the kind of mathematical maturity that a decent high school math education provides.
Incidentally, you can’t directly compare the SAT of 20 years ago with the SAT today because they were renormed. A 700 today is not the same as a 700 20 years ago. Today’s higher scores are nothing to do with prep classes. As I write this I am thinking of a kid you would consider a ‘genius child’ who I know personally who did precisely NO preparation and scored 2400. Incidentally, your speculation about the detailed distribution of kids taking the ssat and isee, with the best will in the world, really has no bearing on how the ssat and sat relate.</p>
<p>To me, these numbers are no surprise. My current school, a private one in England, requires the SSAT, but that doesn’t stop a huge number of idiots from walking through the gates. The misunderstanding here is in the conception that everyone who takes the SSAT is above the national average. This is very much not the case as much of the population of my current school can attest to.</p>
<p>While the schools talked about here on CC are often the very best of the best and likewise attract the very most academic students, this website still manages to convey the illusion that the SSAT is truly only (or at least most commonly) administered to smart kids. As I said, come visit my school and it’ll change your mind.</p>
<p>It’s also important to remember that plenty of public school kids do very well on the SAT, and that not all smart kids take the SSAT and/or apply to private schools. This leads me onto my next point - both the SAT and the SSAT are aptitude tests. Technically speaking, education does not increase aptitude, just as education does not increase IQ. Test prep, however, can increase your SAT and SSAT scores, and that, the fact that it is more probable that private school kids get more/better test prep than public school kids, may be the only reason that there is a difference at all in the percentiles kids attain on the SSAT versus the SAT.</p>
<p>As I said, it’s not as if all the smart and apt kids in the country attend private schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Their scoring system now mimics the SAT system, probably because that seems easier for test takers, and their parents to understand. However, that doesn’t mean that the tests themselves are aligned. They’re both norm-referenced tests, but they aren’t based on each other. Students who score well on the SSAT will probably score well on the SAT, particularly as the tests are based on the same domains of knowledge, i.e., reading and math. That doesn’t mean that the SSAT is precisely predictive of performance on the SAT, or at least, no more predictive than, say, the ITBS. The PSAT would be much more predictive of performance on the SAT.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The SAT tests verbal reasoning, math, and writing. Verbal: </p>
<p>
Math:
</p>
<p>Writing includes an essay, and multiple-choice questions based on grammar.</p>
<p>So, the math extends to a level which an average college-bound student would have completed by sophomore year (Geometry and Algebra II). The verbal reasoning section does not require prior knowledge. </p>
<p>The study of foreign languages, science (biology, chemistry, physics, neuroanatomy), history, music, the arts, philosophy, are parts of a fine education. Not one of them will improve your performance on the SAT. Studying calculus or number theory won’t help, either. Education’s a fine thing, but it doesn’t necessarily translate into higher scores on the SAT.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s an elite group, because most of the children come from high-SES families. The majority of the children have attended good or excellent schools. It’s a much smaller group (60,000) than the national SAT test pool (over 2 million). The performance of the pool may be higher as a whole, but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t many very capable students who have never taken the SSAT at the very top of the scale. 1% of 60,000 is 600. 1% of 2 million is 20,000. Note as well that the students scoring at the highest levels make very few mistakes, if any. </p>
<p>Both tests are likely calibrated for the middle of the range, the kids scoring in the 50th percentile. Quibbling over a few points between 93% and 99% makes little sense, as those kids are the outliers, and the test isn’t designed to distinguish between 97% and 96%. </p>
<p>As a matter of fact, the students at PA, etc., might be scoring very highly. The “average SSAT score” is generally the overall percentage, rather than the subscores. The SSAT provides a combined ranking, and the SAT doesn’t. Scoring at the 93rd percentile in verbal reasoning and mathematics might bump a candidate up a few percentage points in an overall ranking–which the college board doesn’t calculate.</p>
<p>ah well
I’ve had my fun with this topic</p>
<p>I think it turned out to be very informative for everyone involved.</p>