<p>I worked hard and got a high gpa. I really did terrible on the sat and act. oh well.</p>
<p>I've worked my ass off in school, on external exams and all the other stuff my school puts us through. I did okay on the SAT and ACT.</p>
<p>Funny, I'm reading this flip-flop post goin' yeah, yeah, yeah.....all good points.
SAT for me however was killer (very slow reader) trying to absorb every word, digest, answer....left half of the verbal blank. The time issue made me even slower. I know that if it were an untimed test I would have added 100 points to my pathetic score. But that would be defeating purpose, right? </p>
<p>time</p>
<p>Well for people who cant understand the wording of the math questions- just take the SAT IIs</p>
<p>If you get ~600 in math, yet have always done well in clsss, ~700 in SAAT II IIC should be easy for you</p>
<p>BTW colleges look at your scores relative to your classmates, for instance If you get 600 600 600 and your schools average is 600, thats not too good, but if your schools average is 490, 600s across the board are excellent</p>
<p>True. But what I was saying was more a comment about previous posters discussing how good the SAT was, and how if you don't do well you are only making excuses and how it is a great indicator. I find that false. </p>
<p>Also not very many people at my school take the SAT. Less than 30%. So its hard to compare the students.</p>
<p>As far as I can tell from school, now that i'm a senior, the SAT measure intelligence VERY well. No results were far from what anyone expected anyone to get. People everyone thought would get 2300+ did, etc etc. I think it is a VERY good predictor.</p>
<p>I don't think thats true. It measures standardized intelligence well. I did reasonably well on the SAT and ACTs in the 2000s and 30s on both, but not amazing, yet I consider myself quite intelligent. I got As and A* on my IGCSE's. Predicted 41+ points on IB, yet the SAT scores don't correlate. The smartest kids at my school don't do so well on the SAT, except for the American kids who take all the practice courses. Maybe it correlates at American schools.</p>
<p>The SAT is just a test...just like any other test you will take in life? If you study for your Physics tests, why can't you study for the most important test of your life. It is not an IQ test; it's not an aptitude test; it's just the SAT. For people like me, the difference between an OK score and a great score was knowing what TCB considered to be a "right answer". </p>
<p>I went from a 2010 PSAT to 2300+ through sheer determination.</p>
<p>Remember: everybody gets nervous, but if you can identify your weaknesses, you'll feel much more confident on test day.</p>
<p>I agree. Its all about what the college board sees as right and how to study for it. That just measures your ability to study and prepare. That's not a real measure of anything.</p>
<p>scarlet- a 2000 is amazing, dont complain, thats like 95th percentile</p>
<p>You get people on this board complaining about terrible scores of "Omg I only got a 2300, I should go kill myself now, I'm never getting into college". So its a little frustrating.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It is not an IQ test; it's not an aptitude test; it's just the SAT.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Wow, you obviously do not know much about the SAT at all do you?</p>
<p>Hint: SAT = Scholastic Aptitude Test. Meaning it is testing aptitude in the area of scholastic study. Essentially meaning certain areas of study are prerequisite (Algebra classes, Geometry, English classes)</p>
<p>The SAT is fairly able to test a student's scholastic ability as a result of schooling, but it in no way tests for IQ and it discriminates against lower income families and school districts.</p>
<p>Also the people who get the really high scores are only the ones doing the proctors. Just so we're straight on that.</p>
<p>A JOKE, Don't lash out on me</p>
<p>Not funny trader</p>
<p>If you are such a slow reader you may have an undiagnosed processing disability and may be legitimately entitled to extra time. Only neuropsychiatric will reveal the issue. The point of such accommodation is to make sure that one focused disability not mask your overall, true skills.</p>
<p>Quit whining. If you don't test well, you are obviously just a study-aholic and have to work hard for your grades, or your school has very inflated grades. The tests measure your true smarts and probability that you will succeed in college. By admitting you suck at tests, you are admitting that you aren't very smart so quit whining.</p>
<p>andrw313 has a very good point.......</p>
<p><em>bursts out laughing</em></p>
<p>Right, so an inherently flawed, empirically-derived, economically-discriminatory test is a measure of intelligence.</p>
<p>Good work.</p>
<p>Complain all you want, y'all still have to take the test</p>