Vocabulary Lists invalidate practice tests -- HOW TO LEARN VOCAB INSIDE!

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
1

<p>You guys know that if you memorize a popular vocab list (DH, RR, PR, etc.), you're going to invalidate 99% of the official CB materials out there for predictive value, right? They get the words directly from CB released materials, so if you memorize a vocab list, you're just making your practice CR tests worthless. </p>

<p>I reccomend a different approach to vocabulary, one that helped me to high CR scores. Take it if you'd like or leave it, I just want to put it out there: </p>

<p>Take lots of official tests. Get ahold of the past QAS exams (please don't ask for them here otherwise you'll get banned), old PSATs, and the official SAT study guide. </p>

<p>Spread the tests out as much as you need to in order to finish them before your test date. As you take each test, write down each and every word you didn't know and look each up. </p>

<p>This is a more fun, more productive, and more efficient way of learning vocabulary because you're also working on your reading skills. If you just memorize word-lists and hope for the best then, well, I don't think that'll do much for the 48/67 questions that are reading based.</p>

2

<p>^ exactly! </p>

<p>there is little point in memorizing vocab lists.</p>

3

<p>Well-said.I ve been using similar tactic and answer almost all the CB questions correctly ,sometimes i even dont know what does the word that is the correct answer mean.When you learn how to approach this sentences,you will know how to do well on reading comprehension.most of the SC questions are only about identifying what word do you need - a positive,or a negative one.5-6 of the words only require you to know upper-level vocabulary and words like (acquiesce,winnow etc) ,and if you got 3 of them right,and miss 3 or got them wrong,you will still get almost a perfect CR score ,as you already know how to deal with the reading comprehension questions.</p>

4

<p>Hey Arachnotron,</p>

<p>I'm going to respectfully disagree with your post. :) Take my opinion for what it's worth, okay?</p>

<p>The way to validate a list is to check it against a QAS packet that has been released after the list was compiled.</p>

<p>In the case of the lists I've posted about previously, the coverage figures (the 70-80% for the short list, 94% for the long list) were from the October 2007 QAS. The list itself was finished over the summer of 2007. The October 2007 QAS was kind of my moment of truth. So in that once case, anyway, the list did, in fact, have significant predictive value.</p>

<p>You're right that if you checked at least that one list against the Blue Book, though, you would see about 100% coverage, 'cause I put all the words from the Blue Book in the big list. :) Good thinking on that one.</p>

<p>Maybe someone with recent QAS packets (October of '08?) could check out some other lists for us and validate them. I did check out the Barrons 3500 list and saw a coverage rate a little over 80% (I forget the figures, though I posted them on this forum long ago).</p>

<p>Also, I have to respectfully disagree with you that looking up words is a fun and useful way to learn them. :) I agree that realistic engagement with words is a great idea! I'm glad you're moving away from an exclusive reliance on lists. The only problem with looking up words is that at least 50% of your time is spent on an activity (thumbing through the dictionary) that does not contribute in any way to your retention of the words. It's dead time from a pedagogical standpoint.</p>

<p>If previously released lists do often contain words from real SATs, as you say, then by relying on previously released lists, one is effectively doing exactly what you recommend...except without all the quality time spent locating words in the dictionary. So I stand by the list method. </p>

<p>However, I respect your opinion, as I say, and I think that in general the habit of looking things up is an excellent one.</p>

<p>Finally, let's not forget reading! :)</p>

5

<p>I will add, finally, that I am a tutor, and that the largest increase on the CR I have ever personally produced is 350 points, from a 350 to a 700. I see 150-200 point increases on that section on a fairly regular basis, though certainly not always. But I have specialized in the CR section for five years, and I work with a lot of kiddos who have already taken the PR course or the Kaplan course or whatever and are still stuck. I have tried about everything in the book, and I think that rote memory has a valuable, though limited, role to play in building reading comprehension and CR scores overall.</p>

6

<p>^ This is so sad. I don't blame you for being a tutor, nor the students who need you. But its sad because this was never the intent of these supposed predictive tests. It all just seems like such an utterly stupid, pointless game that people are now forced to play. I don't want to be teaching students who are in my class because they memorized a bunch of word lists.</p>

7

<p>Trust me, starbright, memorizing a word list does not guarantee success on the SAT. Most of the critical reading portion is, well, the ability to read and make fairly insightful inferences into what the author is saying. </p>

<p>The test is predictive; at least moreso than high-school grades (which measure nothing more than work ethic).</p>

8

<p>It is tough sometimes to see kids who have to work so hard, but I do find that the work we do together gets them much more ready for college. That's my tutoring philosophy in any case: that it's possible (and even necessary) to structure SAT prep in a way that will also empower you as a student. The 350 point score increase looks like this: a) you take the hardest English and history classes that your school offers and spend ten hours a week on your school reading; b) you annotate habitually; c) you spend an additional three to five hours a week reading fun or interesting books at a comfortable reading level; d) you learn ten new words a day and review fifty old but still familiar words a day (which adds up to 3650 new words a year, in about fifteen minutes a day); and e) you do literacy drills intended to improve both your reading speed and your scanning speed. All of those pieces are necessary. Oh, yeah, and f) you take a ton of practice tests. At the end, you are an awesomely powerful reader in English. Not only do you have a shot at competitive programs, but you also have a shot of doing well in those programs once you get there.</p>

<p>I think that, as standardized tests go, the SAT is a fairly predictive instrument for measuring certain very very limited kinds of college readiness. At least, I have found that after a massive and efficient literacy intervention, students do far, far better on the SAT than they would otherwise.</p>