The Writing section ****es me off

Test Preparation
1

<p>I'm about to take my first SAT in a week, and I'm feeling ****ed off about the WR section. Not that I'm doing badly in it, it's quite the opposite. But why the hell is it in the test? Firstly, the curve is absolutely miserable. A couple of grammatical mistakes that even a professional author probably wouldn't pick up on can kill your score by 10-20 points. Secondly, despite lengthening the test by more than an hour, most schools won't even take a look at the section! Thus, I can only conclude that the WR section, in its nascent years, will only function to siphon off points from the CR and Math sections by causing exhaustion and diverting study time. </p>

<p>I do not know why they introduced the WR section, since most schools required the SAT II Writing anyway. They simply made the SAT I more tiresome (not harder or more intellectually rigorous, just more tiresome).</p>

2

<p>It is quite troublesome how the tests are now bundled together, giving one no choice but to take the bundle all at the same time, when they could just as easily have continued to offer the writing section as a separate exam. I did badly on the writing section despite very good scores on the math and critical reading sections. But due to this unreasonable bundling, I will need to take all three sections once again in order to receive a better score on writing alone. I can only conclude that this is a money-making scheme, reminiscent of the tired marketing ploys that, for example, forces you to buy extended warranties with your new electronic product or forces you to purchase new tires with your free tire rotation.</p>

3

<p>
[quote]
I can only conclude that this is a money-making scheme

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think they would make more money by keeping the SAT II as a separate test, since we're paying just the SAT I price for what was before two tests (SAT I + SAT II Writing). Then again, in cases like yours, they may make more money.</p>

<p>To me, it seems like the authorities reacted very clumsily to mounting criticism of the SATs, especially from California. They probably thought tagging an essay to the SAT I would make it look like the test gave test-takers opportunities to display their character and make themselves seem more rounded. Never mind that compared to the Writing MC, the essay is almost completely worthless, and that the Writing section in general is currently almost worthless as well.</p>

4

<p>I concur with the fact that it's an easy way to make money. </p>

<p>Breakdown, pre new SAT:</p>

<p>(Approximation) 10 dollar registration fee for SAT
SAT II registration fee: 17
SAT II Writing: 8
2 other SAT IIs: 16
Total cost: 51 dollars</p>

<p>New SAT:</p>

<p>SAT registration: 41.50
SAT II regsitration fee: 17
2 SAT IIs: 16</p>

<p>Total Cost: 74.50</p>

5

<p>The writing section was introduced because some University in California complained that the old SAT was too messed up to gauge a high-schooler's chance of success in college. Collegeboard changed the SAT in response to the complaints because that same university was collegeboard's biggest SAT customer...and when your biggest customer threatens to stop buying your product...it's time to suck up to the customer...it's the money...MONEY is the reason why the classes of 2006 and beyond have to deal with a new test...</p>

6

<p>That excuse has it's fallacies. It is reasonable for the CollegeBoard to change the math and critical reading sections in response to UC's complaints, but it makes absolutely no sense to attach the writing section to the other sections, because UC already require the SAT II: Writing test anyway.</p>

7

<p>Yeah I read the same thing, Hyper2400..</p>

<p>Sad isn't it? </p>

<p>And I thought CB is not-for-profit?</p>

8

<p>dualityim-i saw from before taht you got a 2330. why are you taking it again...?</p>

9

<p>I never really considered the impact of taking the writing, CR, and math all on the same day. That's exhausting</p>

10

<p>Its' actually worse than 10-20 points for each mistake. The curve was worse than the blue book suggests.</p>

<p>for one form it was : 77 for one mistake. its much harder than sat2 writing.</p>

11

<p>Duality, I must acknowledge that I have no idea why CB attached writing to the SAT I considering the fact you bring up that SAT II writing was required anyways by UC, unless by some outside chance and for some unusual reason UC requested this attachment (which is highly improbable given that there was no reason to do so...considering that the SAT II writing was required anyways). CB's response can perhaps be explained using the profit excuse for math and reading, but for writing any explanation is elusive so far. </p>

<p>The writing should have been kept seperate...</p>

12

<p>CB not for profit my ass. i wish the US government would shut down the company. the sat is just money, it measures nothing and is stupid.</p>

13

<p>
[quote]
i wish the US government would shut down the company. the sat is just money

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Double edged sword. Nobody likes the fact that CB makes all this money, but come test day, millions of students flock to their respective locations to take the test.</p>

14

<p>well, you have to or else you can't get into harvard.</p>

<p>btw, i loved it when the UCs threatened to stop using the sat, damn CB had to change it.</p>

15

<p>Darn, one of you saw my score from before. I would like to do better, so I am taking it again in October.</p>

<p>If we suppose that UC had no reason to request the writing section to be attached to the CR and Math (for the above stated reason that, the SAT II: Writing was originally required regardless), then this plot must necessarily go much deeper than a simple dispute between the UC and CollegeBoard.</p>

<p>The truth is out there...</p>