The SAT measures intelligence. Period.

Test Preparation
1

<p>Or at least it measures intelligence reasonably well. Yeah, it's not the be-all and end-all of intelligence, but it is an excellent tool for college admissions. </p>

<p>I am sick of reading the delusions that people hold in regards to the SAT. </p>

<ol>
<li>"OMG, you can study for it...that means it proves nothing!"</li>
</ol>

<p>Guess what. You can study for anything. You can study for an IQ test (people don't because it would defeat the purpose). Regardless, the amazing tales you hear about 500 point score increases are just that--amazing tales. They are outliers. The College Board has run its own studies on the matter...and concluded that an SAT prep class only bumps a person's score by an insignificant 10-30 points or so, on average. Yeah, lots of prep and multiple retakes can certainly boost a person's score, but for the vast majority of people, changes in score are insignificant. These statistics are published. </p>

<ol>
<li>"I saw a graph that shows SAT score correlates really well with income! This is ridiculous...the SAT measures nothing more than income!"</li>
</ol>

<p>Are you people serious? Hell yes the SAT correlates with income. If it didn't, I would be concerned about its validity. </p>

<p>Intelligence is largely hereditary. It has a huge genetic component. Much as we like to demonize the wealthy here in America, most of them are wealthy for a reason--they were hardworking, and clever to at least some degree. Smart parents have smart children (on average). And even for those of you who will deny the genetics argument here--you must admit that wealthy households can provide so many advantages compared to poorer households (breastfeeding, better nutrition, more emphasis on education, parents speak more/bigger words around their young children). Yes, it's unfair. The poor have the deck stacked against them. But that doesn't change the facts. </p>

<ol>
<li>"But I have a 4.3 GPA and I scored low. I KNOW I'm smart, this test has to be flawed! Meanwhile, the stoner slacker sitting in back of my history class got a 2200!"</li>
</ol>

<p>GPA doesn't mean a whole lot. At the vast majority of schools in America, getting a high GPA requires nothing more than effort. Believe it or not, high school grades are not exactly a priority to most American teenagers.</p>

<p>I hate to say it, but I am starting to believe that most of the people railing on the SAT are simply unable to face the reality--just because you have a high GPA/work really hard in school/your parents think you are smart/you are convinced you are special, you are not necessarily intelligent. And there's nothing wrong with that. There is nothing wrong with being average (or even below). Not everyone can be exceptional.</p>

<p>Look around you and use common sense. In general, the smart kids get high SATs. The dumb ones don't. There are exceptions to this, and the SAT is a (relatively) blunt metric, but it DOES measure intelligence.</p>

<p>Bonus Note: I cannot help but laugh everytime I see the bad test taker excuse. Seriously? Just because you work really hard on papers and do your homework diligently (=high GPA), this doesn't make you smart. Tests tell a truer story. The only people who can claim they are "bad test takers" are those who literally have really serious anxiety/focus problems.</p>

<ol>
<li>"The SAT is just 3 hours of your life. How you do on one Saturday morning doesn't say anything."</li>
</ol>

<p>Yeah. So? That's the point of a test--it measures aptitude as efficiently and quickly as possible. Take two sprinters and measure their 100-yard times. Repeat this with a couple more trials. This might take a grand total of 2 minutes, but I bet you can get a pretty definitive answer on who is faster. Anyways, if you feel the SAT did not accurately show your abilities, that's why retakes exist. There are fee waivers if you are low income.</p>

<p>"We don't know what intelligence really is! Gardner says there are 264 forms of it! I'm really good at painting!! My mom says IQ tests are PROVEN to show nothing anyway!"</p>

<p>Do some of your own research..with an open mind. Look up something called "g". Read the work of REAL psychometric psychologists, not politically correct press releases and feel-good books. The military gives versions of IQ tests to determine what types of jobs an enlistee is suitable for. IQ scores predict future income and education level. The SAT correlates HIGHLY with IQ scores. </p>

<p>Yeah, I agree the SAT does not tell the whole story. But in terms of measuring linguistic/analytical intelligence (essentially, academic aptitude) it functions perfectly well. That's why basically every selective college in the country still places plenty of value on it.</p>

<p>Flame away!</p>

2

<p>Carl Brigham lives.</p>

3

<p>I agree and disagree.</p>

4

<p>I agree with shaheiruddin…
I do agree that the SAT does measures intelligence to a certain extent. But that doesn’t mean that getting extra practice before you take the test won’t hurt you…</p>

<p>I, for example, sucked at the SAT. But I took some practice tests and began to notice certain things that I eventually figured out for myself, particularly in the critical reading and writing sections. After a certain point, there was no longer any point in my studying for the SAT - it wouldn’t help me at all afterward. </p>

<p>But I mean, getting a high average has absolutely nothing to do with smarts. It’s really more hard work (and of course, smarts does help…). I believe with hard work and persistence, you can get any grade you want. It just depends on how much you have to put in based on your own situation.</p>

5

<p>I have a friend who took a practice SAT during the summer before her junior year and got 1980. 1980’s relatively high (since the national average is approx. 1500) but it’s not extraordinary either.
With a lot of studying however, she started getting 2300+ on every practice test she took.
When she took the SAT in her junior year, she got 2340.
Did I mention she goes to Princeton now?</p>

<p>So I partially agree with you. The SAT DOES measure intelligence, but it’s possible to improve your score dramatically through studying (the right way). My friend’s SAT score was already decent to begin with and that is why it was possible for her to get a nearly perfect score.
Personally, I don’t think it’s possible to increase your SAT score by more than 300+ points.</p>

6

<p>Agree completely.</p>

7

<p>I think SAT scores and SAT 2 scores validate or invalidate a GPA. A lot schools have inflated GPA systems.</p>

8

<p>I agree and disagree with your statement. I do believe that the SAT is a relative indicator of ones level of intelligence, however there are always exceptions. Ones GPA should be of little to no indicator, as it can easily be inflated, as stated above. I have yet to take the actual SAT, but I can already imagine how my predicament will turn out. Based upon my own test taking faults, I often “set myself up for failure” as I almost always blank out on MC tests, over-analyze everything, and go into hyperventilation-mode, often ending up with mediocre scores. This is my fault, especially because I am lazy… but I know that I can correct these unfortunate, ‘endeavors’ so to speak. I’m ranting, but again, I do agree with your statement. I don’t think that my test anxiety/scores would conclude that I am severely ■■■■■■■■, but it is no where near above average. I wish that I could solve this odd conundrum, but it is just something that I have to accept and work with.</p>

9

<p>Is intelligence defined by how well you can do math up to algebra 2, analyze literary passages, know various vocabulary words, and have impeccable grammar?</p>

<p>Unless of course you’re including SAT II’s, but even they don’t emcompass every subject, e.g. CS.</p>

<p>For colleges’ purposes, however, this may be an accurate estimate on how well you can, indeed, do math up to algebra 2, analyze literary passages, know various vocabulary words, and have impeccable grammar. </p>

<p>You can’t convert me into approving of the essay though.</p>

<p>tl;dr It measures some intelligence. It misses others though - perhaps colleges don’t care as much about the others.</p>

10

<p>

</p>

<p>I second that. And way to make that your first post :)</p>

11

<p><em>applauds</em></p>

12

<p>Well…it depends on what type of intelligence. A chemist can’t do an artist’s job and an artist can’t do a chemist’s job.</p>

<p>You can be good at math, reading, and writing but suck at designing, drawing, playing sports, playing music, creating software, etc. You may think these things are unimportant but half the world disagrees with that. Their are more people excited to hear Eminem’s new song or see the USA vs Ghana game then worry about how good their college application looks and their isn’t anything wrong with that.</p>

<p>The SAT can only tell you how good you are at math, reading, and writing but not at anything else in life.</p>

<p>Essentially they are limited to what the higher ups think is important because they all want you to be engineer’s, doctor’s, and lawyer’s and again, I can be good at medicine all I want but suck at everything else. As such, I have just realized, every person on Earth has sucked more then they have ever been successful.</p>

<p>My whole point is, intelligence vary’s depending on subject. One can be good at one thing but suck at another.</p>

13

<p>The SAT is an endurance test; it basically shows how much you care about colleges. </p>

<p>Higher score = more effort/time = more concern</p>

<p>Simple as that.</p>

14

<p>Not really. Their are some people that hardly study and get very good scores just like their are those that do study and do poorly.</p>

<p>However, we aren’t arguing what the SAT is. We are arguing if it measures intelligence.</p>

15

<p>dd is an excellent test taker, worked hard in hs at a very challenging private school and took demanding classes. Never a straight A student but good grades. NM finalist, 32 ACT, 2100 SAT with no prep other than an excellent elective class she took first quarter junior year for the PSAT. She only took the ACT once and the SAT twice to pull her math grade up while taking a math class (hs had block scheduling and math not her forte so had to be taking it to do well on test). Got full tuition to Ohio State and honors program, her first choice. Older OSU friend from her hs told her she was well prepared, would see students freaking out about tests and projects but that she just needed to remember how she learned to study and work in hs. She was dean’s list 2/3 quarters because a Bplus in Math kept her out of it first quarter.</p>

<p>NOW, ds will be a senior next year. Had some developmental delays as a toddler but with therapy and great teachers, was accepted at our most challenging private school for hs. also, never all As but good grades in grade school. Not a good test taker…did test prep for hs entrance exam and he’s started test prep this spring for SAT/ACT. Diagnosed with ADD freshman year so now on medicine and does get extended time on both tests, which gives him some breathing room just in case but he claims he was done in regular time. He does not work hard in school and school is very hard so he has an 80% average; and can’t take AP classes. His grades are a reflection of his effort…zeros on assignments not turned in kill the 90s he gets on tests. Just took SAT after a few prep weeks with tutor and scored 1100/1620…haven’t gotten ACT back yet. Not surprised…he is an average student and his strengths lie elsewhere. He is well spoken, knows how to write and will work hard when interested…he will have average grades in college.</p>

<p>Yes there are many intelligence types which is why art, architecture, theater, music, etc all have auditions and portfolio components to their admissions requirements and why athletes are recruited differently.</p>

<p>Grammar, spelling, etc…all a reflection of how you were raised and educated. I immediately categorize based on poor usage that someone is not as educated. </p>

<p>I hate that some colleges rely so much on hs grades, yes grades can be inflated and some schools just aren’t that challenging. Class rank is not a true indicator of your skills as my dd was barely in top 3rd at her school but I have no doubt at any other school, smaller, public etc, that she would have been at or near the very top. Her grades kept her out of selective colleges, because they weren’t all As.</p>

16

<p>You’re right and wrong at the same time.</p>

<p>The SAT measures intelligence: I won’t deny it. I realized this when I scored a 2180 while my often diligent friends that lacked intellect and depth scored far lower. It’s heartbreaking, but true to a certain extent.</p>

<p>But to say that one cannot improve their score significantly is false, in my opinion. In 9th grade, I got a 1720 on the SAT. There was a Princeton Review course in my town, but it was much too expensive, so I bought the official College Board book, did practice problems, and took all 10 practice tests before retaking the test end of 10th grade year. My writing score jumped from a 560 to an 800. And I promise you this is absolutely real, I’m not joking. By no means did I learn any “tricks” of the test to raise my composite by over 400 points: but I became much, much more familiar with the test and the subject matter.</p>

<p>So while the SAT certainly does measure intelligence, it can also be prepared for, especially the math and writing sections. Critical reading, to me, is the outlier because no amount of test prep seems to raise anyone’s score much. But with rigorous preparation (which can be done completely on your own, like I did!), your score can improve significantly. It is wholly possible.</p>

17

<p>

OP never claimed this so your argument is moot. Read his post more carefully next time, he says that large increases are outliers but never claimed that they cannot happen.</p>

18

<p>

</p>

<p>The College Board’s data support this. The kind of huge increases that we often see on CC are the result of three factors: the unusually driven students that post here, the unusually high effectiveness of the study methods that are common CC, and the self-selection among those who post about score changes.</p>

19

<p>In 8th grade, I took the SAT for the first time. I didn’t know very much at all about it.
These were my scores:</p>

<p>470 CR
570 M
480 W
5 E
Total: 1520.</p>

<p>Now, from that point till now, my 11th grade year, I didn’t do a crazy amount of studying. Sure, I prepared a little bit, but mainly I did a few practice tests as the exam approached. These were my scores for the June SAT</p>

<p>800 CR
760 M
800 W
11 E</p>

<p>I don’t know if this is an outlier like situation, because it was 8th grade in which I took it, and most don’t score very well in 8th grade anyways. But my thoughts are that as we mature through high school we bring out the “aptitude” that the SAT is said to measure. </p>

<p>I feel that the SAT doesn’t measure intelligence directly, but is in fact a great measure of aptitude and potential. I am not familiar with IQ tests and such, but I feel the SAT is the next best thing.</p>

20

<p>Jersey13 - OP didn’t say that explicitly, you’re right. I presented the argument wrong. But basically what I’m saying is, if a test is so deeply rooted as a measure of intelligence, one should not be able to increase their score dramatically. Is that not the OP’s main point, that the SAT measures intelligence and intelligence alone? I just said that, although to a certain extent that is true, the test is not foolproof: you can score alot higher the next time. Maybe I am an outlier in that sense… A friend of mine who did one-on-one Princeton Review tutoring only went from a 1620 to a 1710.</p>